I am assuming that he is questioning why you are here if you are not an FS2004 user. A bit daft really, considering that you are trying to help. I wouldn't normally visit the FS2004 section of the forum, but it's easy to do when you click on one of the latest topics without knowing which section of the forum it is in.

Hello !

I'm new in this forum, but not new in flightsim !

 

I have read this thread and I have some inputs as well as question how to handle the issue.

 

I recently had several fs9 crash during flights As I read in this thread, I started looking at the memory consumption during many test cases.

 

For some addon scenery, the fs9 memory allocation is almost constant while other sceneries the memory regular increase to 2G in some hours. Not only in relation if the scenery is complex or not. Moving to an other airport does not free the allocated leaked memory. ( Message may be "out of memory" or just "had stop working", it come when get close to 2G )

 

Since I consider this as a memory leak in fs9.exe trigged by sceneries, and I cannot see what in the sceneries may expose the fs9 bug (all sceneries consist just of BGL and BMP) I have no absolute solution.

 

My solution is. Do not have long time activities on fs9 before a flight, then better restart fs9. If preparing/prepared a flight, select to pause fs9 when it is not required to run for a longer time, this memory leak has no effect when fs9 is in pause.

 

I wonder if someones see the source to problem the same, is there any fix or work around (such as disable some Display-settings), is it possible to easy avoid those sceneries, is this bug still known in FSX ?

 

Best regards Lennart Vedin flightsim1.com

 

 

Hi Lennart.

 

... and welcome to the forum!

 

That's an interesting post and it's nice to see someone give concrete data to support what we all suspect. We know that there's a problem with FS9 that ties up increasing quantities of memory when searching for some non-existent textures (not missing, but rather not required), and it's well known that Windows-managed page files become fragmented over time, possibly increasing the likelihood of data corruption.

 

I wonder if you would consider a more detailed test of the bad sceneries by removing bgls and bmps one at a time until the problem is cleared.

 

To Martin - the whole RAM, virtual memory & page file thing is a bit of a wormcan, as is becoming apparent above. Have you tried defragging your pagefile? It can't be done while Windows is running but most defraggers have a utility that will defrag system files & folders the next time you power up. You could try IOBit's Smart Defrag.

 

Best regards,

Dave

Why do you think fragmentation causes data corruption? SSDs are highly fragmented and work just fine.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

A permanent and much better OOM fix, rather than lowering the sliders, saving flights, or any other solution, will eventually be realized with http://nexgenflightsim.com/

 

Development has begun, its a full round detailed earth, DX12, 64bit, and a demo of Corsica is intended for us all to evaluate value & performance.   

That is one advantage of software that hasn't been written yet. No bugs.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

A permanent and much better OOM fix, rather than lowering the sliders, saving flights, or any other solution, will eventually be realized with http://nexgenflightsim.com/

 

Development has begun, its a full round detailed earth, DX12, 64bit, and a demo of Corsica is intended for us all to evaluate value & performance.   

 

Will it eliminate those problems on my WinXP 32-bit system?

Hi. I have removed and then reinstated my page file.. as it is on an SSD, best not to try to defragment it (and that would not have any effect, AFAIK).

 

I have let Windows manage the page file too, instead of having it set at a minimum and maximum, which is a bit of a pain as I have 16GBs of RAM. On the other hand, I don't need that space on my C drive right now, and, moreover, I haven't had any OoM errors since I made the change a couple of weeks ago. (Though I have jinxed that now by putting the fact in writing, of course!).

 

Martin

Will it eliminate those problems on my WinXP 32-bit system?

 

Your OOM problems are due to the 32bit WinXP OS and the addons you run in FS9. Windows 7 64 bit may just solve your OOM's in FS9, but not completely/permanently. FS9 would have to be a 64bit program and that will not happen.

 

To answer your question, there will be a demo of NGFS released so you can see for yourself. You could even ask to be a beta tester and report on the performance of XP 32bit. A brand new NexGen flight simulator will have DX12 and 64-bit technology so we can move on from the old to the new. However, the NGiS team is working to make a 32bit version as well, that is less advanced for flight simmers who still have older systems/OS and/or who don't care for the added realism or extra cost. How the advanced version runs on an older OS or older PC is yet to be discovered, but what is the point? Its like "lets buy a $600 paint job for a car that could not sell for $100".

 

To expand on my answer, I have a WinXP 32bit system as well, but I would never even install FS9 in that system. The flight simulators I run on Windows XP 32bit go up to FS2000. In my opinion Windows XP 32bit has no business running FS9/FSX/P3D/XP10, unless you keep default settings and leave out the but the simplest addons - and who does that?

 

But really an I7 PC with Windows 7 or 10 64bit can be bought for like $300-$500 at some outlets and you can still keep your XP system to run what you need to run on it, like I do. I have Windows 3.0, XP, Vista, two 7's, and 10 systems available to run what I want, when I want. 

 

I hope you have a windows 7/10 64bit system and your just asking about your older system. If you have not yet made the jump from XP-FS9 to FSX/P3D-Win7, making the leap to NexGen-Win10 is likely to shock you :-)

Your OOM problems are due to the 32bit WinXP OS and the addons you run in FS9. Windows 7 64 bit may just solve your OOM's in FS9, but not completely/permanently. FS9 would have to be a 64bit program and that will not happen.

 

How the advanced version runs on an older OS or older PC is yet to be discovered, but what is the point? Its like "lets buy a $600 paint job for a car that could not sell for $100".

 

To expand on my answer, I have a WinXP 32bit system as well, but I would never even install FS9 in that system. The flight simulators I run on Windows XP 32bit go up to FS2000. In my opinion Windows XP 32bit has no business running FS9/FSX/P3D/XP10, unless you keep default settings and leave out the but the simplest addons - and who does that?

 

But really an I7 PC with Windows 7 or 10 64bit can be bought for like $300-$500 at some outlets ....

 

If you have not yet made the jump from XP-FS9 to FSX/P3D-Win7, making the leap to NexGen-Win10 is likely to shock you :-)

 

Well, I think I've learned what planet you live on ..... and what sort of slant you put on things, even a little(?) misinformation.  Sounds like a typical salesman.  Much of what you say is close to blasphemy in the FS2004 forum, by the way.

 

Don't take it personal.  I'm just glad I'm still not running FS2004 on my Pentium 4 (which I did for quite some time - with sliders no where near "minimums") ...... can't imagine the response I'd get from you then!

FS9 to FSX is NOT a 'jump', I agree with Gwillmot. A sidestep, perhaps. I have both on my PC and am more than happy with FS9. I rarely fly FSX (for several reasons, which I shan't go into here).

 

I ran FS9 on XP 32-bit for years and at the time it was pretty good, especially with the 3GB/ exe patch installed. Admittedly, I used to get OoM errors sometimes, especially with the PMDG 747-400, but mostly things were OK.

 

Not that I'd go back of course. FS9 on Windows 7 64-bit, with FSX for the occasional VFR outing too is ideal. (I doubt I'll get as far as X-Plane or P3D, or even Windows 10 now)..

Well, I think I've learned what planet you live on ..... and what sort of slant you put on things, even a little(?) misinformation.  Sounds like a typical salesman.  Much of what you say is close to blasphemy in the FS2004 forum, by the way.

 

Don't take it personal.  I'm just glad I'm still not running FS2004 on my Pentium 4 (which I did for quite some time - with sliders no where near "minimums") ...... can't imagine the response I'd get from you then!

 

Flight simulation has always been "cutting edge" -- that is the name of the planet I'm from :-). So I, and those who live on the planet I'm from, consider a flight simmer even staying with XP 32 bit, flying in FS9 still in 2016 as their best experience a sad scenario; this is considered very criminal/rebellious/blasphemous on our planet. I came to your planet to offer hope, since you reject, I laugh while I leave. 

 

Is your planet called "frustrated"? ROFL

Well, I think I've learned what planet you live on ..... and what sort of slant you put on things, even a little(?) misinformation. Sounds like a typical salesman. Much of what you say is close to blasphemy in the FS2004 forum, by the way.

 

Don't take it personal. [...]

Where is the misinformation in Pauls post?

(don't take it personal...)

 

I can only report my own experience: In the late times of WinXP/32 bit being supported, I suddenly experienced amassed OOMs. I already had a very "customized" FS2004 with more than 700 entries in Scenery.cfg. Strange enough, after deinstalling some of them, the OOMs were gone. I then changed to Win7/64bit and never experienced an OOM again. Of all my add-ons, only two didn't work anymore under Win7 (Dreamfleet 727 and FSHotSFX). I have no knowledge and/or experience with Win10 or Win8, but Win7 improved my flightsimming experience vastly and made way for further enhancing of my Sim.

 

But, by the way, and this is where I agree with gwillmot and the OP, FS2004 is no "sad scenario"; at least not if it is brought up to what we FS9ers call a FS9.75 or FS9.X. A look into the screenshots section will prove it.

Where is the misinformation in Pauls post?

(don't take it personal...)

 

"How the advanced version runs on an older OS or older PC is yet to be discovered, but what is the point? Its like "lets buy a $600 paint job for a car that could not sell for $100". - Car runs fine, paint will keep it from rusting.  Can use it another 5 years.

 

"In my opinion Windows XP 32bit has no business running FS9/FSX/P3D/XP10, unless you keep default settings and leave out the but the simplest addons" - Might be opinion, but is false non the less.  Many of us run FS9 "full throttle" on XP and 32-bit OS.  His spin is misinformation.

 

"But really an I7 PC with Windows 7 or 10 64bit can be bought for like $300-$500 at some outlets" - Well, I'd say this one is really a stretch.  Doesn't the processor cost close to that ..... never mind the "rest" of the computer?  If you can find one, I can guarantee it is probably a laptop, NOT set up for gaming/simulation at that price

 

If you have not yet made the jump from XP-FS9 to FSX/P3D-Win7, making the leap to NexGen-Win10 is likely to shock you - TRUE!  TRUE!  Especially the sticker shock since I'm on a retirement budget.  You see, we all don't have the funds (nor large desire) anymore for the latest, greatest, bested, etc.  That's REAL life for some of us on this planet .... not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

P.S. - Did enjoy PRACINES' light comeback and rebuttal ...... REALLY.  That is the way to handle disagreements .... not angry or nasty responses . AND ..... I haven't had an OOM problem in literally years.  Nothing special here .... i3 processor and WindowsXP 32-bit (yes, sorry .... it's my main and ONLY 'puter).

 

Everyone, live long and prosper with whatever you have!

 

The G

Attaway to settle this, like gentlemen, with a 1-1 draw.

 

I was beginning to wonder where this was heading, but nice to see it all above board and amicable.