Thought to share my final 'burnt in' P3D v3.2.3 CFG file...

[SteveW 1,792]

You made more than one setting change at once? How would you know what does what. And you have not given the system time to run in, by my watch. Also the changes you describe are not affected by the AM in that way.

 

Something else you did I would suspect caused your massive performance drop.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

You made more than one setting change at once? How would you know what does what. And you have not given the system time to run in, by my watch. Also the changes you describe are not affected by the AM in that way.

I went to 116 and deleted the FFTF entirely...

 

That's all I did.  Fired up the sim...and taxied around the airport, with no ASN in the mix.

 

I just applied and saved back in my .cfg file..and will fire up the sim again...and see if I climb to 28-33, for this saved scenario.  

[SteveW 1,792]

FFTF 0.1 cuts off the background processing to display more fps, so I would check that setting out alone it tunes your ratio of background to foreground processing. The AM=116 vs 244 is a no brainer.

 

I went to 116 and deleted the FFTF entirely...

So you would have no idea what each change would make. Do one thing at a time or chase your tail.

 

Don't forget you need to make two tests after each change of one thing, the first test settles in the new changes, the second test shows the result more accurately.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

FFTF 0.1 cuts off the background processing to display more fps, so I would check that setting out alone it tunes your ratio of background to foreground processing. The AM=116 vs 244 is a no brainer.

 

 

So you would have no idea what each change would make. Do one thing at a time or chase your tail.

 

Don't forget you need to make two tests after each change of one thing, the first test settles in the new changes, the second test shows the result more accurately.

I'll play around with this, only because you jerked my curiosity chain...but here is my .cfg in play at the same place...with smooth graphics and 32 out of 33 FPS once more...

 

Post Edit:  BTW, what  I will do then, is change to 116...but keep my FFTF as current. Fly for five minutes.  Drop out. Come back...fly again...compare. Then I will delete the FFTF and do the same 5 and 5......touch and go's...see what happens...but will keep the AM set to 116 for both compares....

 

 

 

[AnkH 2,233]

 

Steve...YIKES!!!!!......With my AM=116 and no FFTF.....my FPS dropped BELOW the toilet...not even floating in the bowl!    Chop and stutter, and not even one cloud in the sky!!!!....here is the pic...  

I'll have to go back to what works really well on my system...33 FPS and smooth as butter...my .cfg in all its glory you see above...but anyway..here is what happened...:

 

With my version of the .cfg file..I can actually go to 11 FPS and still experience no stutter...and that was with a sky full of thick cloud scud, lightning and thunder.

 

 

Haha, and, do you now still insist that copy pasting someones config is the way to go? You change two little values according to Steve and your performance is down the drain. Now, just imagine what could happen if someone simply copy pasting your config on his system. I hope, that you start to understand why I was critizising this approach now...

[TheBoom 31]

This is odd but I added SSAA=2 and I see a lot less shimmering now. Not sure if its just a placebo effect though.

 

 

 

 

Boom,  I certainly did not enter 7.5 for that entry. None of my add-ons would have done that.  I do believe that depending on the combinations of sections and their sliders, that this is written when you exit the sim...in that session.

 

Hmm, that's interesting. You were just telling me in another thread a few days ago that custom LOD values may be causing blurries? If you deleted your cfg and let them sim rebuild it do you still see the LOD 7.5 there? If that's the case then I shouldn't have changed mine from 8.5 down to 6.5.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

This is odd but I added SSAA=2 and I see a lot less shimmering now. Not sure if its just a placebo effect though.

 

 

 

 

 

Hmm, that's interesting. You were just telling me in another thread a few days ago that custom LOD values may be causing blurries? If you deleted your cfg and let them sim rebuild it do you still see the LOD 7.5 there? If that's the case then I shouldn't have changed mine from 8.5 down to 6.5.

I had changed mine manually to 6.5...but then after setting my .cfg (in sim) as you see above, IT changed to 7.5.  

 

Also, no placebo...if you do NOT see shimmering...then it DOES affect (in house).  Just like mine did....good stuff, Boom!

Haha, and, do you now still insist that copy pasting someones config is the way to go? You change two little values according to Steve and your performance is down the drain. Now, just imagine what could happen if someone simply copy pasting your config on his system. I hope, that you start to understand why I was critizising this approach now...

No problem, AnkH...as I said, I always say to back up your CURRENT whatever...then so easy to go back to what you had.

 

Right now...I'm seeing that 116 or 244 for the AM is not affecting my drop into the toilet zone for my FPS..but is by deleting my FFTF  line.  I just came from a flight with the AM set to 116, and my FFTF preserved...and had 32 out of 33 FPS.  I'm now going to try 0.3 ( I think this is stock, and would be the same if you did not even have this line in the .cfg)...not sure but I think so...and if that will be the case...then for myself...a setting as in my .cfg is the best for my needs.  Steve pressed my curiosity button...and I'm really bad with that...LOL.....the button is LARGE....

 

Mitch

[SteveW 1,792]

I've just been doing some tests and I've gone from 1. AM=244+FFTF=0.1 to 2. AM=116+FFTF=0.38 all addons on AM=3=00,11. I did a couple of runs with each setup and chose the better result from the two, which was the second result of each case. The results showed that 2. run a slightly higher fps in the first few seconds, probably because of the increased ratio to background tasks generating more infill. This settled to between one and two fps less than 1. for around half the trace, otherwise the same fps was produced. There was an improvement with 2. of around 3-4% in the rate of change of fps after around a minute of the test had passed, and from then on. This is with an outside view of a mega airport with a PMDG at a gate similar settings mid autogen and shadows. I would expect similar results whatever the setup really. When one comes back and exclaims YIKES! Something else happened on that system I would think.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

FFTF 0.1 cuts off the background processing to display more fps, so I would check that setting out alone it tunes your ratio of background to foreground processing. The AM=116 vs 244 is a no brainer.

 

 

So you would have no idea what each change would make. Do one thing at a time or chase your tail.

 

Don't forget you need to make two tests after each change of one thing, the first test settles in the new changes, the second test shows the result more accurately.

Well Steve,  what I found that could drop my FPS in an apples to apples scenario, was not going from an AM of 244 to 116, but in either having my FFTF line in the .cfg or halving my FPS, by deleting it.  So, there is no reason that I can't run the sim with an AM of 116 for now...and see how the long term goes.  I placed back my FFTF line, and once more regained my mostly 32 FPS's out of a locked 33, and back to smooth animation.  So, actually for now...the only change in my .cfg at the moment from my 'burnt in' settings is AM 244---->116.

 

Isn't an FFTF setting 0.33 merely the stock (as if no line was present setting for background proc's?)

 

Mitch

[SteveW 1,792]

Seems cool. I would say that without special test software it will take several different flights to compare that. But I'm confident I can run any five LP configuration and get less overall performance than with any four or six LP configuration.

 

Your big improvements to fps with FFTF=0.1 could mean you are running LOD too large. Keep autogen but reduce LOD.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Seems cool. I would say that without special test software it will take several different flights to compare that. But I'm confident I can run any five LP configuration and get less overall performance than with any four or six LP configuration.

 

Your big improvements to fps with FFTF=0.1 could mean you are running LOD too large. Keep autogen but reduce LOD.

Alrighty...so in my case...116 6 LP is better for whatever reason than 85.....it seems anyway...

 

So, for now...just to observe for self-educational purposes:

 

AM=116

FFTF at: 0.33

LOD at 6.5 (set manually in .cfg)

[SteveW 1,792]

116=01,11,01,00 = four LPs. Six LPs on the four core would require use of four cores as in 221=11,01,11,01, this works the same way as the 116 configuration, but gives more processing room to dlls and simconnect clients within the affinity of the sim, but leaves no free core for addons. So 221 might work better for those with networked addons on other PCs. Problem with increasing the LPs is that the sim makes that many more jobs on these that are not utilised, the sim barely uses four cores to gain a few more percent over three whatever the CPU. Five LPs seems to cause a slight problem for the sim and never performs as well.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

116=01,11,01,00 = four LPs. Six LPs on the four core would require use of four cores as in 221=11,01,11,01, this works the same way as the 116 configuration, but gives more processing room to dlls and simconnect clients within the affinity of the sim, but leaves no free core for addons. So 221 might work better for those with networked addons on other PCs. Problem with increasing the LPs is that the sim makes that many more jobs on these that are not utilised, the sim barely uses four cores to gain a few more percent over three whatever the CPU. Five LPs seems to cause a slight problem for the sim and never performs as well.

Thank you, Steve.  OK...116... for my four core i7-975 Extreme in Hyperthreading Mode.

 

I just shaved FFTF to .30

[SteveW 1,792]

That's what I've been seeing in tests, four better than five. 116 and 244 are both utilising three cores, but it seems the extra job on LP7 with 244 takes away more from job 4 on LP6 than it provides for the sim.

[TheBoom 31]

I had changed mine manually to 6.5...but then after setting my .cfg (in sim) as you see above, IT changed to 7.5.

 

Did a quick test. Deleted cfg, went into sim and maxed out all the settings. Let it run for a while then exited the sim and checked the new cfg file. LOD was still at 6.5. So it must definitely be a manual change or some addon that it is changing it to a higher value.

 

Unless you're saying adding a manual tweak such as FFTF changes the LOD value, which is unlikely.