Folks I've toiled with FS9, FSX and P3D for sometime now and I've come to the conclusion awhile back that 3rd party developers are pushing the limits of these aforementioned sims to much. The rush to 4096 has it's ill effects when ran in a 32bit arena. If developers focused on 1024 textures (such as VRS Superbug) scenery and aircraft would look as good and run without issues with respect to VAS. Again it comes down to good programmers to make 1024 textures beautiful.

 

Even Rob alluded to the source of the problem when he stated the following..."LM can't replicate any VAS issues in their base no add-on setup, neither can I replicate any VAS issues on a base install.  It's the introduction of 3rd party products where the VAS issues surface and LM do NOT have access to 3rd party source files (it's rare LM will get 3rd party source files) and/or tools used ... this makes it very difficult to find the "culprit".

 

The source of the problem isn't with P3Dv3 as no one can replicate the issue with a vanilla install of P3D. It's only after installing 3rd party software the issue of VAS rears itself (Most of which are HD texture add-ons) and/or sloppy code.

Not really sure what your point is with this...

 

Developers aren't pushing anything too much. It's you (the user) that is pushing too much trying to cram too many addons at te same time that causes the OOMs in the first place...

Not really sure what your point is with this...

 

Developers aren't pushing anything too much. It's you (the user) that is pushing too much trying to cram too many addons at te same time that causes the OOMs in the first place...

Sure you do....

 

 Graphics card/s design since the early 2000's and today are designed to effectively work with mip-mapping for high performance and high visual quality. The ESP render engine, regardless of if it will display above 1024x, was not ever optimized to run above that resolution, nor run 32bit or un-mapped texture efficiently.

 

A properly made 1024 DXT5/DDS exterior model mip-mapped graphic will display exceptionally high visual quality in compare to 32bit or higher resolution DTX without a performance hit.

 

More often than not turning down sliders is moot if an add-on only offers 2048+ textures. Be aware that many high res products require a higher mesh resolution setting than the default 38m. To run 10m mesh the texture resolution must be set higher than 1m mesh or the mesh will revert to 38m by default.

Sure you do....

 

 Graphics card/s design since the early 2000's and today are designed to effectively work with mip-mapping for high performance and high visual quality. The ESP render engine, regardless of if it will display above 1024x, was not ever optimized to run above that resolution, nor run 32bit or un-mapped texture efficiently.

 

A properly made 1024 DXT5/DDS exterior model mip-mapped graphic will display exceptionally high visual quality in compare to 32bit or higher resolution DTX without a performance hit.

 

More often than not turning down sliders is moot if an add-on only offers 2048+ textures.

+1

Sure you do....

 

 Graphics card/s design since the early 2000's and today are designed to effectively work with mip-mapping for high performance and high visual quality. The ESP render engine, regardless of if it will display above 1024x, was not ever optimized to run above that resolution, nor run 32bit or un-mapped texture efficiently.

 

A properly made 1024 DXT5/DDS exterior model mip-mapped graphic will display exceptionally high visual quality in compare to 32bit or higher resolution DTX without a performance hit.

 

More often than not turning down sliders is moot if an add-on only offers 2048+ textures. Be aware that many high res products require a higher mesh resolution setting than the default 38m. To run 10m mesh the texture resolution must be set higher than 1m mesh or the mesh will revert to 38m by default.

 

Just run that past me again .... very slowly ... in noob-speak .... please?

Sure you do....

 

Graphics card/s design since the early 2000's and today are designed to effectively work with mip-mapping for high performance and high visual quality. The ESP render engine, regardless of if it will display above 1024x, was not ever optimized to run above that resolution, nor run 32bit or un-mapped texture efficiently.

 

A properly made 1024 DXT5/DDS exterior model mip-mapped graphic will display exceptionally high visual quality in compare to 32bit or higher resolution DTX without a performance hit.

 

More often than not turning down sliders is moot if an add-on only offers 2048+ textures. Be aware that many high res products require a higher mesh resolution setting than the default 38m. To run 10m mesh the texture resolution must be set higher than 1m mesh or the mesh will revert to 38m by default.

Simply put, that's why a lot of us resize the textures that are larger than 1024 when the are provided by scenery and aircraft developers. Takes a little time and effort to resize them but it helps prevent OOMs. You can also do the same and not use the textures that come as is from developers.

 

Folks I've toiled with FS9, FSX and P3D for sometime now and I've come to the conclusion awhile back that 3rd party developers are pushing the limits of these aforementioned sims to much. The rush to 4096 has it's ill effects when ran in a 32bit arena. If developers focused on 1024 textures (such as VRS Superbug) scenery and aircraft would look as good and run without issues with respect to VAS. Again it comes down to good programmers to make 1024 textures beautiful.

 

Even Rob alluded to the source of the problem when he stated the following..."LM can't replicate any VAS issues in their base no add-on setup, neither can I replicate any VAS issues on a base install.  It's the introduction of 3rd party products where the VAS issues surface and LM do NOT have access to 3rd party source files (it's rare LM will get 3rd party source files) and/or tools used ... this makes it very difficult to find the "culprit".

 

The source of the problem isn't with P3Dv3 as no one can replicate the issue with a vanilla install of P3D. It's only after installing 3rd party software the issue of VAS rears itself (Most of which are HD texture add-ons) and/or sloppy code.

 

I need to agree, partially.

 

Many vendors use HD graphics as a selling argument. They focus more on visual quality than on core qualities such as correct rendition of systems and flight models (with respect to aircrafts of course). Other vendors model even the interior of add-on airports regardless if the day to day user will ever see them; but it's there and it needs memory when the model is loaded, just in case I would like to see the furniture of the check in desks.

 

And of course these vendors do so. Many of us users buy add-ons just because they are looking great. These beautiful screenshots are just too appealing. At the same time some of us complain that systems modeling is poor, or buggy, or there is again no manual or tutorial flight with the AC. Others complain because of the VAS issues they invited by running all these HD add-ons at the same time ...

It's a vicious cycle, and even a 64bit platform will only push out the limit a bit further. The time will come again where everybody complains about shortage of memory and fluidity ... it’s a never ending story. And it's sad because there would be ways of using the resources of this 32bit platform wisely and making it look beautiful at the same time. But "low-res" textures (btw. I would not really call 1024x1024 low-res) and reliable core features do not sell as easy - you cannot put reliability into a screenshot ...

 

Best

Frank

Sure you do....

 

 Graphics card/s design since the early 2000's and today are designed to effectively work with mip-mapping for high performance and high visual quality. The ESP render engine, regardless of if it will display above 1024x, was not ever optimized to run above that resolution, nor run 32bit or un-mapped texture efficiently.

 

A properly made 1024 DXT5/DDS exterior model mip-mapped graphic will display exceptionally high visual quality in compare to 32bit or higher resolution DTX without a performance hit.

 

More often than not turning down sliders is moot if an add-on only offers 2048+ textures. Be aware that many high res products require a higher mesh resolution setting than the default 38m. To run 10m mesh the texture resolution must be set higher than 1m mesh or the mesh will revert to 38m by default.

You are completely missing the point...

 

I don't care how optimized you make your add-on, there are only so many of them you can have loaded without getting an OOM.

And that was the whole point in my reply to the original question.

 

Otherwise, please point me to ONE add-on that if you run ONLY IT with a vanilia install gives you an OOM...

It comes down to how good a 3D-modeler/texture artist you are too. There are MANY 4096 artists out there claiming they create real 4k textures when in fact it's only the texture sheet that is 4k and not the actual textures themselves. A2A Simulations, for example, are not one of those, they create beautiful 3d-modeling and textures with low performance impact. Just look at some of their earliest accu-sim releases, zoom in on the gauges of the Piper Cub, these planes could have been released TODAY and be considered to have exceptional 3d-models and texture qualities. So no, 4k textures are abssolutely not needed if the creator is talented and smart enough when creating his textures.

 

It comes down to how good a 3D-modeler/texture artist you are too. There are MANY 4096 artists out there claiming they create real 4k textures when in fact it's only the texture sheet that is 4k and not the actual textures themselves. A2A Simulations, for example, are not one of those, they create beautiful 3d-modeling and textures with low performance impact. Just look at some of their earliest accu-sim releases, zoom in on the gauges of the Piper Cub, these planes could have been released TODAY and be considered to have exceptional 3d-models and texture qualities. So no, 4k textures are abssolutely not needed if the creator is talented and smart enough when creating his textures.

+1

 

Since memory has become cheap (not to mix up memory with virtual address space) lots of developers have become lazy with resources. Imagine what has been possible with 600K available memory under DOS - we had fantastic games out there

... man I am old...

Have yet to have an OOM since v3 arrived.  BUT, that being said, I don't use FTX regionals like NCA and fly into FSDT KSFO HD in the PDMG 777.  That is not so much because of  VAS but because me old rig doesn't handle it quite well enough.    The other reality is that when you are doing long flights in complex birds it becomes a bit silly to setup the environment for low and slow flying since you're not doing that in the heavies anyway, so it all works out very well.  At some point we will migrate to 64bit, and hopefully when that happens we will see a REAL substantial increase in computing power than the paltry gains seen in single core performance in the past 5y.  I'm still on an SB-E chip and 5y/o GTX Titan and they work just dandy as long as you accept you have to live within the limits of what you have, and it's still an excellent experience.   When I want to see all of the eye candy I just hop in the RA Turbine Duke or Legacy and enjoy, and all's well.

You are completely missing the point...

 

I don't care how optimized you make your add-on, there are only so many of them you can have loaded without getting an OOM.

And that was the whole point in my reply to the original question.

 

Otherwise, please point me to ONE add-on that if you run ONLY IT with a vanilia install gives you an OOM...

That is only part of the problem. In the end ESP code is what it is....it was never intended to run efficiently the HD textures that are offered overwhelmingly these days.

That is only part of the problem. In the end ESP code is what it is....it was never intended to run efficiently the HD textures that are offered overwhelmingly these days.

It sounds like you know what you're talking about, haven't you thought about the LM have had the code for over 5 years and might have changed it by now? They did upgrade it to DX11

 

There has been talk at FSDeveloper about drawcalls impacting performance.

So it may be a thought that 16 1k textures on a single 4K texture sheet making just 1 drawcalls rather than 16 will improve performance.

I don't think anyone's done a "study" on it so whether there's a noticeable difference or if I'm not sure.

I do know that a single 4K texture probably doesn't contain 16 1k textures sheets worth of content on it though, some of them like to go mad with the quality so make them very large.

I agree with the OP 100%. I have never been able to understand why devs are pushing 2048 textures, and more, for addons. Why? We don't walk around an airport admiring the walls and car parks! We use a sim because we want to fly aircraft. IMO 1024 textures are more than adequate when properly produced. 

 

 

We don't walk around an airport admiring the walls and car parks!

 

Ah well, speak for yourself I really love some of the intimate detail devs put into their creations. I do sometimes wander around and explore these worlds within the wider world. Having said that I only flight light GA and don't therefore use PMDG or the airports airliners like that need, and for that reason I have not suffered any OOM's; the odd low frame rate and stutter yes, but my memory remains intact.