HKLM\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\APL Not Found?

[Zoandar 0]

Thanks! I'm not sure the affinity command is really doing much, but if problems arise I could set it for some number less than 8 cores and see if that helped. I just happened across that command while finding the others during my research, so tossed it in to see what happened.

 

As far as the high priority setting of the batch file, I would hang onto that with my dying breath! The difference is profound, for sure. FSX has always been a snail at starting. Not anymore. If it came down to brass tacks, before I would give that up I would move non-FSX operations to another computer.

 

Thanks again for all the help. I was one step away from thinking I had to build a totally new and isolated PC just for FSX. Hopefully when I add in all its custom goodies it will remain stable.

 

I hope you and your family have a warm and wonderful holiday season!

[Luke 782]

 

 

As far as the high priority setting of the batch file, I would hang onto that with my dying breath! The difference is profound, for sure. FSX has always been a snail at starting. Not anymore. If it came down to brass tacks, before I would give that up I would move non-FSX operations to another computer.

 

Then something is very wrong. Generally speaking, you should leave process priority alone. If you do adjust it, it's usually downward to consume idle time only (as an example, when I'm transcoding a DVD to MK4). The Windows (really, all operating systems) scheduler does a good job of allocating CPU time between processes to ensure that things aren't starved for cycles. What's more, you have 8 cores to allocate threads against.

If you have to raise the process priority, something is consuming a LOT of CPU cycles. What you've done thus far is not a solution; it's merely a troubleshooting task to point you in a direction that leads to the root problem.

 

Cheers!

[Zoandar 0]

An interesting point of view.

 

IMO, what is "wrong" is within FSX and Windows themselves, and I am in no way equipped to try to figure it out.

 

There had to be reasons why, after abandoning FSX and scattering its support team years ago, MS did not choose to fall back on its pre-established flight simulator platform when they chose to jump back in with MS Flight. My speculation is that MS knew all to well what a clanking clattering bandaid infested platform well beyond its days FSX is, and chose not to fix it. If all of them couldn't do it, I certainly can't. As long as things work this way, I will be quite happy.

 

If they stop working this way, I will rebuild one of my older PCs to specifically run FSX and nothing else, so Windows has only it focus on. Probably without any internet connection, so I can disable nightmares like Windows Update. It would remain frozen in time, running an ages old program, with no need for all of Windows cpu hogging updating, spying, and housekeeping.

[Luke 782]

 

 

IMO, what is "wrong" is within FSX and Windows themselves, and I am in no way equipped to try to figure it out.

 

With respect, if you can't identify either the cause or the solution, you're not in a position to apportion responsibility.

 

Hundreads (Thousands?) of people run FSX adequately without changing the process priority. The only way you will see any sort of change in performance by changing priority is if something else is consuming those CPU resources. If your 8 cores are otherwise idle (like they should be), then changing FSX from Normal to Higher to Realtime will make no difference. You've treated the symptom and I'm glad it's made things better, but you're not dealing with the root cause.

 

 

 

no need for all of Windows cpu hogging updating, spying, and housekeeping.

 

Do you actually know what is consuming these cycles? How do you know it is Windows? What is the process name?

 

Luke

[Zoandar 0]

svchost.exe - in great simultaneous multiples. The same thing that brings my rusty trusty old single core notebook to its knees every time there is a Windows 7 update, slamming its CPU to 100%, without ever GETTING the update, until I do something about it. MS KNOWS about this. The assume "everyone has multi-core processors now", just like in the past when they made the totally inane statement that "most Windows users don't have speakers". WSUS saved me on that front.

 

Aside from that, when FSX hangs there is NO PROCESS being reported in the diagnostic tools as causing a problem. Whatever it is doing is entirely WITHIN the Windows OS and seen as "normal" to any diagnostics. As I mentioned in post 11, it seems very much to be Windows simply "task switching" away from FSX, and never coming back to resume it. FSX was created long before multi-core processors. My bet is that the way Windows 7 works now is to periodically switch away from various processes to move to others, and then come back to them. IF........the software is written to run on a multi-core processor. If not.........oh well. That's a guess, but best describes what I see here.

 

I appreciate your take on the possibility that I am not addressing the "specific problem", but just as doctors used to cure my Strep Throat decades ago by throwing an antibiotic at it without taking any kind of culture or blood test to see exactly WHAT afflicted me, they made it go away. I am using the same thought process here. I like to say "we can only know what we know". I am working within my life experience with computers, and my abilities to keep them running. I am not a programmer or IT, and I certainly don't have the hundreds of hours of time it would take me to learn enough about IT to even begin to look into this.

 

In other words, when the light bulb burns, out, I don't try to examine the filament with an electron microscope to see which two atoms lost their connection. I replace the bulb and move on with life. Patience is not my strong suit. And I will always opt for the quickest fix I can muster. I don't really care what the details are that cause FSX to hang without using these settings, if using these settings make it WORK, and there are no unwanted side effects. Which is the case. The rest of the PC is humming along nicely doing whatever I ask of it. For me, this issue appears to be SOLVED. I just wanted to share those settings with any other pour soul in the same boat. And from what I found in my research, there are thousands of us looking online for this kind of solution. It's all over the internet.

 

So, thank you all for your help, and I hope you all have a Happy New Year.

[Luke 782]

 

 

My bet is that the way Windows 7 works now is to periodically switch away from various processes to move to others, and then come back to them. IF........the software is written to run on a multi-core processor. If not.........oh well. That's a guess, but best describes what I see here.

 

Just so that other people don't reference this in the future, for the record this is completely incorrect. The Windows NT kernel (and any other modern operating system) uses pre-emptive multitasking. The kernel scheduler assigns CPU time to a process, and then takes it away. The process has no say in the matter - what you're referring to is "cooperative multitasking", which was Windows 3.x and (macOS 9.x) era.

 

Glad to hear you have found a "fix".

 

Cheers!

 

Luke