I was flying out of KJFK last night with the PMDG 747 only to find framerates over the city was horrible. Even after I flew out of the city over more rural terrain I was still having sim performance problems. This led me to believe there was a memory leak somewhere. I renamed the extra autogen file to 'autogen.bak' and tried the flight again. Though not perfect framerates and texture loading improved over New York City.I've found the whole east coast area (USA) to be terrible on framerates around major cities. New York is the worst. I wonder even though Microsoft released the 9.1 patch (which I've checked extensively to make sure I was totally up to date) the there still could be a problem with the extra autogen. Though I love the extra autogen I might have to shut it down if I'm flying more complex heavies...Does any of this sound familiar with any of you guys??? :-hmmm

I always have awful performance in the NYC area, especially at JFK. I just flew the IFDG Airbus in there with a freeware panel, and my FPS dipped into the very low teens. It was barely flyable. Normally I lock my FPS at 25 and don't dip much below 20 at most airports. Traffic is a big part of it, but even with it off, the area is still very slow for me. I don't have any scenery installed in the area either.

Sounds familiar to me. Even with the patch I still see autogen issues. Keeping the default.xml file disabled gives me a subatantial FPS boost.Doug

This is from the 9.1 patch notes:"Kennedy Airport (KJFK) features new autogen objects to enhance the high detailed scenery and terrain for the airport and surrounding area."http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimulator/downloads.aspFunny, because JFK is always the worst for me. LGA is much better for me.

The whole upper eastern coast of the United States from Dullas to Boston is hard on my system. Landing at KLGA with 'autogen.xml' active is a disaster...London on approach to Heathrow is another major problem...

had the same issue as Dillon's last week. FPS were horrible with the 744, not as bad with less complex aircrafts. I did not rename my autogen files but will try tonight...John

I get low framerates sometimes, coming into certain runways in Boston. What do you lose, when you rename that .xml file??

Light poles, billboard signs, barns, etc...

And don't forget the MS-Fried Chicken signs :-)

Hate to ask a silly question, but I'm pretty new to this stuff. Which autogen files are you guys talking about? I don't do a lot of flying in those areas, but when I do, I take a big hit on frames also. Is it just one file, or many? Thanks in advance for any help.

Hi Flaps,It is one file. Look in your FS04/Autogen folder. There is only one file and it is called default.xml. Renaming this to anything.xml will stop FS04 from displaying the sort of thing talked about in this thread.Hope this helps,JimActiveSky Sales and Supporthttp://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_dev_team.jpg http://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_proud_supporter.jpg

Yes, the autogen performance degradation bug still exist in 9.1 though it's not as severe as in 9.0. This is thanks to some view distance modifications in the generic.bgl file and possibly other changes.Hopefully FS10 will feature a revamped, more resource-efficent and polished autogen system and get rid of this bottleneck once and for all.

There must be a memory leak somewhere over this area> Now, granted, I have simflyers kjfk installed + Aerosoft's manhattan scenery; my flights regularly end up in a ctd there, especially when I land there. In contrast, Gary Summons' Heathrow gives me acceptable performance (even with VFR London) installed. But the new york area is a son of a #### in terms of performance. ricardo

When you rename the default.xml to something else, can you place the autogen slider anywhere and it doesn't do anything?JimCYWG

Cannot believe nobody has yet mentioned the magic "AI" word in relation to New York flying.Yes, renaming the Autogen.XML makes some difference, but what really makes the difference on my set up is traffic.Lets look at the stats - I have every single commercial airline available loaded into my AI, which means I am probably getting close to 100% of the flights going into LGA, JFK and EWR in real life in the sim. These airports alone handle not far short of 100m passengers per annum and a serious number of traffic movementsAdd to this a whole load of other commercial airports around New York (within the 110 to 120m radius which FS loads into the AI engine), as well as those on the north side of Washington.Then add a huge load of general aviation AI - if you use Markus Brunners program, this will generate a huge amount of GA traffic in the US as it has more airports with more GA gates than the rest of the world put together.Then there is the Ultimate GA packages, which are also heavily US biased, as thats where many of the bizjets are based and fly in real life.I can double my frame rates into JFK just by switching AI off!If you don't believe me - load up the sim at JFK, look at your frame rates once the sim has loaded up, slew yourself up to 2,00 feet above the airport, make sure full traffic is switched on, put the sim on 4* speed, wait 10 minutes until about 130 other AI aircraft have become active in the area, as well as the ones taking off from the airports in the active area, and then see what yor frame rate looks like - now switch AI off - bingoPS I actually find London is worse - Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and Luton have more flight movements per day in agrregate than JFK, LGA and EWRParis is not so clever either