Well anyhow... after the dust settles, it does indeed help in FS9 to unpark them.

More fps, more smooth.

Generally with these sims they will be unparked and you'll need to have very idle LPs for them to park.

 

You can go to:

 

Control Panel\Hardware and Sound\Power Options\Create a Power Plan

 

choose High Performance

 

that should keep them from parking when near idle.

OK, some data from my end. Turned off the affinity mask for both P3D and FSX - there may be some tweaks remaining (especially for FSX) so if you are curious about the value of a specific setting, please ask. i7-4770K set to 4.0Ghz, with the max 4-core limit at 3.7. 32GB of DDR3-2133, Samsung 840EVO 256GB, 760GTX with 4GB. Windows 7 x64.

 

I tested loading up the Level-D 767 starting on 22R using FSDT JFK. Below are two task manager graphs that cover both spawning the sim as well as running in the VC (the rightmost 25-30% of the graphs is the steady state).

 

 

 

The graphs look very similar to me, with the exception of core #1. It definitely looks like the work is being scheduled more on the even cores (0, 2, 4, 6) in both cases. (And for the record, the top graph is FSX, the bottom P3D).

 

With that said, if there's a different methodology you want me to use to test, I'm definitely interested.

 

Cheers!

Why not repeat the test I showed you, nothing else running stock sims those graphs are a bit of a mess and show nothing. Make sure they are started from the desktop icon. Loading vs Running.

 

Clear as a bell and not obfuscated:

 

Look closely at the P3D graphs on the lower row. On the left all LPs active during loading. Above it's not the same. I need to see your graphs showing what's going on should look like the above. Remember that's a six core.

Since you've got less cores you'll need to take more care to see the differences.

Luke, you might want to get that code out you mentioned and list out the threads and have a look at those in more detail. You'll see even on your four core+HT definitely plays out differently between FSX and P3D. As you increase core count, you'll see the differences starting to appear more obvious as they do in my screengrab. Anyway that's all I can say for now, you've got more than you had.

 

 

Why not repeat the test I showed you, nothing else running stock sims those graphs are a bit of a mess and show nothing. Make sure they are started from the desktop icon. Loading vs Running.

 

That's what I did. If you want me to do something different please tell me what you want. I loaded more complicated add-ons because I wanted to stress the sim. If you want a purely default simulation just tell me the aircraft and the airport.

 

 

 

I need to see your graphs showing what's going on should look like the above. Remember that's a six core.

 

I understand the difference. I am showing you what I am getting based on the situation I have described above. What would you want me to do differently?

 

Cheers!

That's what I did. If you want me to do something different please tell me what you want. I loaded more complicated add-ons because I wanted to stress the sim.

Then you wasted your time. Depending on what those addons contribute to, your graphs will be obfuscated. It stands to reason you need to test the sim, not a bunch of addons, for example a GTN would start up an exe, a simconnect client will invoke networking, and so on.

 

 

If you want a purely default simulation just tell me the aircraft and the airport.

Doesn't matter which.

 

 

I understand the difference. I am showing you what I am getting based on the situation I have described above. What would you want me to do differently?

Remember I don't actually need to see your graphs myself, you're studying them not me. So I suggested you need to make graphs more clearly or get out your code and have a closer look. Those graphs of yours are pretty hard to make out.

 

 

Doesn't matter which.

 

Apparently it does, because you complained about my choice. So rather than playing cat and mouse, why don't we do what real engineers do and agree on a common, repeatable scenario and execute it. If you're truly an engineer I'm puzzled why you wouldn't immediately suggest such a thing.

 

 

 

Remember I don't actually need to see your graphs myself, you're studying them not me.

 

I've already studied the graphs and made a conclusion. I'm not sure why you can't interpret a CPU utilization graph from Windows 7. It's showing exactly the same thing as your graphs, except with more detail (kernel/user time).

 

What are you having a hard time interpreting? I can help.

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

Doesn't matter which Luke so long as you're using just the sim as I explained.

 

I complained about your idea of running loads of addons.

 

You stick to your research and I'll stick to mine.

Thanks for your help!

Have a look at the P3D documentation you can see where it says the rendering stage is at it's leanest with four parts. If you only have one core is it four parts on one core? Now give it two, then three and so on. You already know that P3D is different to FSX in the way it utilises the CPU from the revelation I gave away to you earlier. You don't need to spar with me and spin up stuff like "Apparently it does, because you complained about my choice", doesn't work on me.

 

Also have another look at the screengrabs I showed you. Are you thinking they look different between the sims?