Shalom and greetings all my pals,

While I am working hard to modify and sharpen FSX's settings to get crisp sharp ground textures from FL350 which I am doing well,  I have one more question for all of you please

Is AffinityMask entry in FSX.cfg important or not?  Will AffinityMask result into sharper ground textures from FL350?

And should I use AffinityMask=84 in my FSX.cfg? Is it correct number?

I know it is old news and old topic for all of you but AffinityMask is new thing for me even though I have been flying on FSX for almost 10 years.

Regards,

Aharon
 

3 hours ago, Aharon said:

Shalom and greetings all my pals,

While I am working hard to modify and sharpen FSX's settings to get crisp sharp ground textures from FL350 which I am doing well,  I have one more question for all of you please

Is AffinityMask entry in FSX.cfg important or not?  Will AffinityMask result into sharper ground textures from FL350?

And should I use AffinityMask=84 in my FSX.cfg? Is it correct number?

I know it is old news and old topic for all of you but AffinityMask is new thing for me even though I have been flying on FSX for almost 10 years.

Regards,

Aharon
 

You might want to check out this recent thread.

 

Not all processors are the same, thus any one number for Affinity Mask is not going to be correct for all systems. The best thing you can do for yourself and your flight sim experience is to spend a little time to learn about affinity mask.  There are some terrific educational pieces available on the web, just Google "FSX Affinity Mask" and you'll find them.

Is AF important?  I'm afraid the answer is another question... "it depends".  It depends on which sim you're running, what type of system you're running on as later processors can be better at self managing the processor threads than forcing them into a configuration).  It also depends on what other software you'll be running in concert with the sim.  If you're running an i7 processor (or AMD equivalent) you'll also want to have a working knowledge using (or not using) Hyperthreading as this will affect your Affinity Mask setting IF you choose to use one.

My very best wishes!

 

 

 

Also, If you are using FSX Steam you don't need it in your CFG.

 

Cheers,

Greg Z

For a quad core running HT (Hyperthreading) off, this should be 14.
For a quad core running HT on, this should be 84.

FSX will then use Core0 for Fibers, Core1 for Main Thread, Core2+3 for Texture Threads.

 

Thanks all for kind advices and tips. I think I shall skip affinity mask.

Regards,

Aharon

19 hours ago, butwanna said:

For a quad core running HT (Hyperthreading) off, this should be 14.
For a quad core running HT on, this should be 84.

FSX will then use Core0 for Fibers, Core1 for Main Thread, Core2+3 for Texture Threads.

 

You too might want to check out this recent thread. You can't make a blanket statement like that without knowing what programs are loading and the PC configuration, as DaveCT2003 suggested.

On 17.4.2017 at 0:16 AM, ziggy said:

Also, If you are using FSX Steam you don't need it in your CFG.

Yes and no.

Without a specified affinity mask setting, FSXSE will run on CPU cores 2 to 4 on my quad core CPU (no HT), which corresponds to an AM value of 14. This makes sense for freeing as much CPU time for FSX as possible, but at the cost of wasting a CPU core.

Setting AM to 15 will use all four cores, but the CPU time of core 1 will be divided between FSX and whatever Windows is running in the background, which decreases CPU time available to FSX' main threads (which always run on the first logical core).

12 hours ago, Bjoern said:

Yes and no.

Without a specified affinity mask setting, FSXSE will run on CPU cores 2 to 4 on my quad core CPU (no HT), which corresponds to an AM value of 14. This makes sense for freeing as much CPU time for FSX as possible, but at the cost of wasting a CPU core.

Setting AM to 15 will use all four cores, but the CPU time of core 1 will be divided between FSX and whatever Windows is running in the background, which decreases CPU time available to FSX' main threads (which always run on the first logical core).

Correct. It does make a difference in FSX:SE as well.

On my system (i7 6700k @4.6):

No AM - blurries

AM=14 - blurries

AM=84 - blurries

AM=85 - almost no blurries

AM=245 - best with regards to blurries, but a bit more stuttering in heavy scenery (i.e., London with addons)

Afinity mask is not the only thing if it comes to bluries, I use no AM and don't have any bluries, it all comes down to a proper NVidia inspector setup and not overloading your system with the sliders to high, set them according to what your system can handle and look what it does.

I only run a i5 4690 @4.2 Ghz and a GTX 760 card so Andreh, your bluries come from other stuff.

Herman

5 hours ago, electricman said:

Afinity mask is not the only thing if it comes to bluries, I use no AM and don't have any bluries, it all comes down to a proper NVidia inspector setup and not overloading your system with the sliders to high, set them according to what your system can handle and look what it does.

I only run a i5 4690 @4.2 Ghz and a GTX 760 card so Andreh, your bluries come from other stuff.

Herman

Well aware of that. Still, it seems that AM=85 was a crucial tweak on my system. Made a huge difference for some reason.

6 hours ago, andreh said:

Correct. It does make a difference in FSX:SE as well.

On my system (i7 6700k @4.6):

No AM - blurries

AM=14 - blurries

AM=84 - blurries

AM=85 - almost no blurries

AM=245 - best with regards to blurries, but a bit more stuttering in heavy scenery (i.e., London with addons)

This is a good way to confuse people..

AM=14 is for a quad processor with Hyperthreading OFF

AM=84 or 85 is for a quad processor with Hyperthreading ON

 

32 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

This is a good way to confuse people..

AM=14 is for a quad processor with Hyperthreading OFF

AM=84 or 85 is for a quad processor with Hyperthreading ON

Indeed, much about this thread is confusing...

Greg

Did buy AS16 and ASCA yesterday and that asks to install AM automatically, the reason according AS16 is that no AM is the cause of the so called 8 minute freezes of FSX and since I don't have them I leave it out so my FSX install can use all 4 cores without a hold back by this AM, I don't see any other advantage of using AM and limiting your sim's resources unless you have a top speed CPU and top GPU card, and then still? like already so many people who tested it, FSX doesn't gain from AM, P3D does.

Herman 

1 hour ago, electricman said:

Did buy AS16 and ASCA yesterday and that asks to install AM automatically, the reason according AS16 is that no AM is the cause of the so called 8 minute freezes of FSX and since I don't have them I leave it out so my FSX install can use all 4 cores without a hold back by this AM, I don't see any other advantage of using AM and limiting your sim's resources unless you have a top speed CPU and top GPU card, and then still? like already so many people who tested it, FSX doesn't gain from AM, P3D does.

Herman 

What about fsx in dx10? Sincerely curious. I run dx10 and I've done extensive testing with AM. And I'm certain, my system runs better with AM = 85. 

 

André