Set up AffinityMask in v4 = 60 fps all the time!

[SteveW 1,792]

On ‎10‎/‎07‎/‎2017 at 9:33 PM, MarkW said:

Looking forward to SteveW's take on all of this.

Thanks Mark.

 

Shuffling around AM's in P3D generally results in a re-organisation of other processes which may pan out better or worse as we try different numbers.

We need to ensure our Addon exe apps, decent test plane and scenario are all appropriate for testing out the system properly - setting unlimited with VSync=Off, no AA and keeping graphics low to see outright framerate unencumbered by some kind of flat line in the system or GPU limit or we are not recording our CPU limit. Hence we get a raft of opinions about what AMs do.

But it is those other processes like addon exe apps we need to worry about every time we try another AM with P3D or we will have wasted our time. We also need to do several runs for an identical scenario to ensure all caches are equal. And we need to do first time runs from cold to test the uncached situation. Takes some time.

Whatever we do we have to set a good AM for P3D in the first place, ensure addon exe apps are kept from certain cores, and know our test-bed is not giving us false readings. For example; did you know we can gain fps at the expense of background performance and so comparing max fps reached is not a factor in performance setup.

When applying specially designed software to measure what's going on, I have thrown the book at it, but in the end performance capacity more or less determines overall smoothness of operation, assuming we have our monitor and graphics set up correctly to work smoothly.

In other words we can look at a graph of fps over time and study its behaviour - we need to see the shortest line, the least change in frame rate.

[GSalden 4,656]

Since almost 2 years I always come back to AM = 340 on my system ( 5820 ).

I recently tried 980 . Flying in fair weather gave about 5% more fps , but with detailed scenery and an overcast + multiple cloud layers made it perform worse ( - 17% ).

So I am back at 340...

[Slayer 190]

I see a couple of things wrong with that video:

A) His GPU is maxed out so the CPU cannot feed it any further and will be waiting - That's why with all cores enabled you see huge swings in temps and CPU % usage  and on the inverse if you watch closely where some CPU's are disallowed it seems a bit more steady. Contrary to popular belief GPU % usage is NOT a good metric for performance in P3D. Games yes, this no... 

B) Flying in an area with minimal autogen , Autogen is heavily CPU dependant so in this case it is a bad test of AM's - I'd like to see it in a city or near KLAX or KSFO for example.

Less than 99% GPU usage can indicate a couple of things -  one good and one not so good.

Case A: CPU overloaded due to too high of rendering settings - GPU usage drops because CPU isn't feeding it data fast enough so it ends up waiting and usage % falls and you see  50-60%  GPU usage

Case B : in the 80% ish GPU range.  Good balance has been achieved  some headroom left for landing at large payware airports or dense autogen areas 

P3D gives you way more control of GPU and CPU loading but it's up to you to figure out the balance point for your sys.

 

I always start with scenery, Tess. and autogen that I'm happy with , then start slowly turning up eye candy like shadows, special effects etc keeping an eye on both CPU and GPU usage at the same time. 

Once you see your GPU usage high then suddenly drop after a change , you know you've gone too far and back it down a bit

[stripealipe 87]

You should be careful here... GPU usage is not the entire story, as many cards simply throttle when they're not being pushed hard and will show near 100% at a reduced clock speed until they're then pushed harder and then ramp up their clock speeds and the overall usage may then drop.

Use GPU-Z and keep a careful eye on your speeds and overall usage.

[ssair1 92]

Apologies for the newbie question. I'm running an i7 7700k and the affinity mask calculator gave me a number of 84. It didn't improve anything. I took someone's recommendation and boosted that number to 118 and it gave me an 8- 10 fps boost. How did it manage to boost up my fps? If I increase this number will it help even more? (I know total newbie question). 

Best, 

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

2 hours ago, ssair1 said:

Apologies for the newbie question. I'm running an i7 7700k and the affinity mask calculator gave me a number of 84. It didn't improve anything. I took someone's recommendation and boosted that number to 118 and it gave me an 8- 10 fps boost. How did it manage to boost up my fps? If I increase this number will it help even more? (I know total newbie question). 

Best, 

Use this calculator:

http://www.binaryhexconverter.com/decimal-to-binary-converter

Type in the decimal number on the left, and select Convert

On the right, you will see which cores are active (1) and inactive (0)

84=  01010100

118= 01110110

I would like 118 better.

Personally I use:

253=11 11 11 01

Pick your poison 

 

ps.  Oh by the way, it is not about fps, but about smoothness..

 

 

 

 

[lownslo 592]

3 hours ago, ssair1 said:

...boosted that number to 118 and it gave me an 8- 10 fps boost. How did it manage to boost up my fps? If I increase this number will it help even more?

An Affinity Mask doesn't "boost" performance, per se.  It forces a program (like P3D) to use specific cores of the CPU, the configuration of which may enhance performance.  You would be wise to put little stock in AM recommendations because each of our systems are different, and as well we each use the simulator differently.  To be blunt, one simmer's successful AM could be another's disaster.  Rather, start with your add-on programs that run outside the sim (Active Sky, for example, and don't forget that the OS runs on the first core (Core 0)) and keep them away from the cores that run the sim.  Then configure the sim for best performance (as noted above, not FPS but smoothness) on your rig with your add-ons.  It takes time and testing but is worth the effort.

SteveW offers great guidance about affinity masks.

HTH,

Greg

[Nyxx 6,993]

Well said Greg, wise words indeed.

[Matthew James de Bohun 55]

See this really bugs me. I hate the fact you need to delve into being some kind of computer "programmer" to get the best out of the sim experience.

In an ideal world the software would be fully capable of optimising the experience for me leaving me to just fly.

[lownslo 592]

5 minutes ago, Matthew James de Bohun said:

See this really bugs me. I hate the fact you need to delve into being some kind of computer "programmer" to get the best out of the sim experience.

But you don't need to be some kind of computer programmer.  All you need to know is that Windows runs on Core0, and what 3rd party add-ons you have and which cores you wish them to run on (hint: core 0 and core 1... just to start).  Everybody's AM can/will be different, but the critical criteria is that the OS and 3rd party add-ons SHOULD NOT run on cores the sim uses.  Start there and move forward...

Take control of YOUR sim!

Oh and, read SteveW's posts on the subject of AM...

Press On!

Greg

[ega 98]

SteveW,

I have a 7700k processor with 4 cores, 4 threads - it indicates, I think, that HT is off. For better performance would you recommend turning HT on?

Thanks!

[Peter Webber 339]

On ‎2017‎/‎07‎/‎18 at 4:39 PM, SteveW said:

Thanks Mark.

 

Shuffling around AM's in P3D generally results in a re-organisation of other processes which may pan out better or worse as we try different numbers.

We need to ensure our Addon exe apps, decent test plane and scenario are all appropriate for testing out the system properly - setting unlimited with VSync=Off, no AA and keeping graphics low to see outright framerate unencumbered by some kind of flat line in the system or GPU limit or we are not recording our CPU limit. Hence we get a raft of opinions about what AMs do.

But it is those other processes like addon exe apps we need to worry about every time we try another AM with P3D or we will have wasted our time. We also need to do several runs for an identical scenario to ensure all caches are equal. And we need to do first time runs from cold to test the uncached situation. Takes some time.

Whatever we do we have to set a good AM for P3D in the first place, ensure addon exe apps are kept from certain cores, and know our test-bed is not giving us false readings. For example; did you know we can gain fps at the expense of background performance and so comparing max fps reached is not a factor in performance setup.

When applying specially designed software to measure what's going on, I have thrown the book at it, but in the end performance capacity more or less determines overall smoothness of operation, assuming we have our monitor and graphics set up correctly to work smoothly.

In other words we can look at a graph of fps over time and study its behaviour - we need to see the shortest line, the least change in frame rate.

Steve, you would make an excellent politician....😉

[swiesma 625]

If you don’t use your PC exclusively for P3D HT on is a must in my eyes.

[captflyby 2]

On 7/14/2017 at 7:45 AM, AnkH said:

Honestly: this is simply because Simmers are used to suffer from bad performance and they found ways to get along with it, for example by limiting the FPS to 30 or even 20 with the aim to have at least as constant FPS as possible. But if you ever played another game on a 144Hz screen with 100+ FPS, then even 60FPS is ridiculously bad, not even speaking about 30 or 20FPS. It is only acceptable due to the fact that within a civil flightsim, there is no fast movement necessary. But I guess, already properly controlling a well-modelled helo would be better with 60+ FPS compared to 30 or even 20.

OK here's my 2 cents.

Windows 10 16 GIG ram SSDs  Nvidia 1080Ti Nvidia 1060 both with 4-8gig

Prepar3d v4.1

VRS IndiaFoxtrotEcho F-35

I noticed I was only getting 12.5 fps.

Checked task manager.  All 8 CPU boxes: #1 just about maxed out.  All other 7 running at about 10% each.

Tried AM. No good.

Changed airplanes. Same airport. Same weather. Same settings.  fps went to 30-33 fps.  still very very poor.

My two programmer sons assure me that letting Windows manage the system, and not AM, will end up giving a much smoother  trouble free experience most often.

I'm still at 12.5 fps however.

I read detailed Q&A from LM.  I have a programmer friend their 20+ years.  They do software for the latest high tech REAL fighter aircraft, and they can't get the cpus to work together in a flight sim?

I test flew Aerofly FS 2 two days ago on my sim. F18 Hornet. 240 fps. Buttery smooth performance with great visuals, clouds. etc.  Airplane is a game toy.  No systems work. No combat capability. Long way to go for real pilot training/experience.  But still buttery smooth.  NO REASON LM cannot make v4 the same way.

 

[SteveW 1,792]

9 minutes ago, captflyby said:

My two programmer sons assure me that letting Windows manage the system, and not AM, will end up giving a much smoother  trouble free experience most often.

The AM can only restrict the sim from using all the cores, it cannot improve performance.

Also we are talking about AMs in relation to *sharing* the CPU with addons that otherwise take performance from the sim.

Your system is set up incorrectly since P3D settings can crush any system your exhibits the behaviour of being set up to do more than your system can manage.