Would be interesting to know how this 'trick' is necessary if somebody uses Process Lasso.  

You can also try this magic value:

Quote

AffinityMask=33024

Don't try to see if it match your CPU, If you are looking for smoothness, try it

24 minutes ago, roland_lfor said:

You can also try this magic value:

Don't try to see if it match your CPU, If you are looking for smoothness, try it

which in binary is 1000000100000000 .. disables 14 out of 16 cores (provided you have a Threadripper from AMD)...

4 minutes ago, rickdeckard said:

which in binary is 1000000100000000 .. disables 14 out of 16 cores (provided you have a Threadripper from AMD)...

Now that must really be awesome...disabling 87,5% of your CPU.

I'm sure if you do that and top that off by locking your FPS at 37 (no more no less) and make sure to have VSync OFF but Tripple Buffering enabled you'll be halfway to some very nice place 

Happy tweaking and have a great weekend guys (and for any newcomer don't try this at home...it's nothing but a stupid yoke) 

2 hours ago, rickdeckard said:

don't know if anyone else observed this behaviour.

Yes core 0 is close to max all the time hence why I kick everything else of core 0-1.

2 hours ago, Cargostorm said:

Would be interesting to know how this 'trick' is necessary if somebody uses Process Lasso.  

Chris I think Process Lasso would automatically start Pv4 with core 0 off but not turn it back on. From memory it just set the cores to be used.

This trick is to turn core 0 off and then back on.

2 hours ago, WebMaximus said:

Now that must really be awesome...disabling 87,5% of your CPU.

I'm sure if you do that and top that off by locking your FPS at 37 (no more no less) and make sure to have VSync OFF but Tripple Buffering enabled you'll be halfway to some very nice place 

Happy tweaking and have a great weekend guys (and for any newcomer don't try this at home...it's nothing but a stupid yoke) 

Dear Richard, before posting various opinions, please test it, please...

13 minutes ago, roland_lfor said:

Dear Richard, before posting various opinions, please test it, please...

Already have a perfectly performing setup my friend not using a single tweak but thanks anyway 

1 minute ago, WebMaximus said:

Already have a perfectly performing setup my friend not using a single tweak but thanks anyway 

It won't break anything in you computer, load the FSL A320 or 777 on a heavy airport and see how your cores are working. And tell me.

I know it wouldn't hurt my PC but with limited spare time I tend to use it for flying rather than tweaking and experimenting and even more so when I don't have any issues.

So you'll have to find yourself another candidate 

On 10/15/2017 at 6:32 PM, Rob Ainscough said:

LM have not given up on DL performance, but even with changes to the render pipeline don't expect miracles on the software side, it's going to require hardware also.

Cheers,  Rob.

I have to grumble at this, what hardware is required then? I have a EVGA 1080Ti, not even running 4K, and a 6700K 4.70Ghz HT on, on a 960 Nvme SSD. How much better can the hardware get? They don't even make a better GPU yet. I understand how demanding DL can be but if the answer is buy hardware that hasn't even been made yet, surely there is a problem somewhere. 

1 minute ago, Angelo Cosma said:

I have to grumble at this, what hardware is required then? I have a EVGA 1080Ti, not even running 4K, and a 6700K 4.70Ghz HT on, on a 960 Nvme SSD. How much better can the hardware get? They don't even make a better GPU yet. I understand how demanding DL can be but if the answer is buy hardware that hasn't even been made yet, surely there is a problem somewhere. 

DGX1!!!!!!!!!! or get a real plane 

35 minutes ago, Angelo Cosma said:

I understand how demanding DL can be but if the answer is buy hardware that hasn't even been made yet, surely there is a problem somewhere.

The answer is to compromise and use MSAA if you elect to have DL enabled, just as one has to do with any Flight Simulator with perhaps the exception being AF2, compromise (this is nothing new).  Is there any reason this is not a valid option for you other than it's slightly less visually pleasing?  SSAA wasn't available in P3D V3.x and earlier, so I'm glad we at least have the option for better AA for the future.  

Flight simulators have NEVER been and NEVER will be about the available hardware today, LM was very clear about that on their Reddit interview.  When FSX was released the issue was the same, the hardware of the day (2006) couldn't run the sim all maxed out with add-ons ... took years for hardware to catchup slowly and people seeing better FPS ... that was with a heavily CPU bound FSX.  Today we have P3D V4 able to utilize more GPU, and DL is all about GPU processing power almost exclusively.  

Personally I think this is a positive step forward.  CPUs performance (in terms of single thread processing) is NOT progressing as rapidly as GPUs ... more and more CPU cores at lower frequency isn't what flight simulators need, isn't what games need either.  There isn't a heck of a lot of difference between my 7700K @4.8Ghz vs. my 7900X @5Ghz ... the only plus I see is a very stable 51% overclock in the newer CPUs. 

So as LM continue to shift and/or add more features that are GPU intensive, that's a good thing because GPUs are improving more significantly every year.  I would hate to see LM not introduce a new feature (like say PBR) just because the hardware of today isn't sufficient to run at acceptable FPS when one has many add-ons installed.

Now you can just claim the code is not optimized or there is a bug, but unless you're a software engineer with the code in front of you, it's not going to carry much weight in a debate.  There are changes in the render pipeline (deferred) that can be done to improve DL specific processing, but those changes can also compromise other rendering so it's still a case of give and take (compromise).  BUT, since it's clearly the type of AA being used that impacts the FPS so much, then it's almost entirely a GPU limitation of today (but not tomorrow).

I do sympathize with your frustration, but if you can find any other flight simulator that isn't about "compromise" then please let know so I can buy it.

Cheers, Rob.

I do switch back and forth between MSAA and SSAA, its times when I takeoff during the day and it transitions to night and I forgot to switch it up I'm slapped in the face with the reminder.

If LM add PBR I would ump XP11 like a hot potato, I can only imagine how gorgeous everything would look in v4. What you say makes sense though now that I think about it. Well I am along for the continuing ride...

31 minutes ago, Angelo Cosma said:

If LM add PBR I would ump XP11 like a hot potato

Are you sure about that?  What if PBR caused a 50% drop in FPS even more so with higher levels of AA, especially at 4K res or higher.  

Personally, I'd love to see PBR in P3D Vx.x, but I'd also brace myself for a 50% FPS hit.  The PBR in XP11 looks fantastic, but when turning Visual Effects to HDR+SSAO (Max) with SSAA and my FPS is 19 (and that's with a no add-on default aircraft situation Reflections=Min, World Objects = High, Shadows off, parked aircraft off) in XP11.

So regardless of the platform (again iPACs AF2 the exception) we don't have the hardware today to realize them completely maxed out with high levels of AA at high resolutions.  It's always going to be a compromise (8K will become a common reality soon - within the next couple of years) because the folks from LM, LR, DTG aren't going to stop adding more features to their platforms ... that's a good thing IMHO, even if frustrating in today's hardware and for content providers.  But, it's frustrating for me also, I don't have an FS budget and the DXG-1 runs on Linux so not really an option for me even if a FS platform could work with 4-8 GPUs ... just have to play the waiting game for better GPUs.

Cheers, Rob.

EDIT: LR (XP11) is promising 60 FPS with everything maxed out when they complete their Vulkan/Mantle update ... bold commitment but I look forward to see if that materializes. 

I do wish folk would stop using unfamiliar acronyms without any explanation. Anyway, I looked this one up, so for anyone unfamiliar with 'PBR':

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physically_based_rendering

Mike 🤔