Ground textures gets more blurry the further I fly

[skysurfer 76]

7 hours ago, kurtb said:

what is worrying this never happened in 4.2, same pc same specs same settings, fresh install, but why in 4.3??????

 

I had it in 4.2 too 

[Guest]

This is what 4KB block read/write performance is for a standard Samsung EVO 850 SSD (500GB) connected to a standard SATA port (this is NOT an M.2, but standard SATA6):

As you can see from the test which is specific to 4kb block performance, results on the read side are 366 MB/s which is considerably higher than 3.2 MB/s results reported.

Cheers, Rob.

 

[fghdgdfdfgfgf 111]

His memory scores aren’t great either, read/write scores should both in the 40s and latency score should also be in hi 40s to a low 50 something. While I doubt that the memory score is the cause of the blurry issue it may indicate some underlying hardware or driver issue that is.

edit: My throughput scores

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ckzi5djubhz5qj5/1401 mem score.PNG?dl=0

Edited July 4, 2018 by FunknNasty
added my mem scores

[OMGEDSON 7]

2 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Based on your test results of your FS drive, I think your problem is the 3.2MB/s 4K read/write scores.  I would recommend NOT using a RAID setup and go with straight SSD to SATA or M.2 if available.  I'd start there.

Cheers, Rob

EDIT: Are you setting disk cluster sizes to default value (usually 4K) ... looks like you might have changed the cluster size?

Rob you may be onto something, looking at disk usage/sizes in detail has absolutely shown that the 4K load time is significantly slower. Odd, I don't know much about those cluster sizes enough to have messed with it. However it sounds like in theory it could explain why a plane going at the speed of the 747 may require faster i/o to render whats below.

 

Physical Sector sizes are showing 4K

 

What's crazy to me is that I've never ever had this issue before...but lets just stick to the numbers we're definitely seeing because I like the path you're on.  While I'd love to drop $500 on a 2TB pure SSD or M.2 (which is avail!)  I just don't think it's a wise decision right now, esp on theory.  What about investing in the firecuda...

 

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178996&cm_re=2tb_ssd-_-22-178-996-_-Product

 

Purchasing this drive, and considering that the D drive is nothing but sim install, it should be cloneable to the new disk yea?

As you can see, Im just under the 2TB need...if this works out, i'd simply scoop up a larger SSD.

 

 

The plan would be to move all the ground textures initially over, AKA ORBX folder...

 

 

Edited July 4, 2018 by OMGEDSON

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, OMGEDSON said:

Rob you may be onto something, looking at disk usage/sizes in detail has absolutely shown that the 4K load time is significantly slower.

I can't suggest anything else about your hardware other than what appears to be well below "normal" per the test report you provided.  I'm not suggesting you have to use an SSD, but I am suggesting you need to resolve that 4K block read issue as 3.2MB/s is a problem.

I believe your report indicated you were using RAID 0 configuration?   If so, I would not opt for any RAID configuration, just not necessary for P3D or any flight sim with today's SSDs and HDs.  If SSD or M.2 is not in the cards, go with a fast HD like this: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=234-000G-000W6 for <$200 4TB 256MB (WD4005FZBX) cache 7200 rpm which is good for 202 MB/s.  Obviously SSD will be better but you'll not notice a huge difference during flights with reasonable settings.  If you do a lot of Photoreal scenery then an SSD might be more significant.

Whatever you decide, you just want to make sure you get away from 4K block reads at 3.2MB/s ... a standard mechanical HD should be able to do well over 100 MB/s on 4K block reads which eliminate one source of your blurry terrain issue.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting this will solve your issue, but 3.2MB/s is definitely a problem.  If it's the ONLY problem then I think you'll find it will be a solution, but it doesn't rule out other issues that might cascading causes (MB I/O controller, drivers, etc.).

Cheers, Rob.

EDIT: also be aware that P3D Add-On structure could also use your "C: drive" for loading scenery in addition to the drive you have P3D main installed on ... so both drives need to operating at proper specification.

[skysurfer 76]

Hello back. 

I am kind of getting confused what I am having now. 

5 hours enroute and I don't think I have noticed blurry textures. However something is going on with my textures:

 Here is some progress:

Then it turned into this:

Current location is here:

It tell me that wiped out spot ahead is supposed to be the lake. I am wondering if for some reason lakes are not displaying properly.. 

[newtie 533]

4 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I can't suggest anything else about your hardware other than what appears to be well below "normal" per the test report you provided.  I'm not suggesting you have to use an SSD, but I am suggesting you need to resolve that 4K block read issue as 3.2MB/s is a problem.

I believe your report indicated you were using RAID 0 configuration?   If so, I would not opt for any RAID configuration, just not necessary for P3D or any flight sim with today's SSDs and HDs.  If SSD or M.2 is not in the cards, go with a fast HD like this: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=234-000G-000W6 for <$200 4TB 256MB (WD4005FZBX) cache 7200 rpm which is good for 202 MB/s.  Obviously SSD will be better but you'll not notice a huge difference during flights with reasonable settings.  If you do a lot of Photoreal scenery then an SSD might be more significant.

Whatever you decide, you just want to make sure you get away from 4K block reads at 3.2MB/s ... a standard mechanical HD should be able to do well over 100 MB/s on 4K block reads which eliminate one source of your blurry terrain issue.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting this will solve your issue, but 3.2MB/s is definitely a problem.  If it's the ONLY problem then I think you'll find it will be a solution, but it doesn't rule out other issues that might cascading causes (MB I/O controller, drivers, etc.).

Cheers, Rob.

EDIT: also be aware that P3D Add-On structure could also use your "C: drive" for loading scenery in addition to the drive you have P3D main installed on ... so both drives need to operating at proper specification.

I've been using multiple EVO Pros for quite some time now. Never had blurries since 4.1.

Run light settings with no PR tho'.

[somiller 694]

18 hours ago, deetee said:

I followed some of the collective advice here and no longer get the “ progressive “ blurries. 

1. I internally limited my frames to 30 (also set FFTF to 0.15 to compensate for frame loss).

2. Turned off hi-res ground textures. I don’t see much difference with airliner ops (note I have Texture_size_exp set to 9 which helps for visuals). 

According to this thread: https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&amp;t=127871&amp;p=172408&amp;hilit=TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP#p172408

For default 256:
HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=0
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8 (or not set)

For 512:
HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=1
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 (or not set)

For 1024:
HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=1
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10

Please do not use these setting combinations as they may cause problems:

HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=0
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9

HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=0
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10

HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=1
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8

Kind Regards,

[deetee 164]

3 hours ago, somiller said:

According to this thread: https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&amp;t=127871&amp;p=172408&amp;hilit=TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP#p172408

Thanks for the link (ideally that should be a sticky here for dummies like me), the plot thickens... I will try the 512 setting, I see now I had it on the 1024 originally. 

[OMGEDSON 7]

@Rob Ainscough I wanted to level the playing field on tools...so I went ahead and installed Sandra which I had been meaning to do for some time... check this out: http://ranker.sisoftware.net/show_run.php?q=c2ffcef6d0b1d0edd8eadceedae2c4b68bbb9df89da090b6c5f8c8

 

 

[somiller 694]

8 hours ago, deetee said:

Thanks for the link (ideally that should be a sticky here for dummies like me), the plot thickens... I will try the 512 setting, I see now I had it on the 1024 originally. 

Dave,

Anyone confused by this could hardly be called a dummy...it's not intuitive. It appears from Beau's post, that they realize they have created a problem with these complementary/conflicting variables.

Kind Regards,

[Skiff 9]

I've had behavior like this happen before, and it was resolved by rolling back my Nvidia drivers. OP, try rolling back to the last version of your video card drivers that you know were "good" and see if it makes a difference.

[pgde 571]

21 hours ago, OMGEDSON said:

 

21 hours ago, OMGEDSON said:

 

When you do get your new SSD don't forget to turn off the "contents indexed" option above since it unnecessarily uses resources. The speed of SSDs is now fast enough that indexing is not really required (this is a suggestion from Samsung support).

[captain420 3,099]

It could also be the fact that I did update my nvidia drivers after I did a clean install of P3D 4.3. I think I'm on 389.11 now. 

I also have this in my Prepar3D.cfg, but why is this a bad setting? I've always had this and never had this problem with progressive blurries before. I'm exhausted in trying to pinpoint the problem and have taken a break from P3D. Kind of lost the mood. Been wanting to fly but seems like endless hours and days of tweaking and trying to figure out the cause for these blurries have just ruined the whole experience for me.

HIGH_RESOLUTION_TERRAIN_TEXTURES=1
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8

[Guest]

10 hours ago, OMGEDSON said:

I wanted to level the playing field on tools...so I went ahead and installed Sandra

Your results still seem pretty low to me even for that model mechanical HD (WD2003).  I notice you have 2X, if you're running a two 2TB in a RAID 0, I would avoid doing any "on chip" RAID unless you're using a dedicated RAID controller that has it's own processor and RAM cache.

Cheers, Rob.