FSX-MS P3D'ers understand this, please (Part 2 - OOM)

[Jim Young 2,356]

19 hours ago, Dazkent said:

Do you have your frame rate limit set to 30.

FPS are unlimited.  I had a system like yours (i7 4770K; GTX780; 16GB's of RAM) but then moved to the i7 7700K and now my latest system.  I recently posted a flight I took from FlightBeam KIAD to FSDT KCLT using real weather and MSE Virginia.  Drez Washington X was also loaded as it is photoscenery and I also had Northern and Southern California enabled and they were being loaded too.  It was a fairly short flight so I had no issues with VAS:

4208547 *** FSUIPC log file being closed
Minimum frame rate was 16.9 fps, Maximum was 146.0 fps
Minimum available memory recorded was 969Mb
Average frame rate for running time of 4105 secs = 41.7 fps
G3D fix: Passes 55156, Null pointers 0, Bad pointers 0, Separate instances 0
Maximum AI traffic for session was 146 aircraft

It shows I had a minimum of 16.9 fps but I did not see or feel it during the flight.  I think that's what showed up when the flight first loaded.  That's with my current system (see signature for specs).  I have seen stuttering occur when I had the wrong version of FSUIPC installed.  Little things like that and it is hard to figure out the culprit.  But FSX can give you a lot of enjoyment if you are conservative with your settings.  For instance, 4X's SS gives you good quality scenery but it is a fps killer.  This is shown in the AVSIM FSX Configuration Guide.  The LOD slider will also cause stuttering if you manually changed it from 4.5 to something higher.  Autogen will cause stuttering too if set too high.  There are a lot of variables.  Every system requires a different configuration.  There is no one configuration that works for all even for everyone who owns the i7 4770K.  The settings will work for almost everyone who owns the same CPU/GPU but members are flying in several different locations. 

Best regards,

Jim

[fs4fun 366]

FSX remains to this day a fine simulator, with an ocean of great addons, both freeware and payware. A few well chosen payware addons like ActiveSky and DX10 fixer, perhaps some terrain and scenery addons for a bit of extra visual quality and a good airplane (A2A, PMDG etc) and there's no shame to it at all. P3D and X-Plane are kings of the hill and if you want the top of the line that's the way to go.

I love making my own addons, and with FSX you can do that with all the fantastic and free dev tools. Makes for a fun and inexpensive hobby and it does everything I need. I practically never got OOM's with FSX but it takes a bit of care in the settings and not going crazy with hi-res textures or cranking up LOD_RADIUS. Unfortunately some developers use techniques that make their addons too memory-hungry and the end user suffers.

I do some work with modern game engines such as Unity. The functionality and speed these game engines are advancing at is incredible. You can work with inexpensive but modern development tools (I like Houdini and Substance Painter/Designer). None of this being stuck with overpriced Autodesk and using ancient gamepacks, LOL. To me it will be worth buying P3D when you can drop in an FBX or GLTF file and attach custom colliders and program directly on top of the physics engine in a modern programming language.

MS tried to modernize the MSFS engine and released it as MS Flight. Read Stonelance's writings about all the impressive work they did. Unfortunately the community pooped all over it because of bad product packaging, and the baby got flushed with the bathwater. I'm grateful for the Flight Toolkit so I could experience some of what Flight had to offer.

We're lucky to have such a good spectrum of products given the small size of the community compared to other types of games. There's something for every type of simmer. If you're happy with what you have that's all that matters.

[Bob Scott 7,759]

If someone complains that they can't fit all their stuff into their 10-year old subcompact car, "get a bigger car" is one legitimate solution to the problem.  If you're plagued by OOMs in FSX, "get a newer 64-bit platform" is, likewise, one legit solution.  I managed to keep myself out of OOM trouble for most of my FSX days by carefully managing active sceneries on a per-flight basis with Scenery Config Editor, and not going crazy with 8 layers of clouds and monster cloud textures, 4K scenery textures etc.  If you can't afford to make a move to P3D, then sure, FSX still has some legs if your expectations are in line with the platform's limitations.  And 32-bit code is a real limitation.  Getting angry when that is pointed out doesn't change that truth.

Most of us P3Ders were also die-hard FSXers.  We know what each platform offers.  Anyone that wants to tell me that I'm not having a smoother and more trouble-free experience in P3Dv4 ignores the fact that I also know FSX and it's capabilities/limitations--intimately.  I can only speak for myself and a few other friends, but P3D--and especially v4--has been a real step up in reliability and ease of configuration.  Yup, it costs more.  Lockheed's software engineers, as it turns out, don't want to work for free.  If you can still make an abandoned 13-year-old software title work, great!  But does anyone really believe that the result of 8 years of work by LM's P3D team has produced nothing that FSX couldn't do already?  Really??

Right now, I spend 95% of my sim time with P3Dv4.  I also have two copies of boxed FSX Gold, and a still-unused copy of FSX-SE I bought for $5 in their initial rollout sale on Steam.  And P3Dv3, and P3Dv2 for that matter as well.

I'm contemplating finding myself a high-end gaming laptop for travelling (seems that grandkids are popping up all over now), and for mobile simming I can resurrect one of the copies of FSX or 32-bit P3Dv3 that i already own, or perhaps even go with a month-to-month license of P3Dv4 while travelling.  As some have pointed out, P3D pretty much rules on the big screen, but FSX can still hold its own on modern hardware and a smallish (e.g. laptop-sized) 1920x1080 monitor.  Sometimes I ponder giving FSX a try again, but I have to tell you that I do not miss the incessant tweaking that was needed to wrangle FSX into something usable.  And then there are lots of other considerations, like P3D's ability to leverage modern GPUs, and advances in weather depiction (especially low-vis).  I do wonder how my trusty old Tinmouse 737-200 and the PMDG MD-11 would work in FSX on such a laptop...maybe I'll try it.  But the sum of all my experiences in doing this for over 25 years now tells me that I'm gonna end up with P3D on the laptop when all is said and done.  I remember FSX and some of those add-ons fondly right up until I start thinking about all the tweaking, and CTDs, and other issues it gave me along the way.

/soapbox

Regards

[mmann 72]

36 minutes ago, w6kd said:

If someone complains that they can't fit all their stuff into their 10-year old subcompact car, "get a bigger car" is one legitimate solution to the problem.  If you're plagued by OOMs in FSX, "get a newer 64-bit platform" is, likewise, one legit solution

Except that FSX is an entertainment product and P3D isn't; so the analogy should be suggesting someone go from a subcompact car to a commercial vehicle (like a bus).

[Bob Scott 7,759]

10 minutes ago, mmann said:

Except that FSX is an entertainment product and P3D isn't; so the analogy should be suggesting someone go from a subcompact car to a commercial vehicle (like a bus).

Neither training nor education use cases are inherently commercial, so I guess I'd have to disgree with you there. 

 

[Patco Lch 1,484]

47 minutes ago, mmann said:

Except that FSX is an entertainment product and P3D isn't; so the analogy should be suggesting someone go from a subcompact car to a commercial vehicle (like a bus).

I've seen folks using buses for campers and all sorts of things recreational. Preaty cool.

[sloppysmusic 314]

Got to say my rig is custom built i7 6900 64gb ram 5 ssds and I run exclusively with 4k resolution. I often run LOD as high as 8.5 set with Steve's dx fixer payware and get zero ooms(unless experimenting) minimum 15fps in cockpit (only on biggest orbx strips) usually 25 to 30 in cockpit ultra smooth and 50 to 90 outside cockpit and this is all with any of current pmdg jets. Scenery is managed by SCE and is set up so only takes seconds to configure. I have every FSX Orbx scenery available and only have to be careful with LOD in a very few like ESSA, YBBN, LOWI for example. I've made quite a few videos on YouTube of me flying A2A planes around mountains with not a single CTD or OOM. Admit that it helps I am a computer 'expert' but the product continues to serve me extremely well, and entertains me hugely.

[TextRich 88]

To all those of you who thought that FSX users were in denial and/or afraid of change: I hate to burst your bubble, but no, no we are not.  I'm sorry but all those minutes you carefully put in your posts and searching for convincing YouTube videos were waste of your limited simming time.  This forum is for FSX users looking to maximize FSX for whatever reasons they continue to use it over P3D and the other 64-bit simulators.  There are even forums in AVSim for people who still use FLY! and Flight Unlimited for whatever reasons they chose to.  Why don't P3D users post there to convince people to stop using those even older simulators?  How about the FS 2004 forum?  Microsoft Flight?

Seriously, I am a fan of P3D.  I even have a bumper sticker on my car for it.  Because of P3D, Microsoft Flight Simulator lives on in 64 bits and it is no longer dependent on the whims of bean counters at Microsoft.  I love watching P3D streamers on Twitch and reading about P3D add-ons in FSElite.  Eventually we FSX users will decide when it is time to move on to P3D v5 or whatever like FS 2002 users decided to move on to 2004, and 2004 users decided to move on to FSX.  We will decide ourselves as individual flight simmers.  No pity from you is needed at all.

Thank you, P3D users, for your concern but we are perfectly fine and happy.  We just want to maximize our FSX like FS 2004 users are still maximizing their simulators without good virtual cockpits and DirectX 10 graphics.  We feel bad for you because when you go out of your way to post off-topic replies, it makes you look like you are having second thoughts about jumping from FSX to P3D, and you need validation based on the increasing number of P3D users and Lockheed Martin revenue.  Just keep posting in the P3D forums here.  I visit it just like I visit the FSX forum here and I enjoy your natural and unforced enthusiasm over there.  🙂

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

In before the closure.

 

 

[sloppysmusic 314]

27 minutes ago, BF Bullpup said:

Thank you, P3D users, for your concern but we are perfectly fine and happy.

Great post man, couldn't have written it better myself exact same sentiments and belief throughout.

[bobbyjack 61]

Jeez, guys. You all take yourselves way too seriously. Seems to me that those that have full 360 degree home cockpits might begin to be able to talk about what is realistic ( and even then...? Flash, it's not.). Otherwise, we're supposed to be having fun. I am. 

By the way, I've been in a Fedex flight simulator. I hope they've upgraded.

[Jim Young 2,356]

Let's try to stay on topic as (I think) the OP was claiming P3D is just as bad as FSX as P3D users get OOM's, the blurries, stuttering, etc.  He says something like if we have proof he is wrong, then prove it (and some of us have!).  I guess that is why he is staying with FSX as he thinks there's no difference.

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

1 hour ago, Jim Young said:

Let's try to stay on topic as (I think) the OP was claiming P3D is just as bad as FSX as P3D users get OOM's, the blurries, stuttering, etc.  He says something like if we have proof he is wrong, then prove it (and some of us have!).  I guess that is why he is staying with FSX as he thinks there's no difference.

Flat Earthers!

 

[GCBraun 2,433]

I think leaving topics such as these open is a good decision and it should help Avsim in the long run.

Being a long-time MSFS user, I would say that, yes, P3Dv4 is definitely a better experience when compared to FSX.

Nevertheless, while we don`t suffer from OOMs anymore, it is clear that the core is (still) pretty much the same. Many problems that I used to experience with MSFS are still present in P3D and the whole Orbx TE drama is only making this more obvious to the masses.

If more in-depth structural changes in the underlying rendering engine are not made, I believe that XP11 will continue to grow and that many FSX users will end-up upgrading to that platform instead of P3D. Analogically, that would be like upgrading from Windows ME to OSX, instead of Windows 10.

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

Yeah the core is (still) pretty much the same. This is why these threads add nothing to the discussion of flight sims. 

Edited February 15, 2019 by jabloomf1230