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

[Opterix 58]

Hello flightsimmers, dear friends,
it's really boring and annoying to read again and again from some P3D'ers who interfere in things, they are not involved in. They are always telling that changing to P3D would solve the problem somebody has in FSX. Especially in case of OOM. I think it's time to another answer to all these missionaries:

Haha! Very well roared, lions!

You wrote a long drama about a problem (OOM) where there is no essential problem, because you can live with it. But you are concealing problems, where there are really grave and unsolvable problems.
As you can read here Navigraph survey results 2018 most of the flightsimmers still use FSX, if you fairly add FSX and FSX-SE together. There must be good reasons for this loyality.
And as you can read or better can NOT read in the FSX-forums the FSX-users have had seldom problems with OOMs in the last time / years. So there are several solutions so that everybody can find his own way to arrange with these 32bit-conditions.

But as you can read in the P3D-forum the P3D-users even with high tech computers have problems with CTD (crash to desktop), impact in fps, micro-stutterers, blurries and unsharp ground textures when using photoreal landscape sceneries. And yes, they still have OOMs (out of memory).
So you should better be honest and write about the problems P3D-simmers suffer from, instead telling FSX-users that P3D would solve the OOM-problem they could better solve on other ways.

I do NOT suffer from OOMs, because I don't fly through airport terminals to admire the interiors of the lounges, count the paxes in the check-in queue and watch the flight schedules on the timetables. I know for sure that such flights through buildings are not very realistic.
But maybe this is the reason, why P3D is named Prepar3D. With P3D you are prepar3d for all eventualities, for example if your next landing attempt is leading you straight into the terminal 😉
Young mother with a baby in her arm is waving and greeting the crash-in pilots. Or better she's waving good-bye? 😉
If _you_ think this is realistic, please missionize in the P3D-forum. Or in the screenshot forum.
But I wonna tell you this at last: I'm rather bored from many P3D-screenshots with ugly landclasses (orbx) or even without any landscape - only with clouds, fog, at the terminal, taxiing through the night and so on.
Are you P3D-missionaries really flying? Flying over fantastic, realistic landscapes? If yes: let me see!
There are only few good P3D-screenshot posters. They are really great but they do not missionize. So please let us see _your_ screenshots, dear P3D-missionaries.

Happily awaiting
Peter

 

[charliearon 3,024]

I originally removed this post this morning.  At the request of Admin I have now re-opened it.

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

Going on roughly 37 years in this community (not just having flight sim software on my computer), and that's, well, one of the most scewed, slanted and inaccurate way of looking at most everything.

Garbage post.  Should have been removed.  Admin is NUTS!

 

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by DaveCT2003

[Jim Young 2,356]

6 hours ago, Opterix said:

But as you can read in the P3D-forum the P3D-users even with high tech computers have problems with CTD (crash to desktop), impact in fps, micro-stutterers, blurries and unsharp ground textures when using photoreal landscape sceneries. And yes, they still have OOMs (out of memory).
So you should better be honest and write about the problems P3D-simmers suffer from, instead telling FSX-users that P3D would solve the OOM-problem they could better solve on other ways.

I have a high tech computer and have not seen a CTD for a long time.  If I got a CTD, it was due to a bad voltage setting in my BIOS which has nothing to do with P3D.  I have no impact on FPS and have not seen any micro-stutters, blurries, or unsharp ground textures.  I turned Hyper-Threading off in the BIOS and my textures are now all sharp and clear. 

With P3Dv3 and earlier (32-bit applications), it is possible to get an OOM but it is impossible to get one with P3DV4 as you have over 7 terabytes of virtual address space (VAS) for 64-bit applications.  If you do get an OOM, it is probably directing you to your on-board memory (RAM).  Setting a bad page file can also create issues with your computer.  The AVSIM CTD Guide provides more information regarding OOM's. 

 

[tamsini 278]

offensive initials not allowed???

[RichieFly 730]

What? 

This post does not compute...

[Jim Young 2,356]

2 minutes ago, DaveCT2003 said:

Garbage post.  Should have been removed.  Admin is NUTS!

Dave,

I'm the Admin.  There are a lot of "garbage" posts in the eyes of our membership but that should not be a reason to remove the post.  If it is garbage for you and others, simply move on.  I do not want to censor everything posted on AVSIM and I do not want to post only "intelligent" posts.  In this case, I think there is a language barrier that makes his post difficult to read and understand.  I think members also need to know why many have moved on to P3Dv4.  Based on the history of this individual, I do not see similar posts that I might consider spamming or trolling.

Best regards,

Jim

[Jetman67 517]

Strange post,  few minutes i will never get back lol

[signmanbob 592]

I believe the best reason to stay with FSX is that some really good payware addons were not upgraded to P3Dv4, mainly the PMDG MD11 and the FSL Concorde (good for P3Dv3).

I'm sure for those that use freeware, there are many of those never updated either.

I just keep FSX-SE on my computer for the MD11, other than that, everything else has been upgraded to P3Dv4 usually at a big discount.

[PaulGR 168]

I have all PMDG birds. That alone will set me back how much?

I have a pretty good PC and I fly 12-15h routes in my VA quite often. No ooms with all ORBX regions installed, weather, Rex and etc. it takes some time to figure out what’s what but FSX-SE does what I need, does it well and looks good. Until I have $1K burning a hole in my pocket I see no reason to switch and hearing this constant “switch to P3D” bull****  is just annoying. 

Edited February 14, 2019 by PaulGR

[DavidP 1,411]

I hope the OP feels better after that rant. I've been simming since FS2 on a Commodore 64 and P3D4 is by far the best sim I have seen bar none.

Edited February 14, 2019 by DavidP

[sloppysmusic 251]

Where's Part 1?!?

😉

[pete_auau 1,159]

gone  to  the  oom  thread  😀

[virtuali 4,421]

16 hours ago, Opterix said:

As you can read here Navigraph survey results 2018 most of the flightsimmers still use FSX, if you fairly add FSX and FSX-SE together.

That's not what's coming our from that review. You said "fairly" addon FSX-FSX-SE together, but it seems you are looking only at the overall length of the bar, when in fact almost half of it is colored in the lighter blue hues, which means "infrequently" or "sometimes" usage.

Try adding the PROPER bar lengths, that means "most of the time" and "frequently" usage, and it will paint an entirely different picture, since it's just wrong adding together the "good" bars ( frequently/most of the time) with the "bad" ones (infrequently/sometimes).

So, I fixed the graph for you, with only the good bars and sorted, showing the proper situation, which clearly indicates that, even by "fairly" combining FSX+FSX:SE together, they are still behind P3D4 ALONE

That's the cold hard truth: P3D4, which has been released only 18 months ago, is clearly the N.1 sim, surpassing user bases dating decades old.

And this survey was made BEFORE they released 4.4 (with PBR), I don't think the trend could be going in another other direction than up for P3D4 in the next months/years, while FSX can only go down.

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by virtuali

[TextRich 88]

Can't the admins just implement a rule that no FSX vs P3D discussions in the FSX forums are allowed?  Similar to the fact that discussions of licenses are not allowed in the P3D forum?  Compared to other flight sim forums i have been in, the people that post here in the AVSim FSX forums seem generally knowledgeable of the available flight sims today but use FSX for their own reasons.  It does get tiresome to read good original posts in this FSX forum only to have former FSX users (and bored P3D users) respond with the same tired "Just get P3D" comments.