FSX-SE Sadly, I Must Move On From FSX-Steam

[Ricardo41 5,936]

...to P3D, since I cannot deal with the constant OOM's anymore. I just bought quite a few of OrbX products, and they really don't perform very well under FSX-Steam. Add a couple of high-def aiport sceneries, and you're pretty much constantly bumping up against the 4 Gig-limitation. 

[johncott 177]

I had the same issue especially with the newer planes with their texture size and for some reason, with turboprops.  I've only had about five OOM's and they have all been turboprops.  

[airernie 263]

5 hours ago, Ricardo41 said:

...to P3D, since I cannot deal with the constant OOM's anymore. I just bought quite a few of OrbX products, and they really don't perform very well under FSX-Steam. Add a couple of high-def aiport sceneries, and you're pretty much constantly bumping up against the 4 Gig-limitation. 

You really don't need to give status reports.. 

[scianoir 610]

I have most of the Orbx products available for FSX and, with care, I can use them even with relatively resource intensive aircraft and still avoid most OOMs. The key to this IMO is limiting the scenery you load up to the airports and Orbx region/regions you are going to be using, which, depending on the scenery you have installed, can save a considerable amount of VAS. The most convenient way to do this is by using a scenery configurator. I use the payware utility SimStarterNG which I can highly recommend but I think freeware scenery configurators are also available.

I was in a similar situation to you until a few years ago with frequent annoying OOMs and was considering moving to P3D back then but was reluctant to because of the costs of upgrading the large amount of payware I own to run on the new platform. However having researched the forums, I decided to try installing SimStarterNG and this made the difference for me and prolonged the life of my FSX setup. I will eventually move on from FSX and, although P3D was what I originally had in mind, I think I will now try to keep FSX running until the new Microsoft Flight Simulator arrives as that may be a more viable option.

Bill

Edited December 5, 2019 by scianoir

[otterspotter 8]

Agreed. Careful adjustments of scenery parameters to take into account resource intensive areas, type of aircraft, weather, amount of AI are the key to not let OOMs get ya. I can't bring myself to lower my autogen below Normal or fly to SFO without ORBx NorCal, which means I can only visit with PMDG 747 on a cloudless sky or only a high cirrus layer.  Gotta make sacrifices somewhere, right?

Haven't moved on to P3D not only because of a healthy amount of payware collected over the last decade, but also because each P3D update seems to break something and you have to wait for vendors to catch up, and some of them take a good while.  If you fly a popular plane or two between a handful of most popular airports, then I guess these updates won't bother you much, but some of us want to enjoy the breadth of aviation in addition to depth.

[AOB 78]

I have FSX SE, XP11 and Aerofly FS2. Despite having spent an awful lot on Orbx for my FSX I mostly fly AFS2. I must say though that I never experienced OOM errors once I switched from boxed FSX to FSX SE. So maybe it might be your hardware?

[scianoir 610]

On 12/4/2019 at 10:53 PM, johncott said:

I had the same issue especially with the newer planes with their texture size and for some reason, with turboprops.  I've only had about five OOM's and they have all been turboprops.  

Some of the more recent turboprop releases, particularly those from Carenado have very high VAS footprints of which the HD textures, as you say, almost certainly are a big contributory factor. For example the Carenado Shorts 360 has a VAS footprint of over 1.5GB more than the default Baron and the Fokker 50 and Embraer Brasilia over 1.2GB more. If I run FSX using default scenery and the default Baron it will use around 1.4GB of VAS. If I then switch to the Shorts 360, my VAS usage jumps about 3GB. Add a couple of resource intensives scenery to this mix and you will very quickly approach the 4GB VAS threshold for OOMs.

If you are a turboprop fan and you don’t already have it, the Majestic Q400 has a surprisingly low VAS footprint of less than 0.5GB, especially when you consider that it it has arguably the best system depth of any turboprop available for FSX. I can happily fly it for example between Ireland and the U.K. using Aerosoft Dublin (quite a resource intensive airport) combined with Orbx UK and Ireland regional scenery and UKXtreme airports

In the quest to avoid OOMs when using a resource intensive aircraft, in addition to using a scenery configurator as I mentioned in an earlier post, there are other tricks which can help to minimise VAS usage. These generally involve turning down the various display settings but one of the most helpful moves from this viewpoint in my experience is to drastically reduce autogen traffic, but there is plenty of useful advice about these to be found in the forums.
 

Bill

Edited December 6, 2019 by scianoir

[Sagoland 22]

Using DX10 with Steve's fixer gives me about 300mb more room than with DX9. I think this should apply to everyone.

[Rogen 1,087]

Yeah, FSX-SE is good, esp. with Steve's DX10 Fixer and I held off changing myself for a long time, essentially till A2A's accu-sim was available for x64 and their GA fleet were migrated. Honestly since migrating I've completely forgotten what an OOM is and now my tuning aspects are more tied to getting the best out of the GFX card without P3D maxing it to 100%.

I've tried a few times going back as there are some planes in FSX-SE that are not available for x64 but it feels a bit like going back to dialup internet.

I guess MS2020 will likely have a similar affect.

Cheers