Relationship between tweaks and memory useage?

[BobP 56]

I am using the small application "Mem Status" and I do not understand the memory usage it is reporting. The maximum video memory reported by the app at KLAX is around 180mb. My card is 256. Is there a specific tweak that forces FSX to use more video memory. Is that a good thing? Is there a "Tweaks and their affects on memory for dummies"?:)). I don't see the advantage of buying a half gig video card if FSX is not using all of my current video memory. Thanks.Bob..

[cklink 0]

Hi Bob,It mainly depends on you slider settings and screen resolution. If you stay at 1024res and in the cockpit (dont zoom out in spot), I rarely (with everything maxed) have seen it go over 245mb.Resizing you textures as a tweak (http://www.fox-fam.com/wordpress/?page_id=41), reduces the physical size of the texture - thus resulting in less video ram utalized. Versus mine as example, as I chose not to rezise.For example I am at:ie: Global Textures Max, Scenery & AutoGen Dense, LOD Large, Mesh 100, Reolution 2m, Tex Res 15cm @ 1280res, 500ftagl in spot at .3zoom - generates 310mb, and have seen loads of up to 345mb.Therefore for my settings I am glad to have a 512 card. BTW I am locked at 26, and it drops to about 21-22 when I "look" at the terminal zoomed out. If I stay in the cockpit, fps stays at 26.You could easily run FSX for quite some time, and save your money for a 512 DX10 card. Or if your like me and pour everything you got into this darn hobby - see you at the store.Hope that helped.Garett

[LuisFelizTirado 33]

As Garret says, there are few situations where you will use more than, or even up to, 256 MB, Bob. The bottom line is that if you are monitoring memory usage over the range of your normal flights and never see memory usage greater than that, then there is no point in getting another video card.Too many people are making claims about memory usage without making any exhaustive tests. Most of what has been said is either only partially true or misinformation, unfortunately. Everything depends on the type of flying and the settings.Best regards.Luis

[FlyingsCool 3]

I have been trying to spec out computers. Is there any need to get a 512 MB card then?Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[BobP 56]

Thanks Luis and Garett!If I get time, I'll try to do a small "engineering" study of the affects of some of the tweaks from the ACES team relative to video memory usage. I understand that this is system that requires a balance of quality and performance within my hardware configuration.High Frame RatesQuality ImageSmooth SimulationPick two! Someday I'll upgrade my system and OS to be able to pick three. :)Bob..

[Ramasurinen 0]

>I have been trying to spec out computers. Is there any need to get a 512 MB card then?I would say yes to getting a good current 512mb card. I hummed an hawed over waiting to get a 512mb one until the DX10 cards are available, but then think about this for a second: FSX has created a firestorm of incompatibility and performance woes since its release, and we are a relatively small (if highly vocal) community, and on the whole a fair bit less GPU demanding compared to say the first person shooter crowd. I highly doubt that dx10 will be bug free and efficient on release, or that the first cards to support it from ATI and Nvidia will be either. I have a feeling that once they are released, along with the madness that will be vista, that we'll look upon this avsim flame war as a very minor thing compared to the exchanges that will take place on the forums for every other kind of game out there in February. There may be screaming, finger pointing and chaos. ;) Just a hunch. Adding in the fact that Aces has promised a dx10 patch for FS, but given no timeframe, it could be a long rough road to get results.So I went and picked up an MSI 7900GTO 512mb, cheaper and faster than an nvidia 7950. I like to fly with 1 meter textures and what a difference this card has made from my ati 256mb. My ATI used to stutter constantly with anything higher res than 5m and that problem is utterly gone now. Textures load faster, rarely get any blurries, and turns are now stutter free as well. Vram isn't going to do much for framerate, but it does indeed help with stutters. FSX no longer feels like its wheezing with my settings. I'd grab a good/cheap 512 megger now, and wait until the dust settles on dx10 sometime in the summer. Then pick up a card that's been heavily tested, reviewed, and is known to work properly, probably for considerably less than you'd spend in January during the dx10 landrush. Let those first person shooter guys deal with all the problems for awhile I say. They'll be the first to the store, first to the forum, and first to the bottle of aspririn. ;)

[Guest heinzwerner]

Yes, this helps a little.I updated from Radeon 1600XT 256MB to Radeon 1900XT with 512MB:Results: - +15..25% Framerate - More Memory Reserve avoid Stuttering occurence and Duration for Texture Reload massive - Usage of external View and VC-View is now possible without high Impact on Framerate (<10%) - Graphics Card Display Options can now be set to Maximum with full anisotrophical Filter, Antialaising and maximum Bump mapping Quality - More Noise: - Video Card blows much Heat and Noise throug the second PCI-Slot Fan Output - Additional new (and louder) Power Supply necessary with 650W and additional PCIe Power Supply connectors for the Grapics cardCost: More than 400EUR for Video card + 650W Power Supply