Sign in to follow this  
MD83

Poor FPS at major airport

Recommended Posts

I have only 3 to 6 FPS while taxing at KSFO (San Fran). What needs "turned down" to make an improvement? It is interseting to me that I have add ons, very detailed, airports with FS9, and do not suffer from such low FPS. So, what can I try to make FSX perform better at large airport such as KSFO?Thanks,JimCPU Intel 3.4Video card is 256MB PCI expressMemory is 1 GB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

You need to add that new A380 advertised and then you will be ready to go. Yep, welcome to the club.Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I have only 3 to 6 FPS while taxing at KSFO (San Fran). What>needs "turned down" to make an improvement? It is interseting>to me that I have add ons, very detailed, airports with FS9,>and do not suffer from such low FPS. So, what can I try to>make FSX perform better at large airport such as KSFO?>Thanks,>Jim>CPU Intel 3.4>Video card is 256MB PCI express>Memory is 1 GBYou will need to experiment with the sliders.But AI is the biggest culprit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want, you can do these 3 things:1) turn off all autogen with the slider2) rename default.xml to default.bak3) turn off all AIThen you'll get much better fps at big airports.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There about 7 airports you just need to adjust your computer for.Look for tweaks about this. If you do not want to do tweaks just stay away from airposts like Seattle, or any major airport that has 3 or 4 smaller airports close to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, in FSX San Francisco seems to be the densest area. I don't get anything there for having flowers in my hair! :-) Kind regards Jaap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you turn everything off, why not go the next step and downgrade to FS98. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah me too, I've been told I'm some wacko because I run 1920 x 1200 resolution. I dare not tell these same folks about my 30" HD LCD that can do 2560 x 1600 resolution.Upgraded to a 8800GTX 768 MB DDR3 video card and my fps went from 7 fps to 12 fps (min values) -- an improvement and at least flyable. But I have AutoGen turned OFF and you'll need to turn off Blooming also and keep airport traffic and other traffic to a minimum.Not sure exactly what the problem is, but clearly the new DX10 (Vista ready) video cards aren't the solution either along with my 3.9Ghz X6800 CPU.On the plus side FS9 looks incredible with the 8800GTX -- everything maxed out, with add-on scenery and airports and aircraft and it still never drops below 30 - even at Frankfurt add-on. Clearly FSX has got some performance issues beyond "normal" -- hopefully they get it resolved quickly.And before anyone jumps on me about "nerve", I consider 30 fps a good minimum, not 12 fps.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to return your copy of FSX! Is the only good tweak I can think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a post that had a suggestion worthy of note: Follow the path of least resistance and land in the vicinity of major airports! Really though, I feel your pain! I have to turn off scenery density and autogen to even get near a major airport. The FPS counter says I'm doing great but the stutters and pauses are horrid on my system.ASUS A8N Deluxe SLI (one Gefore 7600GT 256mb), AMD 64 4000+, 2 gig RAM, WD Raptor drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is about what I'm experiencing also, any major city/airports and fps drops considerably. I was able to overclock the 8800GTX and gain 2 fps (whopee, upto 14 fps min now) -- my two big test airports are SFO and Gatwick.Had to turn blooming off which was a shame. But there appears to be issues with blooming anyway, as the runway lights shine thru the cockpit (even with cockpit set to 0% transparency).Of course this is all my imagination and there really are no problems at all with FSX and everyone is happy. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe BLOOM is a CPU function which at the least was an extremely bad idea the graphics card wont help that.From my investigations, believe its autogen in the cities that kills the frame rates, in particular the buildings.... doh!! I think they got it wrong again!!Perhaps we could have a compotetion to find something that has been programmed well in FSX, ie something that uses the

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>If you turn everything off, why not go the next step and>downgrade to FS98. ;-)Come on now that's no good. I just *knew* someone was going to reply with this type of comment. That's why I almost did not post it. Where in my post did I say that HE *had* to do any of those things? All I was doing, was merely giving him a couple of suggestions. If you want to read into that and say something inane like "why not downgrade to FS98 FSW95 FS51 SubLogic FS II breast chest neck and head" then fine, you can say that silly stuff. What does that do for the discussion? nada. I'm just trying to help the guy out.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"1) turn off all autogen with the slider>2) rename default.xml to default.bak>3) turn off all AI">>... and what are you left with?!Well, what do you think you're left with??!! You're left with . That's what. But maybe that wasn't my point.What does it do? It gives a person the ability to pinpoint exactly the ITEM that is killing their frames. Then a person can slowly add things back in to see what the effect is. Do I need to spell it all out??Do I need a disclaimer on every post now?Pretty simple, and when I post trying to help someone here, I now kind of dread it, in this case fearing that I would get these "that's FS1230123-1023!!!" posts, instead of meaningful civil discussion. It just gets ooollllllddd after a while.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blooming is most likely done on the GPU, not CPU. Blooming often uses HDR (high dynamic range) and is a performed by the GPU shader. But not always, there are many ways to accomplish any given task.Read this if you need more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_renderingOr, good discussion on Blooming/HDR:http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/to...topic_id=405591Unfortunately it is difficult to determine exactly what is killing what because they all relate to each other. It would be nice if the Aces dev team would provide their results from their profiling of FSX. This would help us understand how the various options are affecting the limitations of the GPU (and/or CPU).Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Blooming is most likely done on the GPU, not CPU. Blooming>often uses HDR (high dynamic range) and is a performed by the>GPU shader. But not always, there are many ways to accomplish>any given task.>>Read this if you need more info:>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_rendering>>Or, good discussion on Blooming/HDR:>http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/to...topic_id=405591>>Unfortunately it is difficult to determine exactly what is>killing what because they all relate to each other. It would>be nice if the Aces dev team would provide their results from>their profiling of FSX. This would help us understand how the>various options are affecting the limitations of the GPU>(and/or CPU).>>Rob.>>>>Logically, you are exactly correct wrgt bloom and that would be nice however I am sure i read in a post from an ACES bloke that its done on the cpu, please dont directly dismiss information if you have no proof or other information wrgt FSX.Bloom/HDR is solely a graphics card function when programmed correctly and many more mainstream games apply it this way with no significant hit to framerate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Yeah me too, I've been told I'm some wacko because I run 1920>x 1200 resolution. I dare not tell these same folks about my>30" HD LCD that can do 2560 x 1600 resolution.>>Upgraded to a 8800GTX 768 MB DDR3 video card and my fps went>from 7 fps to 12 fps (min values) -- an improvement and at>least flyable. But I have AutoGen turned OFF and you'll need>to turn off Blooming also and keep airport traffic and other>traffic to a minimum.>>Not sure exactly what the problem is, but clearly the new DX10>(Vista ready) video cards aren't the solution either along>with my 3.9Ghz X6800 CPU.>>On the plus side FS9 looks incredible with the 8800GTX -->everything maxed out, with add-on scenery and airports and>aircraft and it still never drops below 30 - even at Frankfurt>add-on. Clearly FSX has got some performance issues beyond>"normal" -- hopefully they get it resolved quickly.>>And before anyone jumps on me about "nerve", I consider 30 fps>a good minimum, not 12 fps.>>Rob.>Hi!Since you have the new 8800GTX, I need to ask you if you did see a big improvement with the new card? What card did you have before?I am using a 7900GTO with Core 2 Duo @ 2.3GHz, 2GB PC675MHz. I'm wondering if FSX is heavy on the CPU or a new GPU will give me better perfomance. I am 75% of max settings and get 1-8fps in heavy airports and 15-25fps in air.Thank you!Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be highly unusual for the task to be done by the CPU on video cards that support the function in hardware. Like I said, it is possible for "software" only rendering of bloom but that would have a performance penalty and would not use existing GPU functionality.Which "Aces bloke" gave out this information? If the source is the actual coder/developer, then I'm more likely to believe the information, however, if the source is a Project Manager or Marketing member then there might be some "lost in translation" issues.I know when Microsoft's AOE III first released it was implementing "software only" blooming, but a later patch incorporated GPU function and I saw dramatic performance improvements.But your information might be correct, as bloom has some implementation issues in FSX such as runway lights being displayed thru the cockpit as if it where transparent.I see PC Gamer's review of FSX was not exactly stella either 84% and not even an "Editor's Choice" -- Andy Manhood pretty much stated what we all know about FSX performance "released a year too soon".Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Well, what do you think you're left with??!! You're left with>. That's what. But maybe that>wasn't my point.>>What does it do? It gives a person the ability to pinpoint>exactly the ITEM that is killing their frames. Then a person>can slowly add things back in to see what the effect is. Do I>need to spell it all out??>>Do I need a disclaimer on every post now?No, but you needed to explain a little better :)>Pretty simple, and when I post trying to help someone here, I>now kind of dread it, in this case fearing that I would get>these "that's FS1230123-1023!!!" posts, instead of meaningful>civil discussion. It just gets ooollllllddd after a while.My message was in no way uncivilised

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this