Sign in to follow this  
Guest nels

New .NET 3 Framework inproves performance in FSx??

Recommended Posts

People in the Vista Australis (VOZ) forum have been claiming improved performance after installing .NET 3. I was sceptical - as I couldn't really see why that would be so. I installed it last night - and now I am beginning to wonder if there is in fact something in it. Like a lot of these things - including lots of so called "fixes" , I do have to wonder if the perceived improvement in performance is in the imagination of the user. In this case, it seems to have given me a few FPS more in one particualrly difficult area . Anybody here at AVSIM tried it?Barry

Share this post


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

Thanks for the info...Note however the following as shown on the MS d/l page :QteSystem Requirements * Supported Operating Systems: Longhorn (Windows Code Name) ; Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1; Windows Vista; Windows XP Service Pack 2For customers that already have the .NET Framework 2.0 installed, this .NET Framework 3.0 redistributable package installs only the new Windows Vista components. This ensures that any .NET Framework 2.0-based applications work seamlessly when the .NET Framework 3.0 is installed, with no application migration or updates of any kind required.UnQteGeorge DorkofikisAthens, Hellashttp://online.vatsimindicators.net/811520/1704.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Installing the .Net 3 Framework didn't seem to make any difference to my FSX performance and I am down under. I'm in NSW so it must be a State thing!:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that the Framework would make a difference. The .NET Framework is for managed code. I'm pretty sure that most of FSX is straight C++ and not managed (for performance reasons). I could be wrong though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Caution! Anyone running Windows Media Center Edition needs to be sure to stay AWAY from it...so far, two people in our corner of the 'world' have run into serious problems, and this update does not apply to that version of XP.As an aside, I'm using a fairly well-proven process to validate the effectiveness of new 'tweaks' from this point. Because as we all know, sometimes the placebo effect kicks in, and/or claims of gaining '5 FPS' are difficult to actually measure.So any way I'm now using a standardized test flight, replayed in real-time via FS Recorder, and FRAPS logging. If anyone is interested in the results with this particular tweak, or the technique to quantatively measure it, they're here:http://com-central.net/index.php?name=Foru...iewtopic&t=5787In short, while it may make a difference for some, I have no change either on my system and it's rather nice to have hard data that can show it either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I have found that .NET 3 framework makes FSX run better because the multiplayer functions run on it. If you do not have .NET when you install FSX you get configuration problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, no .NET used in the Multiplayer code, all C and C++ native code (like the rest of FSX). The only .NET related part of FSX is the managed wrapper for the SimConnect API (which doesn't run inside FSX but inside the SimConnect client application). FSX doesn't load any managed assemblies within its own process space.About the only reason I can think that installing something like this might give you a performance boost is if it happened to modify some system setting that caused stuff to function differently than it had been, or maybe changes load order and memory use of other parts of the system, etc.Timhttp://beatlesblog.spaces.live.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MS says it's for Windows XP (sp2). Hum?!I wonder what will stop working?Who has install .Net v3 and survived?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever it did on my system it worked. I metioned this in another thread but I was about to toss FSX in the trash. This addition plus others from this forum and my searches on the web have made all the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Whatever it did on my system it worked. I metioned this in>another thread but I was about to toss FSX in the trash. This>addition plus others from this forum and my searches on the>web have made all the difference.>>>You need to be really sure.You said "plus others".Maybe one of the others did the improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I installed .Net v3 over v2 and it does nothing for anything as far as I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I installed .Net v3 over v2 and it does nothing for anything>as far as I can tell.Ditto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The .NET install was the only major upgrade I did before reinstalling FSX the other tweaks were to my vid card and settings. I haven't altered the cfg file or replaced/resized textures. I used to only get between 4 to 12fps taking off from SeaTac airport. My other tweaks were settings in the sim. I performed these with prior installs to no avail. Now I get between 12-18fps when taking off. Still a bit choppy,which is fine since KSEA is one of the superdetailed airports. If I want pure performance I can reduce autogen now where before I had to kill it and turn all graphics and scenery to low just to get a usable but still choppy frame rate. I am now convinced when I first installed FSX my initial setups were corrupted, I am not a programming guru but it's the most likely culprit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why (not that smart) but before installation of Net Frame 3 I was getting 8.8 to 9.5 FSP. After installation I'm now getting 12.6 to 16.1 FSP. I made sure that everything was setup the same before and after the installation. I'm guessing maybe it has something to do with the latest ATI drivers that I'm using - just guessing because ATI states that NetFrame must be installed in order for the driver application. Whatever is the reason I'm much happier.Wilbert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry for being a bit of a bore here but I am not as PC savy as most here and am worried that if I install the net 3 and its not needed that I will end up re-installing the FSX agian. I am not saying that net 3 will make problems I am just going on my experinces in the last three years of installing things that seem to be out for the jury.In other words is there a way to know for sure about this and the other fix;s that have been mention to solve low FRS in FSX only to see later maybe the thought fix really was not the fix.I say this in repect to everyone and there efforts to help FSX perform better and appreciate the time and efforts taken. I am just not a PC savey person whom always is able to install and uninstall with out making mistakes all the time. Thus I hope no one takes my questions the wrong way. I wish MS or someone whould offer a patch (I would consider a pay version, ((however I feel MS owes us a patch)).To all the FS fans out there working through the issues to get FSX running better on our present day PC's "I say thanks".Agian, Thank you.Mark.System:OS:MS Windows XP Professional, Ver 2002 Service Pack 2 Hardware:Intel Pentium® 4 CPU 2.802.84 GHz, 3.00 GB of RAM Radeon X1600 Pro 512MB running a 21/19.6 Sony Flat Screen Tubed Monitorand a 17/16 NEC/Mitsubishi Tubed MonitorGeForce FX 5200 128MB running a NEC/Mitsubishi 18 Flat Panel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since installing .NET 3.0 I've noticed a difference of about +3fps. Maybe a 'wanted' to see that difference and my eyes are deceiving me. It does look smoother though.FSX still needs a big patch though. It must be disappointing for the ACES team to get a poor rating at sites such as Gamespot.com for poor frame rates : http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/sim/microsoftfli...ght%20simulator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Installing the .Net 3 Framework didn't seem to make any>difference to my FSX performance and I am down under. I'm in>NSW so it must be a State thing!:)I read in another forum that you should uninstall .Net 1.1 before installing .Net 3.0. (do NOT uninstall .Net 2.0) It also recommeneded running a defrag after the installation, but I'm sure most of us do that on a regular basis already. I haven't installed .Net 3.0 on my rig yet, so I don't know how well this will work. From what I've read on various forums, most people are experiencing at least a 10% increase in performance....cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! Thats the first "fix" giving me a significant increase in FPS (tried all that texture compression and cfg tweaking stuff)!I installed it over Framework 1.0 (didn't have the 2.0 Framework installed) and then uninstalled the 1.0 Framework.In FSX my Frames increased from about 9 to 18 FPS and in FS9 from 12 to 19. Thats guessed average FPS but I can say it defenetly feels alot smoother in both sims and I don't really care about numbers if the feeling's right! :-cool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>People in the Vista Australis (VOZ) forum have been claiming>improved performance after installing .NET 3. I was sceptical>- as I couldn't really see why that would be so. I installed>it last night - and now I am beginning to wonder if there is>in fact something in it. Like a lot of these things ->including lots of so called "fixes" , I do have to wonder if>the perceived improvement in performance is in the imagination>of the user. In this case, it seems to have given me a few FPS>more in one particualrly difficult area . >>Anybody here at AVSIM tried it?>>Barry.NET 3, as far as I undertand from reading the link, doesn't really have anything to do with apps like FSX. I would think it would give more benefits for things like Office 2007 and IE7; those have .NET components, I think it's like the old Dynamic Data stuff between apps or whatever, but I'm not a programmer I just play one on TV :(

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