10 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Hi Dirk,

I'd forgotten about that section in SSNG. I calculated it and googled how to enter it in p3d.cfg. So it's there at the moment with 1365.

This shows what RTSS is reporting. Remember it has a base of 1, not 0 so deduct 1 from each value for the actual vp.

89% on LP0 in comparison to 17% and 19% looks indeed a bit too much. 

Is it in flight or on the ground?

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by Dirk98

5 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

89% on LP0 in comparison to 17% and 19% looks indeed a bit too much. 

Is it in flight or on the ground?

Depends on your settings. Set your LOD to max and AG/AG range too and watch what happens.

His load looks very good. But I also would like to know where he is.

7 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

89% on LP0 in comparison to 17% and 19% looks indeed a bit too much. 

Is it in flight or on the ground?

That was on the ground cold and dark. Having just completed a circuit at EGCC I'm not happy with v5.2. The Carenado PC12 is not a demanding aircraft and AIG only had 35 aircraft at EGCC but with clear skies and on approach to 05L Core0 hit 100% on several occasions. Consequently fps dropped below 30.

That never happened with earlier versions. UK2000 is not demanding scenery so where is all this processing being done?

I'll stick with v5.2 because I have a dialogue with LM. But all is not well I'm afraid.

Stopping flying now as footie is on. Appreciate your help Dirk and also Steve's.

7 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Depends on your settings. Set your LOD to max and AG/AG range too and watch what happens.

His load looks very good. But I also would like to know where he is.

It's not that 89% is high - no not at all Gerard.

My other princiapal LPs are usually higher so nothing really new to watch there.

PS: When my LP0 is 89% my other principal LPs are always higher than 17% or 19% is what I'm trying to say.

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by Dirk98

16 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Stopping flying now as footie is on. Appreciate your help Dirk and also Steve's.

footie is in 35 minutes ))

1 minute ago, Dirk98 said:

footie is in 35 minutes ))

I’ve been at it since 09:00 and also have workmen here laying a new patio. I’m knackered. 😉

More fun tomorrow.

7 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I’ve been at it since 09:00 and also have workmen here laying a new patio. I’m knackered. 😉

More fun tomorrow.

Ray, 

You've got it all wrong! The workmen are supposed to be knackered not you.

7 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I’ve been at it since 09:00 and also have workmen here laying a new patio. I’m knackered. 😉

More fun tomorrow.

Lord Proudfoot in his mansion … 🧐

14 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Lord Proudfoot in his mansion … 🧐

C'mon, patio is just a patio no roof.. ))

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by Dirk98

35 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:I turn OFF Hyperthreading as it's well documented that it can cause thread locking in some circumstances (if you have 6 or more cores, I'd recommend turning HT OFF).

That is the opposite of the opinion of ChillBlast, a UK company that built My PC back in 2018. And in fairness the problem of core0 hitting 100% with moderate settings, a moderate aircraft and moderate airport scenery was never there in v5.1 or v4.5.

I still have v4.5 installed so will add the same airport and aircraft and try the same flight. If it’s fine, as I expect, then the problem definitely lies with 5.2.

50 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

I've also noticed that RTSS when using it's artificial frame locking can trigger 100% CPU utilization. 

There have also been reports that this reported 100% utilization, is just that: "reported utilization", and that the actual load on CPU0 is much less.  Might be worth tracking CPU Core temperature as well, to see if this is a "problem" or just a reporting issue.

As I remember earlier discussions, enabling VSync with the internal frame rate limiter set to unlimited locked the frame rate to the hardware sync rate (30 fps in my case) and freed up CPU cycles as frame pre-rendering was throttled in that configuration.

With the more recent nVidia drivers (I am on 466.27), the nVidia Control Panel has a "Low Latency Mode" setting that limits the number of pre-rendered frames--to 1 when set to "On" and 0 when set to "Ultra" as I understand it.

It seems from what I'm reading like maybe v5.2 is still doing pre-rendering work despite being locked to the hardware refresh rate.  So I wonder if setting that Low Latency Mode (in the P3D program settings in nVidia Control Panel) to On/Ultra (the default setting is Off) might restore the previous behavior of throttling pre-rendering workload. 

Just a theory.  Can't test it here, as I am still on v5.1 HF1, awaiting some add-ons to catch up, and frankly still waiting for some of these performance issues to be cleaned up.

19 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

There have also been reports that this reported 100% utilization, is just that: "reported utilization", and that the actual load on CPU0 is much less.  Might be worth tracking CPU Core temperature as well, to see if this is a "problem" or just a reporting issue.

I've seen several reports that the high CPU ute rates are also accompanied by high CPU temps, in some cases people getting all the way up to the thermal throttling threshold on their processors.

3 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I've seen several reports that the high CPU ute rates are also accompanied by high CPU temps, in some cases people getting all the way up to the thermal throttling threhold on their processors.

In that case, I would agree there is a "problem" and settings need to be reduced.

I have just taken another look at my system, using RTSS to set fps at 30.  (can do the same with nvidia CP).

Yes, Core0 reports 100% utilization, but Core1 reports 0% at the same time.  😉

I have a 4 core CPU with HT on, for 8 LPs.

So, the load on the first of my 4 CPU cores is 50%, not 100%, and there is no temperature issue that I can see.

I will try to post a screenshot..

So one more time, before going off the deep end on this, convince yourself that you have a load problem, and not simply a "reporting issue" which we have seen in previous FSX/P3D releases as well.

14 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I've seen several reports that the high CPU ute rates are also accompanied by high CPU temps, in some cases people getting all the way up to the thermal throttling threshold on their processors.

Were those reports about performance of Prepar3D v5.2 specifically? Or were they just some general observations?

Thanks.