Horrible FSLabs performance P3Dv5.2 HF1

[ha5mvo 254]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the whole AM debate futile when it comes to FSLabs? 

Wouldn't the FSL configuration utility set its own mask once you run the sim and override any value that's been set by the user?

[Ray Proudfoot 8,958]

54 minutes ago, ha5mvo said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the whole AM debate futile when it comes to FSLabs? 

Wouldn't the FSL configuration utility set its own mask once you run the sim and override any value that's been set by the user?

Wouldn’t that depend on how many cores the CPU has and whether Hyperthreading is set in the BIOS? Or does it do the same as it does with Concorde and set all cores active? Controversial. 🤔

How can it know such things especially the Hyperthreading option?

[fluffyflops 1,858]

52 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Wouldn’t that depend on how many cores the CPU has and whether Hyperthreading is set in the BIOS? Or does it do the same as it does with Concorde and set all cores active? Controversial. 🤔

How can it know such things especially the Hyperthreading option?

Activesky knows when you turn on Hyperthreading the machine id changes and it asks you to verify the device 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,958]

4 minutes ago, fluffyflops said:

Activesky knows when you turn on Hyperthreading the machine id changes and it asks you to verify the device 

I’ve always had it enabled so am unaware of that. Maybe one of the triggers for a possible change of hardware.

[ha5mvo 254]

I don't think one should read the bios. I believe its just the number of cores, be it physical or logical. In that sense 4 core HT on = 8 core HT off.

Either way, my assumption is that it makes no difference in the fslabs' case since the utility will set its own AM  - all cores active.

[fluffyflops 1,858]

with all the hours I have in the fsl....for me theres a hit in v5.2 for sure.  I just landed at LFPG and it was 20 frames.  somethings not right.

Edited July 24, 2021 by fluffyflops

[Ray Proudfoot 8,958]

1 hour ago, ha5mvo said:

Either way, my assumption is that it makes no difference in the fslabs' case since the utility will set its own AM  - all cores active

But that has been proven to cause problems with systems with Hyperthreading enabled. Can the utility be controlled by the user?

[fluffyflops 1,858]

11 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

But that has been proven to cause problems with systems with Hyperthreading enabled. Can the utility be controlled by the user?

Isn't there a program you can disable in the aoc folder?? 

What amazes me is Marcus the beta tester has openly raised the issue on the fsl forum but he won't chip in here. 

And Andrew are Norman are ignoring the thread on here and on their forum.  

I actually think as mentioned before don't think it's the FSl I think it's the new 'use less VAS' idea on 5.2 that's causing the issue. 

FSl was perfect upto 5.2

Edited July 25, 2021 by fluffyflops

[Ray Proudfoot 8,958]

Just now, fluffyflops said:

Isn't there a program you can disable in the aoc folder?? 

I don’t own the Airbus.

[simfan1983 185]

12 hours ago, ha5mvo said:

I don't think one should read the bios. I believe its just the number of cores, be it physical or logical. In that sense 4 core HT on = 8 core HT off.

Either way, my assumption is that it makes no difference in the fslabs' case since the utility will set its own AM  - all cores active.

I believe you can choose not to have the FSLabs utility amend your cores settings when it first detects the change. Quite a few people prefer 5.2 without HF1 as the performance and lighting reflections seem to be bugged in HF1.

[mobiel 72]

21 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Thanks. Did the AM make a difference?

I had an AM of 85 before. And I really see maybe a litte difference but nevertheless thank you 🙂

[Ray Proudfoot 8,958]

3 minutes ago, mobiel said:

I had an AM of 85 before. And I really see maybe a litte difference but nevertheless thank you 🙂

That’s the same as the 170 I suggested earlier. 85 used the first VP of each core, 170 uses the second.

[mobiel 72]

2 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

That’s the same as the 170 I suggested earlier. 85 used the first VP of each core, 170 uses the second.

Ah okay, so it is maybe a "placebo" effect 😄

[Ray Proudfoot 8,958]

4 minutes ago, mobiel said:

Ah okay, so it is maybe a "placebo" effect 😄

😁 Probably. I'd stick with 01010101 or 85 that you had originally.

[ha5mvo 254]

8 hours ago, fluffyflops said:

Isn't there a program you can disable in the aoc folder?? 

What amazes me is Marcus the beta tester has openly raised the issue on the fsl forum but he won't chip in here. 

And Andrew are Norman are ignoring the thread on here and on their forum.  

I actually think as mentioned before don't think it's the FSl I think it's the new 'use less VAS' idea on 5.2 that's causing the issue. 

FSl was perfect upto 5.2

In each folder : C:\Users\[USER]\Documents\Prepar3D v5 Add-ons\FSLabs\A320\Data is a file called UMpolicy which I believe sets AM  - among others.

A320 above can be 319 or 320-SL and so on, depending on the models you might have purchased. Each has its own policy file, which may actually be different across the various models.

If you're brave enough you can try and tinker with those. I never tried it so there's no guarantee as to what might happen.

Personally, I don't think affinity mask is a solution for frame drops. Certainly not in any significant manner.

Edited July 25, 2021 by ha5mvo