3 minutes ago, VFXSimmer said:

Look, if you're content to run your trees at a low setting, then great problem solved.  Your OP was an interesting, albeit pretty unlikely cure.

Others were trying to offer up reasons why that unusual solution worked in your case.  The majority of systems out there dont have the problem you are experiencing or else everyone would be converging on the same solution and the tree fix would have become ubiquitous by now.  Occam's Razor points more to something unique to your setup which is what people were offering up very reasonable theories of how that could be so.

The simple truth is there are far too many hardware configurations out there to expect Asobo to test for them all.  I do find it short-sided that they dont output a crash log somewhere like X-Plane does - would be a great way to both help themselves and the community.  Barring that, I dont think you're going to come to a happy conclusion without doing more leg work on your end.  I understand it's frustrating, but I think thats the reality you're facing.

The initial posts suggesting you try testing your memory clock as a potential reason for why your tree fix worked were very reasonable and no one was trying to insult anyone's intelligence or experience.  I do feel its a bit short-sided on your part, however, to draw an immediate conclusion that because your "other software" (and even SU4) worked at the same clock rate it is therefor not possible for that to be the cause.  Clearly something changed.  As I suggested, SU5 is much more multi-threaded which in and of itself operates your hardware differently.

I humbly suggest that if you ask the community for help, that its not going to do you any favors to be dismissive or belligerent when someone offers reasonable advice.  Otherwise, all you are doing is venting and you'll get no closer to a solution, which I still presume is to get MSFS back and running well on your machine.

 

Well, first of all I didn’t really ask for help. I just posted about a thing that most definitely works on my end. Happy with trees on low? Not at all. Seeing it as a solution? Never actually did. Belliherent, well not really. I don’t recall calling anyone retarded. I just stated my position that I shouldn’t need to ”nerf” my computer for this one program that obviously broke after an uppdate. This made people call me a retard and having no analytical skills and not ”deserve” help.

 

4 minutes ago, VFXSimmer said:

Its kind of about the time that I'd be looking for "unusual causes" just to eliminate them as a possibility.  If its a fairly simple thing to test, what's the harm? .. heck you even get an "I told you so" out of the deal if it doesnt fix the problem.

Well yes, I tend to agree... if you've eliminated all the usual suspects, it's time to test the unusual ones, as unlikely as they may seem. Anyway, I don't deny there are still CTDs that are caused by the sim itself, and it's not uncommon for CTDs to show only in very specific software/hardware environments, making them very hard to track them down. 

And yes, I think that's why there's no harm in trying - either it solves your problem, or it settles the dispute about whether or not RAM timings are an issue.

Edited August 19, 20214 yr by pstrub

Troubleshooting 101. I never profess to solve an issue with one magic elixir. Fortunately having a bench and store full of hardware affords the opportunity to more easily pin down the issue at hand. If all is well with your hardware, then I can't help. This is why I don't go on the internet and forums to try and help. Would rather be paid for when I actually solve it. 

Unsuscribed. 

29 minutes ago, OneOfMany said:

Would rather be paid for when I actually solve it. 

I feel the same each time I am asked to give dental advice. 😂

I would change the RAM timings first, and if that doesn't work I would remove 1 of your RAM sticks. If that still yields problems swap the other one in, leaving only one. It could be bad RAM, and it could be that your system cannot handle the higher memory speeds. But in any case I would not leave it like this with just lowering settings, because there is no guarantee the next update won't cause the same issues to show up. 

So. I did some tests now that I am home again after a rather nice, but far too short, vacation with the family. 

A wise man in the thread told me to try the "lower RAM frequency/timings" per the self proclaimed 1337-haxxors that was so mysteriously triggered by my original post. If not just to silence the incessant kvetching by this aforementioned subset of the forum. According to them, my finding was an impossibility. I also have to admit that their persistence made me slightly doubt the conclusions I previously made, and the thought that I'd better try what was suggested became more and more firm as our vacation progressed. Now when I am back home, I have devoted quite the number of hours trying out various settings running either on the XMP-profile of 3600MHz CL 16 or without said profile at 2133MHz.

One trip that ALWAYS triggered CTDs for me is a short hop between LIPS > LIPI. I've flown VFR direct from point A to B. Same runway and time. It always ends in CTD. Up until I started messing with the settings. Once again, for those that have a hard time comprehending and understanding the words before their eyes; I do not claim this to be anything remotely close to a solution. Nor am I in the slightest happy with running trees (or anything) on low. I have most definitely the hardware to run higher than that. However this renders my sim unusable and I prefer being able to use what I paid for to not using it, so for the time being (up until Asobo fixes what they clearly have broken) I will indeed use these settings. And no, higher settings do not cause too high temps with subsequent CTD, so that is not the answer. Playing COTW gives higher temps and never crashes. Nor am I sure that just "trees" are the silver bullet. But I quite frankly do not have the time to try other combos as I have a 6y/o and a 4y/o that wants to wrestle with me. And a dog and wife. And a house. You hopefully get the point. The time I get to flight sim I very much prefer I don't CTD 10NM from the runway after a 2-3hr flight. 

After that introduction, here goes:

Running my RAM at 2133MHz. (SPD)
BUILDINGS            > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
TREES                    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
GRASS/BUSHES    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
Result: CTD 10 minutes after take off. Never succeeds in finishing a flight. 

Running my RAM at 3600MHz.(XMP)
BUILDINGS             > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
TREES                    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
GRASS/BUSHES    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
Result: CTD 10 minutes after take off. Never been able to finish a flight. 

Now, if I set "TREES" to low (keeping the others at MEDIUM), I can finish this flight and others. CTDs are down from just about every flight to none. Regardless of the RAMs frequency. The RAM is obviously not the issue, and never was. They work perfectly fine, as I have stated on numerous occasions, as apart from MSFS post SU5 EVERYTHING is absolutely rock stable. It simply is not a logical conclusion to arrive at that the RAM is faulty under these circumstances where everything apart from this recently updated app works perfect. 

So, my conclusion is that this indeed works on my computer. It is totally and utterly undeniable that it does, seeing those 1337-haxxors unironically trying to tell me that it is impossible is, frankly, more than a little amusing. So my initial advice still stands. If you suffer CTDs, might want to experiment a bit. Not calling it a solution, not being happy with the situation, or that it works for everyone, but until Asobo fixes what they so clearly broke, you might have little choice and nothing to loose if you want to use this program. And for some of you it probably will work. 

This is the last thing I will write in this thread as I have little doubt the 1337-brigade will start the kvetching again and I am profoundly uninterested in debating this further with those people. 
 

9 minutes ago, Swe_Richard said:

So. I did some tests now that I am home again after a rather nice, but far too short, vacation with the family. 

A wise man in the thread told me to try the "lower RAM frequency/timings" per the self proclaimed 1337-haxxors that was so mysteriously triggered by my original post. If not just to silence the incessant kvetching by this aforementioned subset of the forum. According to them, my finding was an impossibility. I also have to admit that their persistence made me slightly doubt the conclusions I previously made, and the thought that I'd better try what was suggested became more and more firm as our vacation progressed. Now when I am back home, I have devoted quite the number of hours trying out various settings running either on the XMP-profile of 3600MHz CL 16 or without said profile at 2133MHz.

One trip that ALWAYS triggered CTDs for me is a short hop between LIPS > LIPI. I've flown VFR direct from point A to B. Same runway and time. It always ends in CTD. Up until I started messing with the settings. Once again, for those that have a hard time comprehending and understanding the words before their eyes; I do not claim this to be anything remotely close to a solution. Nor am I in the slightest happy with running trees (or anything) on low. I have most definitely the hardware to run higher than that. However this renders my sim unusable and I prefer being able to use what I paid for to not using it, so for the time being (up until Asobo fixes what they clearly have broken) I will indeed use these settings. And no, higher settings do not cause too high temps with subsequent CTD, so that is not the answer. Playing COTW gives higher temps and never crashes. Nor am I sure that just "trees" are the silver bullet. But I quite frankly do not have the time to try other combos as I have a 6y/o and a 4y/o that wants to wrestle with me. And a dog and wife. And a house. You hopefully get the point. The time I get to flight sim I very much prefer I don't CTD 10NM from the runway after a 2-3hr flight. 

After that introduction, here goes:

Running my RAM at 2133MHz. (SPD)
BUILDINGS            > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
TREES                    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
GRASS/BUSHES    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
Result: CTD 10 minutes after take off. Never succeeds in finishing a flight. 

Running my RAM at 3600MHz.(XMP)
BUILDINGS             > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
TREES                    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
GRASS/BUSHES    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
Result: CTD 10 minutes after take off. Never been able to finish a flight. 

Now, if I set "TREES" to low (keeping the others at MEDIUM), I can finish this flight and others. CTDs are down from just about every flight to none. Regardless of the RAMs frequency. The RAM is obviously not the issue, and never was. They work perfectly fine, as I have stated on numerous occasions, as apart from MSFS post SU5 EVERYTHING is absolutely rock stable. It simply is not a logical conclusion to arrive at that the RAM is faulty under these circumstances where everything apart from this recently updated app works perfect. 

So, my conclusion is that this indeed works on my computer. It is totally and utterly undeniable that it does, seeing those 1337-haxxors unironically trying to tell me that it is impossible is, frankly, more than a little amusing. So my initial advice still stands. If you suffer CTDs, might want to experiment a bit. Not calling it a solution, not being happy with the situation, or that it works for everyone, but until Asobo fixes what they so clearly broke, you might have little choice and nothing to loose if you want to use this program. And for some of you it probably will work. 

This is the last thing I will write in this thread as I have little doubt the 1337-brigade will start the kvetching again and I am profoundly uninterested in debating this further with those people. 
 

Do you have that Four seasons add on from the Market Place with the trees and foliage? 

The idea of checking RAM timings was to eliminate that as a possibility. It takes 1 minute to change and many others have had CTDs for this very reason. Your unwillingness to simply check this one variable to eliminate it as a possibility is why you got some flack. Nobody said it was guaranteed to be the cause. Smh. 

On 8/21/2021 at 3:09 PM, Swe_Richard said:

So. I did some tests now that I am home again after a rather nice, but far too short, vacation with the family. 

A wise man in the thread told me to try the "lower RAM frequency/timings" per the self proclaimed 1337-haxxors that was so mysteriously triggered by my original post. If not just to silence the incessant kvetching by this aforementioned subset of the forum. According to them, my finding was an impossibility. I also have to admit that their persistence made me slightly doubt the conclusions I previously made, and the thought that I'd better try what was suggested became more and more firm as our vacation progressed. Now when I am back home, I have devoted quite the number of hours trying out various settings running either on the XMP-profile of 3600MHz CL 16 or without said profile at 2133MHz.

One trip that ALWAYS triggered CTDs for me is a short hop between LIPS > LIPI. I've flown VFR direct from point A to B. Same runway and time. It always ends in CTD. Up until I started messing with the settings. Once again, for those that have a hard time comprehending and understanding the words before their eyes; I do not claim this to be anything remotely close to a solution. Nor am I in the slightest happy with running trees (or anything) on low. I have most definitely the hardware to run higher than that. However this renders my sim unusable and I prefer being able to use what I paid for to not using it, so for the time being (up until Asobo fixes what they clearly have broken) I will indeed use these settings. And no, higher settings do not cause too high temps with subsequent CTD, so that is not the answer. Playing COTW gives higher temps and never crashes. Nor am I sure that just "trees" are the silver bullet. But I quite frankly do not have the time to try other combos as I have a 6y/o and a 4y/o that wants to wrestle with me. And a dog and wife. And a house. You hopefully get the point. The time I get to flight sim I very much prefer I don't CTD 10NM from the runway after a 2-3hr flight. 

After that introduction, here goes:

Running my RAM at 2133MHz. (SPD)
BUILDINGS            > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
TREES                    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
GRASS/BUSHES    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
Result: CTD 10 minutes after take off. Never succeeds in finishing a flight. 

Running my RAM at 3600MHz.(XMP)
BUILDINGS             > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
TREES                    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
GRASS/BUSHES    > ULTRA | HIGH | MEDIUM
Result: CTD 10 minutes after take off. Never been able to finish a flight. 

Now, if I set "TREES" to low (keeping the others at MEDIUM), I can finish this flight and others. CTDs are down from just about every flight to none. Regardless of the RAMs frequency. The RAM is obviously not the issue, and never was. They work perfectly fine, as I have stated on numerous occasions, as apart from MSFS post SU5 EVERYTHING is absolutely rock stable. It simply is not a logical conclusion to arrive at that the RAM is faulty under these circumstances where everything apart from this recently updated app works perfect. 

So, my conclusion is that this indeed works on my computer. It is totally and utterly undeniable that it does, seeing those 1337-haxxors unironically trying to tell me that it is impossible is, frankly, more than a little amusing. So my initial advice still stands. If you suffer CTDs, might want to experiment a bit. Not calling it a solution, not being happy with the situation, or that it works for everyone, but until Asobo fixes what they so clearly broke, you might have little choice and nothing to loose if you want to use this program. And for some of you it probably will work. 

This is the last thing I will write in this thread as I have little doubt the 1337-brigade will start the kvetching again and I am profoundly uninterested in debating this further with those people. 
 

I'm glad you found a (temporary) solution! 

They completely changed how trees render in SU5, so the key issue must have had something to do with that. 

On 8/21/2021 at 3:09 PM, Swe_Richard said:

So. I did some tests now that I am home again after a rather nice, but far too short, vacation with the family. 

One trip that ALWAYS triggered CTDs for me is a short hop between LIPS > LIPI. I've flown VFR direct from point A to B. Same runway and time. It always ends in CTD.

Thanks for this detailed post about your test! It's always good to rule out one source of error with certainty, even if you think it's unlikely.

Anyway, in order to reproduce the exact conditions that caused your installation of MSFS to crash, what was the runway you used? Probably doesn't matter much on a direct VFR flight, but anyway... And did you use any add-ons? Gonna try this after work - might be a useful datapoint, as I too run a 3900x on an x570 board. 

On 8/21/2021 at 3:09 PM, Swe_Richard said:

So, my conclusion is that this indeed works on my computer. It is totally and utterly undeniable that it does, seeing those 1337-haxxors unironically trying to tell me that it is impossible is, frankly, more than a little amusing.

The only amusing thing is the fact that you obviously still did not understand what we were trying to tell you, not even my joke you seem to have gotten by now, if you still insist on the same strange conclusion. 

As I DO work in problem solving, all I can say is that your approach to the problem is neither scientific nor logic and you jump to conclusions. But as you still prefer insisting on you being absolutely correct, I am not going to waste any additional minute to explain you why you are completely stuck in your "problem solving strategy".

If you calm down and stop being frustrated about people telling you stubborn, I suggest you start with the tool called 5-Why Analysis, then you might instantly realize what we were talking about...

3 hours ago, AnkH said:

The only amusing thing is the fact that you obviously still did not understand what we were trying to tell you, not even my joke you seem to have gotten by now, if you still insist on the same strange conclusion. 

As I DO work in problem solving, all I can say is that your approach to the problem is neither scientific nor logic and you jump to conclusions. But as you still prefer insisting on you being absolutely correct, I am not going to waste any additional minute to explain you why you are completely stuck in your "problem solving strategy".

If you calm down and stop being frustrated about people telling you stubborn, I suggest you start with the tool called 5-Why Analysis, then you might instantly realize what we were talking about...

Even more amusing is the fact that I had no ctd at all in 2021, then suddenly with SU5 a total disaster. Reinstalling did not help. Hotfixes neither.

Then last week all of a sudden: no more ctds. What had I changed? Added the FBW A320 EXPERIMENTAL edition !!!!!

Isn't it crazy?

A.

4 hours ago, AnkH said:

... I am not going to waste any additional minute to explain you why you are completely stuck in your "problem solving strategy". ...

 

Yet here you are, kvetching like there's no tomorrow...?

 

1 hour ago, ADamiani said:

Even more amusing is the fact that I had no ctd at all in 2021, then suddenly with SU5 a total disaster. Reinstalling did not help. Hotfixes neither.

Then last week all of a sudden: no more ctds. What had I changed? Added the FBW A320 EXPERIMENTAL edition !!!!!

Isn't it crazy?

A.

Did you have the previous version of the FBW A320 installed?

34 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Did you have the previous version of the FBW A320 installed?

Nope .... all stock before that.

Apparently (but I know it can't be) the experimental version of FBW A320 fixed MSFS2020

Odd.

A.