10 minutes ago, ADamiani said:

Nope .... all stock before that.

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

Odd.

A.

Sounds very unlikely but as long as it works for you now, cheers! 

On 8/21/2021 at 9:09 AM, 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 am glad you have found a workaround to your CTD issues.  I would much prefer flying with trees set to Low than to deal with consistent crashes.  Having said that, I think you should perhaps try a few more things to narrow down the root cause.  For example, have you tried turning ALL graphics settings down to low and then try trees at both high and low?  If trees on high still cause CTD's in that scenario, then the root cause may somehow be related to your tree settings.  But if as I suspect the CTD's do not occur, you can then reason the CTD's are caused by some threshold you are reaching due to a combination of graphics settings  Of course, if that was the case I would also expect to see high GPU or CPU temps at the time of your CTD's, which you have already stated is not the case.

15 minutes ago, PlumCrazy said:

.., I think you should perhaps try a few more things to narrow down the root cause.  For example, have you tried turning ALL graphics settings down to low and then try trees at both high and low?  If trees on high still cause CTD's in that scenario, then the root cause may somehow be related to your tree settings.  But if as I suspect the CTD's do not occur, you can then reason the CTD's are caused by some threshold you are reaching due to a combination of graphics settings ..

Well, of course I am well aware of this, and I allude to this earlier in the thread where I say that I don't know if the "trees" variable is the "silver bullet". I simply do not have the time to do such extensive testing. I am very much content that having settings as I described in my lengthy post has undeniably cured my CTDs (and at the same time fully acquitted my RAM as the culprit).

2 hours ago, Swe_Richard said:

Well, of course I am well aware of this, and I allude to this earlier in the thread where I say that I don't know if the "trees" variable is the "silver bullet". I simply do not have the time to do such extensive testing. I am very much content that having settings as I described in my lengthy post has undeniably cured my CTDs (and at the same time fully acquitted my RAM as the culprit).

I wonder when someone will suggest that you purchase a new home as a possible solution....🙄

I applaud all the snide responses, especially from some that also popluated every thread about sim related ctd issues that were miraculously solved by purchasing new hardware. 

Ram timing involves more than basic clock speed. More importantly, it relates to the wait States between internal row and column addressing and data placement /retrieval. Overall cl speed addresses a portion, but under load, an internal too tight timing will cause the issues. Xmp is like automagic timing in a perfect world. Voltage can make or break it. X570 was notorious for it. 

Eg. https://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/7343/x570-aorus-elite-memory-problems?page=1

I run all ultra, including trees. 3840x1080. Older I9-9900k oc to 5ghz all cores, z390, 3090 (replacing 2070super I blew up last week), adata 3000 16-18-18-36 at stock 1.35v. Never a ctd. Also VR with a reverb g2. If trees were the actual issue, myself and many others would be concurring nonstop. 

Hardest thing to explain to someone is that turning sliders to the left may be necessary, even on their brand new build. 

Notwithstanding that any particular combo of hardware can expose issues, as well as their associated drivers. 

 

X

5 hours ago, OneOfMany said:

I applaud all the snide responses, especially from some that also popluated every thread about sim related ctd issues that were miraculously solved by purchasing new hardware. 

Ram timing involves more than basic clock speed. More importantly, it relates to the wait States between internal row and column addressing and data placement /retrieval. Overall cl speed addresses a portion, but under load, an internal too tight timing will cause the issues. Xmp is like automagic timing in a perfect world. Voltage can make or break it. X570 was notorious for it. 

Eg. https://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/7343/x570-aorus-elite-memory-problems?page=1

I run all ultra, including trees. 3840x1080. Older I9-9900k oc to 5ghz all cores, z390, 3090 (replacing 2070super I blew up last week), adata 3000 16-18-18-36 at stock 1.35v. Never a ctd. Also VR with a reverb g2. If trees were the actual issue, myself and many others would be concurring nonstop. 

Hardest thing to explain to someone is that turning sliders to the left may be necessary, even on their brand new build. 

Notwithstanding that any particular combo of hardware can expose issues, as well as their associated drivers. 

 

x570 is and G-Skill is ok , you seems prefer intel and adata mems lot of bla bla talk.

the gigabyte tread you linked to is 2 years old , he run agesa 1.003 not say if it was bios F3 or F4 the latest bios today is F35 atleast 9 bios updates.

I have 2 systems up and run MSFS , Intel 9900K Z390 32gb G-Skill 4266 Galax 2080ti Hof and AMD 5950X X570 32GB G-Skill Galax 3090 Hof.

on the 2080ti 4k 3840x2160 most on ultra with Render scale 100 the 3090 system ultra with  RS 140.

Run VR on both , HP Reverb G2 work great on both systems after i get the rev 2 cable from HP.

No problem with CTD Intel or AMD

 

5 hours ago, westman said:

No problem with CTD Intel or AMD

Then my point is made. Appears to be hardware. 

And as far as bla bla AMD goes, I ran a 386 dx40, and pretty much every chip since then. We sell a lot of them, so what? 

Edited August 24, 20214 yr by OneOfMany

23 minutes ago, OneOfMany said:

Then my point is made. Appears to be hardware. 

And as far as bla bla AMD goes, I ran a 386 dx40, and pretty much every chip since then. We sell a lot of them, so what? 

i had ctd after the uppgrade to WU4 did a clean install of MSFS after that all ok even after SU5  uppdate, think its a Asobo thing not first time they messed up things , his hardware is probaly ok.

Edited August 24, 20214 yr by westman

Well I have no ctd after wu4, did not reinstall before su5 and have the same results as you. No ctd. Therefore, immediately assuming that, is probably not a given. My simple check is an os and msfs reinstall on a test ssd. 

Not saying the install can not have issues. The op indicated that he had to turn down a specific graphic detail setting to avoid his issue. So either the hardware is being pushed beyond its capabilities, which I doubt, or is an os/ hardware / driver issue which is showing up under this particular load process.