Hi guys,

After I had no problems with V5.2, the problems with V5.3 start again.
My problem is again VRAM (I have RTX 2070 Super with 8GB).

I had no problems on the first flights, but it depends on the scenery.
Yesterday, however, in EDDH, FSlabs ended after about 5 minutes ... VRAM went up to 6.8GB, then there was a crash.
With PMDG I was even able to get to the runway.

Generally speaking, PMDG takes less in VRAM than FSLabs. Think it's 200 to 300 MB more ... Which is also crucial.
Immediately after installing 5.3 I noticed a higher VRAM ... but ignored it for now ... A few days it went without any problems.

Yesterday I played a bit in Scenery Options, but couldn't get a lot of VRAM out ... so it made almost no difference ... When I reduce the settings.

I switched from Ultra to High under Display ... But it doesn't do much either ... But I don't want to go down to Medium because you can see the difference right away.

Also traffic reduced from 100 to 50% ... VRAM stays almost the same.

I'm slowly getting really annoyed by P3D .... with 5.2 it actually went well for me ,,, after 5.0 and 5.1 ...
Thought of XPlane 11 again, but there are no good longhauls .... and PMDG for MSFS can be maintained ..

But as soon as I find an alternative to P3D, I would like to switch ... I'm getting tired of doing something all the time.

Also VRAM problems (DXGI Error) were known in earlier versions and were fixed in 5.2 ... I don't understand why they screwed it up with 5.3.

I don't have a DXGI error, but as soon as VRAM goes up to 6.8 GB, it's over.

Do you have any tips for me?

thank you

LM is aware of the problem. I'm running a GTX2080 and have the same issue. I went back to 5.2 until there's a fix.

40 minutes ago, mwilk said:

LM is aware of the problem. I'm running a GTX2080 and have the same issue. I went back to 5.2 until there's a fix.

Where? I haven't seen Beau or Rob acknowledge it as an issue to fix.

My advice is to revert back to 5.2. That’s what I immediately did when I got my first (and only) CTD due to vram. 

I too am tired but am enjoying MSFS 2020 immensely. The FBW A320 can stand toe to toe with PMDG or FSLabs for most purposes, at least for me. As far as the absence of VNAV in the a320 that’s not true. It will constrain both climb and decent altitudes as programmed. It will fly an approach to the numbers without any pilot input as a matter of fact. (Cat III ILS / Autoland)

I’m happy for now. 
-B

A couple more things to check that I’ve found as a fellow peasant with a 8GB card.

If you use GSX, check that your pax density is not set to high or max, because having a ton of pax rendered does impact VRAM.

Check the size of your FSL repaints. Some of the community paints use 1GB more than default.

Using SSAA instead of MSAA can net you a little more VRAM.

In addition to texture res and vol clouds, LOD can have a big impact on VRAM, so try lowering that as well.

Edited December 17, 20214 yr by Chapstick

So we all went from 32Bit OOMS to 64bit and now we are back to square one with VRAM limitations.  This is something LM needs to fix especially with their engine.  Throwing VRAM isn't going to solve the problems - heck I am not wasting money on a new card (with inflated prices).

Man, P3D is designed by engineers who expect all their customers are engineers too lol

4 hours ago, RAMMSTEIN1977 said:

Do you have any tips for me?

Better hardware....

5 hours ago, Chapstick said:

Where? I haven't seen Beau or Rob acknowledge it as an issue to fix.

This is from the P3D official forum.

Re: Vram issues 5.3

• Report
• Quote

Post by JorgenSA » Fri, 10 Dec 2021, 15:23

This has been discussed in several threads since v. 5.3 came out.

L-M is aware of the situation.

Jorgen

2 hours ago, kevinfirth said:

Better hardware....

So what did LH do to 5.3 that requires that much more VRAM to justify a $1500 graphics card upgrade?

15 minutes ago, mwilk said:

So what did LH do to 5.3 that requires that much more VRAM to justify a $1500 graphics card upgrade?

Very little from my perspective.  If you want all the bells and whistles, with add-on scenery and a/c, in some circumstances 8Gb simply isn't going to cut it. Any 11 or 12Gb card would suffice in terms of vram, depending on your use case.  I can get P3D to use significantly more than that with the right settings, a/c, scenery location and AI.

27 minutes ago, mwilk said:

This is from the P3D official forum.

Re: Vram issues 5.3

• Report
• Quote

Post by JorgenSA » Fri, 10 Dec 2021, 15:23

This has been discussed in several threads since v. 5.3 came out.

L-M is aware of the situation.

Jorgen

Ah yes, Jorgen.... Ummmm....that font of deep insider knowledge of all things LM and P3D.

Being aware of people's comments is not synonymous with acknowledging there is actually a problem with P3D.

Edited December 18, 20214 yr by kevinfirth

Just now, kevinfirth said:

Ah yes, Jorgen.... Ummmm....that font of deep insider knowledge of all things LM and P3D.

Being aware of people's comments is not synonymous with acknowledging there is actually a problem with P3D.

He's their go to guy on their forums when it comes to answering questions. If he doesn't speak for them then they should have shut him down a long time ago. You notice that no one from LM posted to refute that remark.

5 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

Very little from my perspective.  If you want all the bells and whistles, with add-on scenery and a/c, in some circumstances 8Gb simply isn't going to cut it. Any 11 or 12Gb card would suffice in terms of vram, depending on your use case.  I can get P3D to use significantly more than that with the right settings, a/c, scenery location and AI.

I have the exact same addons in P3Dv 5.3 that I had in 5.2. In 5.2 I had no VRAM issues at all. What did they add in 5.3 that would put such a strain on VRAM?

Haven't seen any mention of the display resolution. 

4K monitors have over twice the number of pixels as 2K, and 4 times as many as 1080p.

I use a 2K monitor and rarely have VRAM usage >3GB.

Dave

13 hours ago, Chapstick said:

Using SSAA instead of MSAA can net you a little more VRAM.

Should this not be the other way around?