>Since the problem is with virtual address space wouldnt the 64>bit os's capability to have 8tb of space be worth the upgrade>to 64 bit?No, the WinXP64-bit OS gave me plenty of OOM errors in FS9 as well. The 2GB virtual-address (user-space) limit is still a wall as far as applications such as FSX are concerned because FSX is a 32-bit app that runs in the WoW subsystem of WinXP64. This issue will not be circumvented until ACES releases a "True" 64-bit version of FS. Phil Taylor has indicated that they monitor the business aspects of developing such a version routinely but to date, the market does not support such an effort.Many here theorize that FS11 or FS12 may have such an advance, but not FSX sp-something. Now Phil is looking at modifying the FSX.exe for us to by default, fix the 3GB limit in the executable so we don't have to do it our selves. Speculation is that this will be in FSX-SP2. Now to be fare, the D3D fix which arrived in the June'07 DirectX update was not available back when I was running FS9 on WinXP_64. So, although we had tried these recommendations back then, it wouldn't have worked in sort, becuase of D3D.The only thing WinXP64 did noticeabley for me was improve drive-performance and access times becuase the drivers for the hardware were true 64-bit wide pipes. But, at the same time, the video drivers were always behind their 32-bit counterpart as far as stability and performance were concerned. Give and take, that is what Flightsiming is all about; a balanced aproach to your goals, just like overclocking. Get the 32-bit OOM problems fixed first. Then worry about the slightest tweaks, including the better OS for peak performance Good luck.

Thanks for all of your help, sorry if I asked this question before, but would adding an extra 2gb of ram help here, since this is a virtual memory issue, if the system had more physical ram to work with it would need less virtual memory?

Adding more physical ram won't help the V-memory issue, but you will notice higher ram loads during gameplay. You will consistently see loads over 2 gigs, even in every day use. It seems that FSX's appetite for ram is not fully satisfied with a 2 gig system. You will notice FSX will use significantly more ram with 3-4 gigs installed. Once again though, this will not help the V-memory issue. Consider the V-memory function to be like the op system's forecast of how much ram it thinks it will need in the future. The program and the op system are in constant communication and deciding future requirements. The current physical ram load is occurring entirely separate from this forecasting. The Vcard's driver uses this 2 gig of V-memory space too. It keeps an image of its current ram load here in case of Vram corruption. In the case of Vista, it seems these two are oblivious that they are sharing a finite 2 determinate. These bozos just keep addin' in numbers till the total exceeds 2 gigs. Then bammm. The program shuts down with an OOM message. How could this be? Our forefathers considered it ridiculous that anything would ever even approach this 2 gig limit. This is what the MS patch is addressing. We will say the same thing about the 64bit systems 8TB limit. Again, this is not 'using' ram or harddrive space . . . or anything. V-memory is just "adding-up" a row of numbers. How much hardware resource would this take? Maybe a couple of bits of physical ram? Not much. Physical memory and V-memory are entirely separate issues. Those Anandtech articles are pretty good, worth a read.

Alright, i understand that physical ram and vm are different, but I just thought that with extra ram installed the system would have to use less of a paging file and then maybe less oom's.

Also consider that Page file and Virtual Memory are different functions too. The system is misusing its VM function and this VM abuse is causing the OOM crashes. VM has nothing to do with the system's use of Page file. If setup correctly, the Page file function is working just fine. Page file will not cause this type of OOM fault. This is a VM problem. Make sure your page file is setup correctly: Go into your page file setup area and make sure it is set to "System controlled" or words to that effect. If the system is allowed to control the page file size, it will automatically increase the size as required. All you have to do as make sure you always have enough HD space for it to use.So to answer your question: Yes. Additional physical ram will reduce the page file size. However, if you have set the page file up as described, the page file will not cause OOM faults.This VM situation is about a hard limitation of any 32 bit operating system. The "3gig-switch" tweak is one workaround, but so is the MS patch. I'd say, "Go with the MS patch!" Run CHKDSK (Computer > C: > Properties > Tools > Error Checking). Almost sounds like a corrupted file or two.

Oh I thought vm was the page file. No wonder I was confused. The ms patch isnt released yet though right? And would 64 bit help if I were to enable the fsx.exe to use more vm like in jordinal's post using cff explorer?

Hi Mike,I use Vista x64. As far as I am concerned it runs fine. A few small FS related issues... you cannot run 16 bit apps on x64, so if you use the Reality XP garmin units, as supplied with the DF Baron amongst others then you won't be able to use them.Also hardware drivers. In reality I haven't come across any problems with this, as most manufacturers have x64 drivers now. A good example is the Saitek x52 pro that i just got, I had to go to the website and download drivers and beta drivers for it, but it works. If you own older hardware or stuff from obscure manufacturers then this could be an issue.Every 5 years or so I do an OS upgrade and decided on x64 because I wanted to stay "future proof" for longer... Whatever issues people were having, these are being ironed out and once vista SP1 comes along then I am sure it will be even better.I imagine in 2 or 3 years the minimum spec will be 8 core cpus with 4gb, and we will all be there with our smooth as silk FSX complaining that FS11 runs terribly... and so the world goes round!!!Cheers,Paul

Haha yep thats pretty much how I figure things will turn out.