Sign in to follow this  
Guest Vilk

A simple way to dramatically increase frame rates

Recommended Posts

Any OS that is installed from scratch usually runs like charm - it is the drivers, add-on, agents, etc, that naturally slow everything down. Therefore it is always advisable to keep it simple.May it be sloppy coding, incompatibilities, the increased demand for resources or bugs. The same is valid for FS add-ons.Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Every week we get at least 3 Miracle FSX Cures.And every week 98% of those who try them get their hopes broken.This is one of those tips that actually works and makes sense.Its hard to argue,difficult to flame and blame MS.Therefore, WHATS IT DOING HERE!:-lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you as a matter of fact I did the same thing and when I was satisfied that all was looking pretty good I went back and reinstalled, UTX, FSGLandclass, and finall FSX Mesh and noticed that it all went south again, so I now as bad as I hate to say it I may just go to stock MSFS stuff and leave off the add-ons. I am flying less, tweaking more, and enjoying the whole sim thing much less now. Thanks for reminding me of K.I.S.S. , it still makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on my personal experience, FSX on a PIV-2.8 1Gig system is right at the edge, and is not going to give good performance... sad, but true.Once you decide to get your next PC, with an Intel Duo or Quad and 2 GB of memory on a new, fast motherboard, your performance problems will be a thing of the past.. The good news, is that you will flying more and tweaking less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bert, I am running a Pentium 4 with 2.8ghz and also I have 1 gb of memory with an XFX Geforce 7300Gt 512mb card, I get pretty decent service.What would do the most to upgrade my system, memory or vid card?Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're absolutely right, Bert: that's exactly what I found. Apart from the occasional tweak - I've added on ASX/G, UTX and a few aircraft; it runs consistently between 20 and 50 frames with most everything - where applicable - turned up to max. I'm happier than I've ever been with the sim. I fly the Shockwave P40, their Spit and 109; the Do27 occasionaly; I fly the Eaglesoft Citation II - west coast USofA - almost daily between two of about five cities, plus the CoolSky/Flight1 MD80 for longer hauls. It's at least 1 flying hour per day, with perhaps an hour or so on this and a couple of other sites.I did this upgrade almost exactly a year ago - it was a leap of faith - (and $1500 Can :( )and have never looked back.:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to delete Accel because,well it just does not like Nvidia.During my many reinstalls, I found the biggest perfomance hog of em all.MyTraffic X.....I LOVE my ai especially military but its got to go.My initial load times were 2-3 minutes, now with Mytrafficx less than 20 seconds.Once a CURE is found for me and I load Acceleration I have a few addons that will be staying.UTX,Activeskyx,Xgraphics and some of the better payware aircraft.I also learned to BE AFRAID of some of these "You are not going to beleive....." Tweaks. Especially the ones where you actually have to install something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree - all of the myriad of adjustments often conflict with each other due to resource limitations. A very expensive personal computer can withstand parceling its resources via tweaks but low end units simply "squeeze the balloon". I did a reload of XP and FSX. I was shocked at the steady above 20 fps with no blurred textures. The only answer is the stock CFG should stay that way for lower end, resource limited, computers. Yes, I have to choose amongst fancy clouds, autogen and AI flying about. But basic flight (GA aircraft) is quite satisfactory. My only addon is Ultimate TerrainX for the USA. Its greatest penalty is adding to my load times.e4400 (2.7ghz), 1gb DDR memory, older ATI 9800SE 128mb video card.Regards,Dick Boley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@dlhusk:Memory is much cheaper than the video card, but improving the video card would probably help more. I would reccommend replacing both memory and graphics card as a boost to your performance, as RAM is relatively inexpensive.That being said, replacing your vid card might be really expensive, especially if you are moving into the PCI-E architecture. That may require a new motherboard, and probably a new power source as well. If you're going to do the mobo, then you might as well upgrade your processor, too... it sure adds up in a hurry.Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago a top Management Consultant taught me the value of keeping things simple.So, with frame rates moving downward and FSX begining to become crotchety, I asked myself what had changed and what I could do to fix the problem simply.What had changed? The add-ons I'd installed. To test my hunch I uninstalled FSX. Then installed it (and the patch) again.Result? The frame rate has almost doubled. When I look back I realise that, as soon as the novelty of a new aircraft has passed, I use it only occasionally. As soon as the novelty of flying over more detailed scenery has passed I fly over it only occasionally.From now on I'm going to be more selective before installing more add-ons.Think about it..........Cliff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>@dlhusk:>>Memory is much cheaper than the video card, but improving the>video card would probably help more. I would reccommend>replacing both memory and graphics card as a boost to your>performance, as RAM is relatively inexpensive.>>That being said, replacing your vid card might be really>expensive, especially if you are moving into the PCI-E>architecture. That may require a new motherboard, and>probably a new power source as well. If you're going to do>the mobo, then you might as well upgrade your processor,>too... it sure adds up in a hurry.>>Jeff Shyluk>Assistant Managing Editor>Senior Staff Reviewer>AVSIMThanks for that input Jeff. I already have a PCI-E card in the XFX Geforce 7300GT and it is 512mb, when I bought it I thought it would do a decent job, which it does, Actually I can run all sliders on HIGH and not have the jerkies which is pretty good, maybe I should leave it alone for now.Thanks again, Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also started with a P4-2.8 1 Gig system.First I added 1 Gig of memory, then I added a faster 7600GT video card, then I junked the whole thing and bought a new, Q6600 system.The main issue is processor power, then memory speed, then video card (I think).If you can put a Core2Duo or Quad and 1 more GB of memory onto your current motherboard, then that is where I would start.If the motherboard does not support the current line of processors,as in my case, it is : new motherboard, new processor, new memory and re-use the video card. You will not believe the difference !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jim, I hope you don't mind a question for the MT statistics: At which setting is your scenery complexity(SC) slider and in which area did you suffer the worst hits? A dense area like LA, SF or NY? In these places the SC slider is the greatest perf annihilator - because the MT aircraft make the jetways move, etc. Case you would like more info, please check this thread: http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...23108&mode=fullCompressed, we're prepping some aircraft configs without the jetways. The perf gain is 'pretty neat'. The downside: You loose some eye candy because the jetways remain static. I'm sure you can significantly improve performance. Please note it's still experimental and we're testing the reception of such an 'unfeaturing' Cheers and kind regards Jaap My Traffic team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to that option. I have been using MTX with great success...I am currently using it in DX10 mode using the revised schedule posted on the MTX forum for SP2 compatible models. There is only about a 1-2 fps drop at KSEA when I move the traffic sliders from 0 Airline/0 GA to 50/50 (that is a lot of movements). Of course, I avoided the perf hit of the jetways by commenting out the exit entries in all of the models. Before that, it was about a 6-7 FPS drop while the jetways were in motion. To tell you the truth, I have never really paid attention to the jetways attaching to the AI aircraft. That would be a great option to choose from...hope to see that in MTX 5.1b!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only tweak for FSX is to throw as much CPU power as you can get at it. GPU is important, too, but I do think that the difference between a 6600GT and 8800GTX is rather marginal from my own experience. During the past year, I have had a 6600GT, 7600GT and a 8800GTS with the same CPU and the improvement in performace was disappointing at best (for FSX).Not a single tweak has been the holy grail for me. Not one. Not texture bandwidth, not fiber frame fraction, not even reducing autogen, no driver update, not even so much the obvious FSX sliders. Changing autogen from the center to the right has very little impact on my system, however traffic is a huge, huge hit here. Any traffic.Other games however took full advantage of the 8800GTS and I saw a good 200% performance increase compared to the 6600GT.Why? Only the FSX Gods know.Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy, That's a highly interesting post, thanks a lot. Plus it's an excellent example of what roughly to expect in a middle dense region, with one large airport. Entirely or partially jetway-free will mainly add for those who like dense environments like NY with LGA, EWR and JFK. Or Chicago with O'Hare and Midway, LA, SFO, likely London and maybe Tokio. As you might know, our previous advise was to not exceed scenery complexity 'Dense' with hi-end systems, this will certainly be a thing of the past by adding such options. I'm not too sure how we should implement it yet. Make 2-3 groups so you don't disable/enable everything at once? My best system can handle a couple of 'jetways enabled AC' very well. LOL, v.5.1b... :-) Wasn't it v.5.1 six month birthday yesterday!? ;-) We'll need to make some 'dolores' again to safeguard the future of the project some time... It won't be until after FSX SP2. Along these lines, a new, standalone Vista version is in the making too. ;-) FWIW, you should be able to push the IFR slider quite far with the preview schedules. The GA slider usually weighs more. Particularly without jetway configs. Thanks again and kind regards Jaap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps if there was a file the likes of the 'performance_models' batch file that would remove exit headers from all of the models. In the same way that you now have performance and quality conversion files, there could be 'jetways' and 'no jetways' files. That way the user could easily switch between the two.Great work on the new planes, by the way. I have been following the new aircraft threads on the MTX forum with great anticipation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are NO magic tweaks that will double or triple frame rates.People who keep posting these threads are living in a DREAM WORLD.The graphics engine is a dog with a massive CPU bottleneck. Nothing short of doubling your CPU instructions per second will do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Looking forward to that option. I have been using MTX with>great success...I am currently using it in DX10 mode using the>revised schedule posted on the MTX forum for SP2 compatible>models. There is only about a 1-2 fps drop at KSEA when I>move the traffic sliders from 0 Airline/0 GA to 50/50 (that is>a lot of movements). Of course, I avoided the perf hit of the>jetways by commenting out the exit entries in all of the>models.There are 149 plane folders in MyTraffic/Aircraft folder! How did you do that, did you modify all 149 (or so) Aircraft.cfg files? Could you pls post an example, what exactly you commented out?Many thanks.Dirk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>You're absolutely right, Bert: that's exactly what I found.>Apart from the occasional tweak - I've added on ASX/G, UTX and>a few aircraft; it runs consistently between 20 and 50 frames>with most everything - where applicable - turned up to max.>I'm happier than I've ever been with the sim. I fly the>Shockwave P40, their Spit and 109; the Do27 occasionaly; I fly>the Eaglesoft Citation II - west coast USofA - almost daily>between two of about five cities, plus the CoolSky/Flight1>MD80 for longer hauls. It's at least 1 flying hour per day,>with perhaps an hour or so on this and a couple of other>sites.>I did this upgrade almost exactly a year ago - it was a leap>of faith - (and $1500 Can :( )and have never looked back.>>:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+Paul, where are your Scenery and Autogen sliders at, your resolution, AAx and AFx?Much thanks,Dirk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your situation, with you already having a 512MB video card but only 1 GB of memory, I would suggest that you immediately go out and by another 1 GB of memory.I did that for my laptop, and it did wonders for my system. It didn't actually make FSX perform a whole lot better (there was some improvement), but the system was a dog with only 1 GB, and, after adding the 2nd GB, it became much easier to use, i.e. starting FS, switching to other applications or going to the desktop, stuff like that. With only 1 GB, it was painful.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dirk, naaa, only roughly (= ca) 40 aircraft move the jetways. And 'only' the largest series (ca 30 AC) have been in preperation so far. As is, they will be split into 3 groups and it's still considered an exprimental exercise. Nothing is automated yet. A final, automated implementation will likely come with the new version(s) - after FSX SP2. To answer your question about the 250 movements in the other post, just move the traffic sliders accordingly. Max AI densities vary greatly from region to region. For example, 100/100 is ca 1400 movements around San Francisco. So, roughly 15/5(!) is 250 movements. In 99.9% of the areas 100/100 is no prob whilst being conservative with the scenery complexity. The number I mentioned depends on the CPU, 250 was a guesstimate for an AMD X2-4x00. Anyhow, hopefully the thing is up by tomorrow, we're more or less done. @ tohughes, it will probably end up as two (or more) exes in the Aircraftinstallers folder, one to do and another to undo. Right now, I think it makes sense to break it down into multiple groups so you don't throw out everything at once. As stated above, I've only edited (and tested) 30 of the roughly 40 AC in question, 28 models are in now. Hope that's ok for a start. :-) BTW, check out the 3rd pic in the 757 thread. ;-) Cheers and kind regards Jaap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an example of the manual way to do it from the B733MX aircraft.cfg: //{exits} number_of_exits = 2 exit.0 = 0.4, 19.1, -6.0, 2.0, 0 exit.1 = 0.4, -32.0, 4.5, -3.0, 1 Just two forward slashes in front of the bracketed exits header disables the jetways as they now have no where defined to attach to on the plane. I didn't do every aircraft, only the ones that would use jetways at a large airport. Still a lot of files to edit, but it was worth the performance gain. Looks like things are well under way from the MTX gang to do this the easy way, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think of the data path of the flight sim engine like an assembly line.Each pixel you see represents the output of a very large and complex data structure. You're talking hundreds of megs of data.Each bit of that data has to move all around your PC. From the hard drives to main memory. From main memory to the processor's cache. Off the cache and onto the processor. The processor generates output that has to be streamed to the video card. Where's this headed?There isn't any single item that will make an FSX system.The most important corollary to that?Any single item can break an FSX system. (by break I mean stutters blurries etc)Just recently went through a build. I used to do it but in recent years had gotten lazy. Here's some things to consider rig-wise:Fastest processor with the FASTEST FRONT SIDE BUS (the FSB is key)IMO go with a faster dual core rather than a quad unless you specifically know apps you use will benefit from a quad. Most of the time with today's software some of the quad core's are just going to be sitting there generating heat or worse competing with the active cores for bus space. YMMV obviouslyBuy the best mobo you can afford with the latest chipsets and with the highest FSB support you can get. If you don't know what some of those numbers on the newegg listing mean, figure it out. Or ask someone you trust...I went with DDR2 800 memory. It's dirt cheap (so put in 4 gigs even if it's not all used) and plenty fast. Again clock speed is critical. DDR3 is technically faster but apparently has some issues. Any issues are unacceptable with any primary system component, IMO...Single high end video card. Look for a fast clock, a large bus and lots of memory. With FSX it doesn't really need to be extreme. Just look for those qualities. Regarding SLI (using two video cards)... With the current mobo standard, the second card is only pushing data through 4 "pipes" rather than the normal 16. That second 500 card is effectively crippled at the knees...Again with all this, YMMV. Hope that helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hi Dirk, naaa, only roughly (= ca) 40 aircraft move the>jetways. And 'only' the largest series (ca 30 AC) have been in>preperation so far. As is, they will be split into 3 groups>and it's still considered an exprimental exercise. Nothing is>automated yet. A final, automated implementation will likely>come with the new version(s) - after FSX SP2. >>>To answer your question about the 250 movements in the other>post, just move the traffic sliders accordingly.Thanks, Jaap. I think I've got (or will easily find) a utility that can find all text-based files in a location on your HDD, that contain certain entries you indicate and can replace them with anything else you want. So, I'll try to experiment on my end while waiting for the news from you.Dirk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this