A simple way to dramatically increase frame rates

[aerdt 0]

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

[Guest JIMJAM]

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

[dlhusk 0]

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.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

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.

[dlhusk 0]

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

[Paul J 349]

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.:+:+:+:+:+:+:+:+

[Guest JIMJAM]

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.

[nudata 10]

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

[Guest jshyluk]

@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

[Guest cliffie1931]

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

[dlhusk 0]

>@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

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

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 !

[Guest baksteen33]

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

[tohughes76 0]

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!

[aerdt 0]

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