>So I ask Microsoft is this problem going to be addressed and>if so what kinda time frame we looking at for it to be fixed.I think Phil Taylor has made it quite clear that there will be no further work done on FSX. Period. End of sentence... :-halo IMHO, the single biggest problem with FSX in most cases lies behind the keyboard... :-outta

>and have Core>Affinity set to 14 (i.e. like your setting it locks out Core 0Bob, Phil has made it very, very clear that this "Affinity Mask" only affects threading. FSX 'core' continues to run on Core 0, irrespective of the Affinity Mask.With the improvements made to their threading, this setting has lost any real value for Quad Core owners. ;)

Not sure if this is of any consequence, and I don't remember if David or Geofa posted this, but I used to get frequent stutters, and after changing the below information I haven't seen the stutters since. Anyways, it's worth a try.TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=4000TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=0000Happy New Year everyone.

>Not sure if this is of any consequence, and I don't remember>if David or Geofa posted this, but I used to get frequent>stutters, and after changing the below information I haven't>seen the stutters since. Anyways, it's worth a try.>>TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=4000>TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=0000>>Happy New Year everyone.>I might add that the above lines should be added under the section TERRAIN in your fsx.cfg file.The fsx default values are:TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=4500TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=3000Ulf B

Bill,Sorry, but I have to disagree with Phil about the effect of Core Affinity.In my case the benefit is not so the frame rate, but the initial loading speed of the game from the hard disk almost doubled when I changed the Core Affinity to 14. (My default flight is on the boundary of two large areas of VFR scenery which may go some way to explain this effect). PS - With this setting, FSX uses about 30% of Core 0, 100% of Core 1. Cores 2 & 3 are a bit more variable (depends where you fly) - typically they both run at 100% for a 5 to 10 seconds, then decline to 25% for a second or so, and then return to 100% and repeat the cycle. So all four cores are used, the main change seems to be that the majority of the work moved from Core 0 to Core 1.

I know that that is what Phil said, but the heavy load, pretty much 100% utilization all the time, moves from core 0 to core 1 and leaves core 0 lightly loaded, when using a mask of 14.

I use the BufferPools tweak except that I find that the value suggested above doesn't enough for me. I was still getting bad stutters until I read something that someone over at FSW had done, they had set their BufferPools to 100000000 (100MB.) I use 110MB or, 110000000. The amount suggested above, "Poolsize=6000000", is only 6MB!!! Thats barely using any of your video card's memory. It works best if your card is 512MB or over but if it's lower than that, you can experiment with lower values. When you start seeing wierd things like wheels sticking up out of the plane's roof etc, just reduce the value by 10MB and try that. I hope this helps, it sure helped me!

i fully agree to this, geofa. And to add a few. SP2 without any tweaking in the cfg file except maybe the max_autogen_buildings and trees tweak makes the best performance, the other tweaks are RTM or SP1 and much of a cause for stutters with SP2. And when overclocking the system, don't take it to the max and don't overclock the graphic board. MHO :-)Regards, Gerrit Kranenbarg

---

http://www.oncourse-software.co.uk/forum_images/pfe_team.jpg

Ulf,I have got to thank you for this tip. With just 2GB RAM it's cured my stutters.Using.........NVidea 6800GT and dual core CPU

Why not simply lower the autogen settings in FSX...? It seems sometimes people don't mind editing cfg's but changing simple menu-options is a no go... (I know you can't change autogen trees and houses apart from each other in FSX, but still, removing all houses is more drastic than simply lowering autogen and have fewer trees and houses.)

I remove the autogen buildings because to me they look very unrealistic. I then turn up the scenery complexity to the max giving me full airport buildings and cities. By doing this I get full tree coverage and buildings while on the ground-then once gaining a little altitude the photo real textures shows up sharply blending with the trees giving a more realistic look from the air imho.I actually do this for looks and not performance as my machine can handle full autogen either way.http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Hm, well... this may not be a bad idea after all... ;) The main reason why I use (a lot of) autogen is that I don't like the flat mountainedges AND the flat surrounding when I land. I did try a few times to fly with no autogen at all and it isn't that bad: great fps and the textures are indeed quite okay from a certain height, but taking off and landing.... yikes...! But indeed, with these settings you DO get the 3D idea, you don't have flat airports, you DO get lively mountainedges... Well, I think I will fool around with the cfg once more today... ;)

Just be aware that some have reported that setting houses to 0 can cause crashes for some-it hasn't for me yet but who knows...http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/