Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest D17S

Best tips for curing blurries?

Recommended Posts

I have tried just about every tip that has been printed for FSX, but I find that even turning sliders way down, the textures just don't keep up with the aircraft if flying anything over 60-80 knots. Since I mostly fly jets, this is really making FSX annoyingly unenjoyable since the terrain quickly becomes mush .. Does anyone have best tips for ensuring that ground textures stay relatively sharp and keep up with airliners flying at 280-450 knots?I have texture size set to 5 meters, mesh to 76m, water set to Highx1, and have restricted autogen through the max_autogen tweak to only trees=200, houses=200. I have also tried using the Fibre load tweak setting it to 0.66 rather than default 0.33 - but all to no avail. I beg on my knees to ACES or someone else with the knowledge, to advise what one can do to ensure that the textures keep up with faster aircraft.I appreciate that my system is several years old, but I would just like to have FSX running at a similar capacity to FS9, which I have moved on from and had to remove from my PC.Hardware:ASUS motherboard, AMD 2.4 Athlon single processor,7200 rpm hard disk,2 gbytes DDR Ram,GForce XFX 7600GT graphics - 256 mb RAMAny advice would be appreciated.Regards,Stuart

Share this post


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

To be honest, with your hardware, you should stick to FS9... Maybe it wasn't the answer you was looking for, but it's the most realistic one you might get.______________Efrain RuizLiveDISPATCHhttp://www.livedispatch.orgCooler Master cosmos SDFI LP UT P35 T2R (3-17-2008 BIOS) | E8400 @ 4GHz (500MHz x 8) | 2 x 2GB OCZ Flex II PC9200EVGA Nvidia GTX280Two (2) WD3200AAKS 320GB (Operating System RAID-0) | Two (2) WD3200AAKS 320GB (Flight Simulator RAID-0)Corsair CM PSU-750TX | Asus 20X DVD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup: she ain't got whut it takes! Take a deep breath and.....pjASUS P5B; C2D E6600 oc @3.346gig; nVidia 8900GTX; 2gig OCZ PC2-8000 Platinum; TripleHead2Go 3x19" VA926; Homebuilt yoke and pedals, throttle quadrant and 6-pack thrust levers + TRackIR4, VoxATC - no blurries and good for another year. . . :+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things. If you are using a single core CPU, get rid of SP1/SP2 and use RTM. After the texture loader was parallelized in SP1/SP2 it no longer works properly on single core. So if your staying with that CPU RTM is the only way to get rid of your blurries. If you want blurries fixed and want to keep SP1/SP2 you need a quad. A daul core will help but texture loading will still not be as good as RTM with a single core. The only way to get texture loading back to what it was RTM is to go with a Quad. Trust me on this as I had been fighting blurries since SP1, and since then I have gone from 2.8Ghz single, to 3.6Ghz dual, to the quad that I now have. Only now that I have a quad do I consider texture loading to be acceptable with SP1/SP2. Of course, as mentioned, texture loading works fine on a single core provided you do not use SP1/SP2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Wow, I've had a single core since beta testing began, what 3>years ago, and I have never seen this! I had SP1, SP2 and now>Acceleration installed and still don't see this!! Any MS links>that state this?>>Thanks in advance!> >JimCan it noob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Two things. If you are using a single core CPU, get rid of>SP1/SP2 and use RTM. After the texture loader was>parallelized in SP1/SP2 it no longer works properly on single>core. So if your staying with that CPU RTM is the only way to>get rid of your blurries. >>If you want blurries fixed and want to keep SP1/SP2 you need a>quad. A daul core will help but texture loading will still>not be as good as RTM with a single core. The only way to get>texture loading back to what it was RTM is to go with a Quad. >>>Trust me on this as I had been fighting blurries since SP1,>and since then I have gone from 2.8Ghz single, to 3.6Ghz dual,>to the quad that I now have. Only now that I have a quad do I>consider texture loading to be acceptable with SP1/SP2. Of>course, as mentioned, texture loading works fine on a single>core provided you do not use SP1/SP2.I'm not certain a quad is required. I have an E8500 with 2 GB's RAM at 1066mhz and a EVGA 8800 GTS 512 and have never had a problem with blurries, stutters, or FPS, and I am running most of the current addons with most everything turned up to full, except bloom and lens flare is off. Although I did have my install and system tuned by FS-GS. But I agree that the OP's computer is probably not up to the task to get that kind of performance. Probably a dual running at least 3.0 ghz per core should be ample.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a couple of suggestions that worked for me. Search the forums there are tons of posts on blurries and generally you will find advice that is completely opposite from each other. Some say lock your frame-rates others say lock it. Some say edit the Texture_bandwidth to 40 others 400. No mater what people say I have discovered through several systems that FS is very system specific. What worked on one machine may not work on another. Before i got my new computer I used the mipbias=6 tweak and that did wonders for me. Also try FSAutostart and shutdown all of your OS's unnecessary background services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>Wow, I've had a single core since beta testing began, what>3>>years ago, and I have never seen this! I had SP1, SP2 and>now>>Acceleration installed and still don't see this!! Any MS>links>>that state this?>>>>Thanks in advance!>> >>Jim>>>Can it noob. >>>You are calling a member with over 13,000 posts a noob? LMAO... The irony...As for your quad core is a must suggestion, I have an E8400 C2D overclocked to 4GHz (500 x 8) and my FSX is STUTTER FREE and BLURRIES FREE. So to say that a C2D is not enough for FSX, sounds more like a "noob" comment to me.______________Efrain RuizLiveDISPATCHhttp://www.livedispatch.orgCooler Master cosmos SDFI LP UT P35 T2R (3-17-2008 BIOS) | E8400 @ 4GHz (500MHz x 8) | 2 x 2GB OCZ Flex II PC9200EVGA Nvidia GTX280Two (2) WD3200AAKS 320GB (Operating System RAID-0) | Two (2) WD3200AAKS 320GB (Flight Simulator RAID-0)Corsair CM PSU-750TX | Asus 20X DVD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>>>You are calling a member with over 13,000 posts a noob?>LMAO... The irony...>Well thats becuase the OP asked for tips, which I gave, then Mr Skorna had to show up and make some kind of belittling remark toward me. If he had been around during the lauch of SP1 he would know all the headaches which were caused by the change to the texture loader. Nobody can deny it has been changed. >I'm not certain a quad is required. I have an E8500 with 2>GB's RAM at 1066mhz and a EVGA 8800 GTS 512 and have never had>a problem with blurries, stutters, or FPSTry flying at 300knots at tree top level on your dual, then toss in a quad and do the same test. You will see the quad loads textures much better, perhaps twice as fast. For a guy flying at 30k a dual is probably fine, but for a guy like me who flies low and fast, a quad is the only way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Try flying at 300knots at tree top level on your dual, then>toss in a quad and do the same test. You will see the quad>loads textures much better, perhaps twice as fast. For a guy>flying at 30k a dual is probably fine, but for a guy like me>who flies low and fast, a quad is the only way to go.FWIW, I just did that same test you recommended with my C2D and there were no blurries whatsoever. A 4GHz C2D is good enough to fly without blurries at 300 kts at tree top level.______________Efrain RuizLiveDISPATCHhttp://www.livedispatch.orgCooler Master cosmos SDFI LP UT P35 T2R (3-17-2008 BIOS) | E8400 @ 4GHz (500MHz x 8) | 2 x 2GB OCZ Flex II PC9200EVGA Nvidia GTX280Two (2) WD3200AAKS 320GB (Operating System RAID-0) | Two (2) WD3200AAKS 320GB (Flight Simulator RAID-0)Corsair CM PSU-750TX | Asus 20X DVD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In any case, it's going to be a CPU issue. The CPU has to process each frame and send it along to the Vcard. In FS, the Vcard doesn't do much. Once a user had an 8800GT or above, the Vcard becomes simply a conduit for CPU horsepower. Frames occur at various levels of resolution. The CPU process areas furthest away from the airplane at lower resolutions. This takes less CPU horsepower. As these areas get closer to the airplane, the CPU tries to reprocess to a higher resolution. Notice how scenes seem to 'pop' into higher resolutions as the airplane flys over them. If the CPU does not have the horsepower to 'up-res' these scenes, they simply stay at that lower resolution. This is called 'the fuzzies.' The CPU simply does not have the horsepower to do all its other stuff AnD up-res scenery as the airplane flys by. Scenery looses. Aces re-programmed so scenery loading (i.e., "up-res") is now shared by the other 1-3 cores. That's the how multi-cores can help. During gameplay, cores #2 (3&4) process scenery loading (the up-res process) and reduce 'the fuzzies.' A single core has to go it alone and an Old single core will never have the HP to keep up. But at least, turn that water down. It's a hog even with a core2 at 4G. Also AG, Scenery Complex, Special effects and traffic has gotta go, completely. No shadows or bloom. These are All CPU intensive and a single core needs all its wits for frame and general scenery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks alot for everyones input.I did expect the response of "get a new PC..." but was hoping someone had found the holy grail of tweak/config. Honestly I don't want to go back to FS9, that would take too much effort, to get it back to anything like FSX, now that I have UTX Europe, add-on landclass and aircraft for FSX.It was mentioned a few times that going back to RTM FSX may certainly help, due to changes made in SP1/SP2 to suit dual/quad core CPUs in the SPs.Does anyone know if add-on aircraft, that may have been designed for SP2, would have problems running on the original RTM? The main add-ons that I have, apart from freeware, are Level-D 767, Flight1 Super80 and Feelthere ERJ145. Also, what is the correct way to go back to RTM? Does one have to uninstall, then reinstall from the original disks, or is it possible to just reinstall the original disks over the top of SP2?Presumably one can save the FSX.cfg and Scenery.cfg and replace back after reinstall. Will one need to reinstall the above payware aircraft or not?Thanks again for all the advice.Regards,Stuart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<"then Mr Skorna had to show up"> ???????Mr. 53-post "SillyEagle" - there's absolutely nothing wrong with Jim's post #5. He merely states his experiences - which echo mine and probably hundreds, if not thousands of us - and to publicly refer to him as "noob" - is insulting to all of us. Jim Skorna has helped more folks on this site than anyone else, perhaps with the exception of Bill Leaming. ..and YOU might want to put your ego on the shelf before voicing a "must have a quad-core" opinion on what another "must" have. Some folks simply can't afford the latest and greatest with all the bells and whistles.To STUART H:-I had blurries with a few of the early ATI products, but in the last few years and particularly since switching to my existing system with the 8900gtx - have no blurries whatsoever, and very often do (RA Spit, ASA warbirds, etc.,) tree-top runs down the valleys from KPAE, popping up to land at Renton. I have NO blurries. That's Seattle area, with most things - except water and traffic - middle to high - autogen full, 2500 houses, 1200 trees - set up per Nick N's recommendations and using nHancer... and the magic, slightly outdated, C2D. My beast is now 20 months old (the 8900gtx was bought when it came out). If you look around you can probably pick up a 6600 and the bits to modify your rig to at least as good as mine for less than a grand nowadays. You don't "need" a quad.OK - I'm done.We love ya Jimmy! (in a brotherly way, of course..) :-lol ;-)("some kind of belittling remark" indeed. mutter, mutter, mutter..)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Hardware:ASUS motherboard, AMD 2.4 Athlon single processor,7200 rpm hard disk,2 gbytes DDR Ram,GForce XFX 7600GT graphics - 256 mb RAM"That is your problem. I used to have an Athlon64 3500+ and X800XT videocard, and I still was unable to play FSX SP1 or SP2.. Even with autogen and most sliders turned down (framerate of 20 to 30+), the scenery was still extremely blurry. On my current dual-core system, scenery stays sharp even when the framerate creeps below 20.FSX RTM doesn't have this problem, but SP1 and SP2 are designed for dual-core systems and are simply not plyable on single-core machines. Go back to FSX RTM (no service pack) and turn down autogen to imrpvoe the ridiculously low framerate of the RTM version... Or switch to FS9 - it will actually look *better* than FSX on your system, because you'll be able to play it at much higher detail settings.If your motherboard is a Socket 939 board, and supports X2 CPUs, you could try to find a used X2.. while your framerate won't be much better, the blurries should be almost cured and it's a very cheap upgrade. A better option is to build an entirely new system, ideally a quad-core one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding of the multithreading capability of FSX is that it is quite limited. I would be very interested in MEASURED performance data that demonstrates the ability of FSX to schedule more than two threads for simultaneous processing.Can you please show us the CPU utilization per processor and per FSX thread while "flying at 300knots at tree top level " on a quad core machine. A copy of the output from something like ProcessExplorer or xperf would certainly settle the question about the ability of FSX to schedule four threads SIMULTANEOUSLY. I would like to see processor activity sampled at a slow rate (once per 5 seconds) but measured over a minute or so. A slow sample rate will not skew the results due to sampling driving a core and a long sample period will demonstrate the ability to keep four processors running on a regular basis for a significant period. I am interested in your results because I am thinking of upgrading my processor and need some MEASURED data to compare fast clocks to multiple processors. Multiple processors are of little value if FSX can not schedule threads to them on a regular and significant basis. My system is an E6600/4GB / 8800GTS(175.19) /Vista32/SP1 / FSX/Accel/SP2 - when flying (PC-7 300 knots @1000') from McChord AFB to SEA with all settings to almost their max values and using GEX scenery upgrades: one processor is at 95%+ all the time and the other processor spikes at about 97% for a second or so and then drops to 50% or so for many seconds. I see only two active threads fsx.exe (90% cpu) and API.DLL!Ordinal307.. which averages about 45% CPU and never exceeds 75% for even short periods. I see an occasional burst of activity from other threads but nothing more than one or two percent CPU.AND - NO BLURRIES! I get framerates of 31 or so in the VC and 25 - 28 from outside behind and above the plane. I have AI traffic down to 20% and no road trafffic and boat/ferry traffic below 30%. Real life data would be very helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.. and my understanding from various sources/heresay/intel/gossip docs over the last year - and I may be behind the times and therefore quite wrong here - is that the two C2D's from which the quad is constructed - spend more time discussing and deciding backplane management priority issues - than they do processing, and, as FSX only utilizes a second core - not four - there's little to be gained. I wouldn't necessarily promote that argument, though, because almost every iteration of the Intel chip is an improvement over the previous. As well - whereas Mr. SillyEagle may be correct concerning the performance of his quad with his setup-up, I will bet there's an equal number of folks with blurries and unexpectedly poor performance using that same quad, and we would find something else in their system that is different: bios; graphics; FSX settings, sound, drivers, power supply, cooling, etc.. Even ten identical systems will often display differing performance figures. No two systems are alike, and no two users feel the same way about their simulator. Stuart H - I had a quick thought - why don't you give Michael Greenblatt a call at www.fs-gs.com. This fellow knows more about setting up a pc than the Chinese know about rice.:-beerchug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sure wouldn't recommend an owner of a mid to hi end dual dropping $300 on a quad. Those additional 2 cores will only help scenery load more quickly. The result is that higher scenery resolutions will be displayed closer to the airplane. "Blurries" are simply scenery resolutions that have not loaded to their highest resolutions. This is where multicores help FSIf any system can maintain the highest scenery resolutions (AG, et al) at 300kts and 1500 feet . . . don't touch nothin'. You have arrived. That is every bit of scenery performance FSX has to provide. That is as good as it will Ever get with FSX. If a user went for a dual, that user is just stuck with it. An upgrade will almost certainly be required sooner than for a quad core owner . . . but since FS is being observed at a 100% performance level, at least a user's perceptions and (therefore) experience won't suffer! FPS and AI are another story entirely. That's about clock speed on a single core. Those performance factors have Nothing to do with the number of cores in use.Any quad core user can testify that their 4 cores are always engaged during FSX ops. The thicker the scenery gets, the more they work. However I really can't conceive of a tangible benchmark that would define this usage. However (still) even if it WaS possible, unless an observer is willing to acknowledge that FS's (then defined) usage of these additional cores Must specify increased scenery loading performance, any test would not move the discussion forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites