Afterburner

And I don't trust LM are working on this given their silence on the official forum. But I sure hope they do.

This is encouraging news! A fresh installation after having deleted all of the folders and generated files can be really helpful in driving out the gremlins inside the computer system that are responsible for different kinds of odd errors. I am pulling my thumbs that the success will last for you!

I find it strange that there has been almost no discussion about the registry trick that you found on the FSL forum and also about the DX shader files. I find the lack of a statement by LM on the DXGI error disappointing. If you check out all threads on the official forum related to this error, you will hardly find any responses by LM employees. On the other hand, LM can only address errors that are reproducible, which in case of the DXGI error is hard to do. Some users experience this error with high GPU load, some (like you did) get it during cruise altitude with low GPU load. Add to this the observation that this error happens more frequently with PMDG planes than with default ones. (And LM may argue that they cannot be blamed if such error doesn't pop up with their default airplanes). Personally, when I had this error, it was with PMDG 777 (and just once with Majestic Dash-8) at detailed airports after having landed and parked. I rolled back an older driver from fall 2020 recently (with which I can't remember having experienced this error - it's the driver 452.06), and I also deleted the DX cache, as you did (while leaving "Max Performance" in NCP). So far no errors.

Why would you want to touch a running system if you are convinced that the problem is solved? For testing purpose?

Ray, have you had a DXGI error yet with Max Performance setting and TdrDelay=0? I am asking because it sounds like you had one, and now you want to clear the DX shader cache, but I don't recall...

You are right, the moonlight reflection looks too orange. Here is a personal shot of the moonlight reflection on sea that I made in the real world: Have you tried how things look with EA off? It is known that EA is still bugged when it comes to some colors (such as sunset or moonlight reflection).

The best part of that thread is where someone asked "Have you contacted Microsoft" (about the DX12 Win 10 issue). As if they are going to install P3D with all of the add-ons on their computers and run elimination tests 😆

One reason why this error is annoying is that it is tricky to pinpoint the exact cause. Ever since the first cases of the DXGI hung error came up, I have never seen LM acknowledging that this problem can happen on some systems, less alone providing a solution to it. Some argue that P3D is not to blame, since this error happens with some other games as well (just Google it), so Nvidia and their drivers must be the culprit. However, this error doesn't happen with all games (including FSX and MSFS if I am not mistaken), so Nvidia may argue that it is the fault of the software after all. There must be some problem with the interaction between the OS and the GPU driver, but it's too bad that neither Nvidia nor LM want to dig deeper into it. I have been wondering if this error occurs, why is it simply not possible to reset the GPU driver without crashing the sim from Windows 10 side?

Of course, everyone is free to set up their sim as they please and have their own standards of beauty as the beholder of their eyes 😉 I just wanted to show how Rayleigh scattering looks in the real world.

@airservices If you limit your FPS in P3D, you will always see core 0 running at 100%, no matter how low or high your settings are. This is a FSX/P3D thing that has been out there since FSX. If you get good FPS, I would not worry (although limiting the FPS internally carries a FPS penalty unless you make adjustments to the Fiber Frame Time Fraction). If your monitor can run at 30Hz or anywhere between 30Hz and 60Hz, I would do it as Ray Proudfood suggests: to set unlimited FPS and activate Vsync. Then you will have highest possible performance, while having a lower CPU load in situations where there is not much demand for CPU power.

I respectfully disagree. The blueish haze looks real, as seen on a real-world photo that I have personally taken after departing from the airport UUDD in June (you can see that airport): The human eye can adapt, but it still sees the haze blueish. Also note the haze itself: Although on the ground it looked like the visibility is distant, you see significant haze when you climb up. As I once wrote, having flown FS2004 / FSX / P3D v1-4 for a long time with mostly unlimited visibility (especially without weather programs), most users have adopted to an unrealistic representation of the atmosphere at high altitude, where in looks like distant objects are just within reach due to a lack of haze.

That sucks. Since when did you start having these errors? Is you GPU factory overclocked by chance?

I actually found your thread about it on the LM forum 😉 You stated that it's "clearly associated with DX12", but I don't think it's true, since this problem was well known with P3Dv4 (did you have these errors with v4?) I have them rarely, and mostly when I use PMDG 777 (a coincidence that you also have them when using PMDG 737?). I agree that there is no clue to what could cause them. I never had any back in the old P3Dv3 days with Windows 7 and 382.15 drivers 😉

Did the DXGI DEVICE HUNG message appear out of nowhere, or could you pinpoint the cause?

The cloud draw distance simply gives you the visible radius of rendered clouds around your airplane. If you set the minimum and maximum value identical, the draw distance will be stable at that value at all times. If you set different values, AS will use the smallest radius in situations where it makes sense to reduce the GPU load (for example, on the ground or right after passing the cloud layer), and use higher values if you climb higher above the clouds.

Yes, I noticed the deletion of that post. Any thread or post that asks about the progress of Concorde gets deleted lately, which is very disappointing. A simple "we're working on it" by Lefteris or Andrew would have soothed the worries, but no, they leave us in the dark.

When I saw the "C", I thought about the new Concorde. Sigh that it's not about her... 😐

With your hardware and the awesome 17 fps in clear skies, I doubt there is a lot you can do to improve the performance in cloudy conditions. I would recommend lowering the display resolution in that case.

Have you actually clicked on the green "Install to Sim" button in Envdir? After you turn on ASCA integration and select to install ASCA sky textures only, you need to click on "Install to Sim", so that Envdir installes these textures in your ASCA folder.

The phenomenon that you have experienced is one reason why tinkering around with AF can lead to unforeseen side effects and why it is often best to leave it in the default state, meaning not to enter anything at all. I can't tell you why the textures don't load properly if you use your specific AF setting, but don't you think that by just getting rid of the AF entry you can save yourself some headache? The default setting wouldn't be used if there was something wrong with P3D's own affinity handling.

@Ray Proudfoot Looking at your display settings, I warmly recommend to tick the "receive" boxes next to each shadow type and increase the shadow draw distance. Ticking the "receive" boxes will make sure that when you have cloud shadows cast the ground that the buildings and trees do not shine bright (this is especially noticeable during sunrise/sunset), but become darker. This looks more realistic. Since the shadows are GPU intensive, they will make your video card work harder, but your GPU load is low anyway, so you have a lot of overhead for GPU intensive features.

If it were just silence; I have seen threads with polite enquiries being locked or deleted.

You can adjust the HDR brightness (as well as saturation and bloom) inside P3D lighting settings.

I see nothing wrong with the brightness if you ask me. As far as the green tint, you have a lot of "green" scenery beneath you, so it will obviously appear more greenish than if you were to fly over e.g. a desert. Also, it looks like you are flying during a sunset, during which the Rayleigh scattering that gives the haze a blue color changes its color tone.

Not to be too picky, but when it comes to Concorde, I think that the typical fuel load for the LHR-JFK flight was 92,000 kg rather than the full capacity of 95 tons, which was used on the London-Barbados flight. I would have loved to fly the latter route in the real-world because you were almost guaranteed to reach FL600 due to the cold upper temperatures near equator, and you could get from cold winter in Europe to the tropical heat of Barbados in less than four hours. This route was actually quite fuel efficient for Concorde because with three more tons of fuel, it flew 1000 km farther than the LHR-JFK route. In fairness, it has to be added that the Barbados route was restricted to maximum 80 passengers, and the airplane landed with less fuel than average (around 10 tons).