s0cks

Members
  • Content count

    96
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Wait, alcohol dehydrates you so drinking that probably wasn't a good idea!
  2. PNW Seattle is basically unplayable for me unless Scenery Complexity is Very Sparse or Sparse. Scenery Complexity seems to be the hardest FPS hitter. Big cities with custom scenery and large airports always bring my computer to it's knees. I know I don't have the fastest CPU in the world (shock, it's not overclocked!) but the hit I get seems unreasonable. This has always been an issue (even in FSX), but in P3D with Orbx the problem is far more pronounced. I don't think this is necessarily an Orbx issue, but rather an engine issue. I could be wrong though.
  3. That means I have to d/l 10.30, which takes a lot longer than a screenshot! Tbh though, I've always found 10.25 to be butter smooth too and unless they've changed autogen and ground textures I can't see how it could be much different? Some of the screenshots in the screenshot forum don't seem to indicate a drastic change in graphics.
  4. GMO is a real problem in terms of biodiversity.
  5. s0cks

    Making FSX better...

    To get more speed you will need a higher overclock. Ideally Intel is better as they have much better clock for clock performance (a 3.4GHz i5 is faster than a 3.4Ghz Phenom). May be worth trying P3Dv2 though, as it's more optimized and they are optimizing further for v2.3 update. Overclocking has it's downsides. It requires aftermarket coolers (or liquid cooling), and it produces heat, which means more fans, which means more noise. I personally got sick of the whirring sound of fans so I went back to stock speeds and replaced everything with slow & quiet fans. I love how quiet it is now, so I hope that P3D can eek out some better performance from more modest processors.
  6. s0cks

    "Kids React to Old Computers"

    The walkman shocked me the most! I'm only 29, but even I remember cranking the old walkman, then discman's came along but would skip too easily when running (and fitting a CD size device in your pocket... not easy). Then minidisc's came along... I had so many minidiscs! Was great for portability. Finally MP3 players and the iPod and we entered the digital music era!
  7. You are right, it's not a true reading. I don't think it accounts for AA. Use nVidia inspector (or some other program) to monitor VRAM usage when in XP.
  8. The PMDG is a complex aircraft, it's likely that regardless of what you do your system still struggles to simulate this beast. You would find with a default aircraft vastly different results. As I said a few responses ago, in these circumstances having unlimited frees up some much needed processing power so you can maintain as close to 30 as possible. a. pointless as you cannot render your PMDG at >60fps anyway. b. again pointless, you will just lose FPS. c. not a surprising result when comparing to a and b. Pure smoothness is only achievable when: a) the internal limiter is set AND b) your computer can render the scene at the limit imposed AND c) fps matches, or is half of, your monitor refresh rate with vsync enabled Anything else will produce stutters (be it few or many).
  9. After much more testing I would say this tweak is a no go, and probably mostly placebo. I tried a number of long flights (some using the tweak, some not) and I really couldn't tell the difference other than if I checked task manager. On the plus side though, this tweak prompted me to change my affinity mask from 14 to 15, so that all cores were utilized. Doing this has definitely improved performance by roughly 30-40% in heavy areas (roughly a 3-5fps gain). I understand that the original reason to set 14 was to leave core 0 for Windows tasks, but I found losing that entire core cost me more in terms of performance. It may also be a legacy tweak from the days of XP, Vista, and 7. I use WIndows 8.1 which may process CPU instructions differently.
  10. I too get terrible blurries in unlimited when travelling @ over 200kts. I suspect though, that those with more processing power won't see this happen as often. With limited I can travel up to ~600kts close to ground and still not see blurries. This plus the increased fluidity makes it a must have. I tried an external limiter plus pre-rendered frames set from 1-5 but nothing could match the internal limiter for smoothness and clarity. It was however better using an external limiter + unlimited than it was using nothing but unlimited, so some may find that a good trade-off if they want to keep those extra frames.
  11. Haha, maybe I have Before this I did have an i5 system overclocked to 4.2GHz, and other than being faster (and hotter), both performed as I would have expected. More frames when unlimited, smoother when limited. It's rather irrelevant though as different clock speeds won't cause a CPU to act differently. I don't think any processor here can handle FSX @ 60fps in all scenarios, so regardless, we are all hitting a CPU wall at some point or another. I've worked as an IT technician for over 10 years now, and so far I can say most people talk crap. I don't mean to be disrespectful here, it's just that I don't think many people understand or validate their results correctly (and not just in flight sim). Every tweak or settings has logic behind it, it is not random. We may not know what the tweak does, or how our systems are configured in a way that effects that tweak, but every time one of us uses it, it will be making the same change as anyone else who uses it. This one is simple though, as it's fairly easy to understand. If your frame-rate is up & down you will get frame time variance. This will cause stutters. End of story. If you can keep your framerate steady with unlimited, great! It will be smooth. So far I've seen nothing that contradicts this. If you can maintain a smooth framerate then unlimited will be smooth. If your framerate fluctuates a lot then it will be smoother limited. Frame time is the key figure here - one not reported by FSX.
  12. s0cks

    Advanced AA ?

    You don't have SMAA enabled? I dunno, but I never got any AA bar SMAA to work with SweetFX so I assumed the two didn't gel. I also read a few posts by others confirming so I left it to rest. Might have to revisit some time. Perhaps an older version worked....
  13. Hmm not so sure now. Just had another test and so long as I set AF=15 eventually all cores start working and I get even load. This merely helps to kick those other cores into action faster it seems. I'll test some more but maybe not so incredible after all.
  14. Oh wow! This is rather incredible... Before After The difference in smoothness is night & day!