Search the Community

Hullo, I bought X-Plane 10 not long ago and I am really enjoying it. I also have FSX but I have not used it since I acquired X-Plane; I have not quit on it though. However, FSX is a 32-bit application and I am using the 64-bit version of X-plane 10. Now, I am not a hardware expert but I could imagine that the two applications make use of my hardware in different ways. This is my iMac: 27" iMac (medio 2011): Intel Core i5-2400 CPU (3,1GHz) 8GB DDR3 RAM AMD ATi Radeon HD 6970M (1GB DDR5 RAM) Can anyone here tell me if I would see a better performance if I up my RAM from 8GB to 16GB? Or is X-Plane more focused on GPU and VRAM. In addition, would it be worth the cost of the RAM modules; approx. $142/€134/£97 for 2 x 4GB modules. Thanks for your help in advance

Hi all! Whenever I try to play FSX after about a minute it crashes saying it ran out of memory. I didn't used to do this. Just in the past few weeks. Computer Specs: Windows 7 Professional 32-bit. Intel Core 2 Duo @ 3.00GHz 4096MB of Ram(~4GB) 750 GB HD with 132 GB remaining Any help?

This is worth a mention for better performance control alt delete brings up task master click applications tab and have a look what is currently running on your system, you will be very surprised at whats in there ... click on the non essentials and click the " end task tab" and free up some memory just before you take off .

I have 2 questions:1. After today hotfix, during ILS autoland i have on PDF "SINGLE CH" even after engage second AP. someone else with the same problem? Solutions? and most important:2. I have windows 7 64bit, 4GB memory. Do I have to do paging? I did this before, when I had windows XP(min an max value - 3072) and I wonder: to leave it, or not to leave it,question is now? NGX works fine for me most of time - 22-26FPS, if I move the mouse - 16-19FPS, It's ok for me. But FSX freezes sometimes just for a second - like a slideshow, and it can be very annoying, especially if this happens on take off and final. I don't know the reason - probably CPU overload, but i want to try everything until next year when I plan to buy new system.I have Intel Core 2 Duo, 2.53 MHz, 4GB RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GTAny suggestions?

A lot of people seem to be recommending the 4GB version above the 2GB particularly for muti display setups. However since the GTX770s memory bandwidth is 256bit (compared to GTX780s 3GB 384bit VRAM). I'm planning: i7-3770 (OC ~ 4GHz) GTX770 8GB DDR3 Mainly for X-Plane and some FSX. Q1) Am I going to be able to make good use of double the VRAM fon the 4GB card for the same memory bandwidth? Q2) Do I really need 4GB VRAM in the X-Plane server machine when I can network more PC's for additional views?

Can anyone give me an idea how much memory FSX is using with the 777 loaded? PMDG minimum requirements state that the 777 might run on a 32 bit OS but it isn't supported. So basically 32 bit users buy at their own risk. I'm trying to get an idea of what memory usage actually is to see whether it might be worth a shot running it under XP-32. Migrating to Win 7 64 bit from XP would be a major headache, apart from the additional cost of the new OS. Given PMDG's refund policy (or lack of one) I don't want to buy the 777 and then find it won't load on my system. If anyone has managed to get the 777 running using 32 bit windows I'd be interested to hear how well it runs. Thanks in advance.

Hi, I recently purchased Xplane 10 on Steam and have had some of the best time on any flight simulator thus far. The game runs perfectly, and completely mesmerizes me. However... After about 10 hours of gameplay (on 10.20), I downloaded some simple Lua plugins (Headshake, landing speed, etc), and some aircraft addons (757, and 727). So far, X-plane10 has been 1000x times better than my experience in FSX, and I play it daily. However, now that the 10.30 update has been released, after I start a flight, my Xplane says "Xplane is running out of memory: scenery loading has been disabled", then I click "understood" play for another minute, and it says that "Xplane has completely run out of memory", then it crashes. Thinking something might be missing in the Xplane files, I verified the Game Cache on steam, and it found 127 files that were missing. It then downloaded these files and I thought that the game was fixed, but I was wrong; it still said the same "running out of memory" message. I have completely re-installed the game, including the Europe and North America scenery packs (provided by Xplane), and the game still crashes. I even loaded the default KSEA airport, and that scenery was causing the out of memory message as well! Now many would assume that this problem is caused by a weak computer, but just a day earlier, I was running the game on very high rendering settings, and was getting 45-78 FPS consistently. At the bottom of the rendering page, it said that the total Vram the game was using was around 1.7GB, which would be no issue for my 4GB GPU, and on Task Manager, only 40-50% of my 8GB of RAM are being used... I don't know what "memory" Xplane is running out of. PC Specs: OS: Windows 8.1 64bit CPU: i7 4770k @ 4.2GHz RAM: 8GB @1600MHz GPU: GTX 770 4GB Mobo: MSI G45 HDD: 1TB Seagate SSHD SSD: 120GB Kingston SSD If there is a fix for this problem, please let me know! If there is none, how could I revert back to the "stable" 10.20 version in which I had no issues? Thanks a lot.

Hi all! I've never had any problems with OOMs in FSX since I switched to a 64bit OS. But recently there was a discussion in another forum about FSX RAM usage and how GPUs with large amounts of video memory might cause OOMs. The discussion was inspired by these two threads here on Avsim: http://forum.avsim.n...x/#entry2160874 http://forum.avsim.n...25#entry2100237 There were some questions whether GPUs with high amounts of VRAM installed could actually deprive FSX of virtual address space and cause an OOM. So I ran a few tests trying to prove it. I only have a GPU with 1GB VRAM, but since the GPU drivers can throw in some shared system memory if the installed VRAM is not enough (dxdiag reports around 4GB video memory on my system), I was hoping to show that if I tell FSX that there's plenty of video memory available using the VideoMemoryOverride switch in fsx.cfg I could actually cause OOMs. Well, the result in short is that I couldn't find that VideoMemoryOverride does anything at all. Neither increasing nor decreasing the values seemed to have any effect on VAS usage or VRAM usage as reported by Nvidia Inspector. I was only able to show that use of the DX10 preview mode can actually reduce VAS usage significantly. However I would be interested if that's just my system or if other people can't make this tweak work as well. So I will write up the test details here, hoping that someone will be able to reproduce my findings. Theoretical Background (I do not know much about DirectX, so this stuff is just what I read somewhere else. Please correct me if I'm wrong.) FSX is a 32bit application that --when run on a 64bit OS-- can address at most 4GB of virtual memory (->Virtual Address Space, VAS). DirectX9 applications must use their in-process VAS to address the GPU's video memory. Hence the more video memory FSX uses, the less address space is left for the actual application. There is an undocumented tweak found by ******* 'Bojote' Altuve called VideoMemoryOverride that is supposed to limit the maximum amount of video memory used by FSX. It should go in the section of fsx.cfg that contains the actual graphics card being used by the app: [DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE.0] //VideoMemoryOverride=268435456 //0.25 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=536870912 //0.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=1073741824 //1.0 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=1610612736 //1.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=2147483648 //2.0 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=2684354560 //2.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=3221225472 //3.0 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=3758096384 //3.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=4294967296 //4.0 GB Mode=1680x1050x16 Anisotropic=1 AntiAlias=1 [DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE.0.0] Mode=1680x1050x32 Anisotropic=1 AntiAlias=1 //VideoMemoryOverride=268435456 //0.25 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=536870912 //0.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=1073741824 //1.0 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=1610612736 //1.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=2147483648 //2.0 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=2684354560 //2.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=3221225472 //3.0 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=3758096384 //3.5 GB //VideoMemoryOverride=4294967296 //4.0 GB I don't know why I have two entries in my config (with suffix .0 and .0.0). I guess the second one is for a specific display (I only have one monitor connected to my GPU). Test Setup Since I do not have problems with OOMs the way I use FSX, I tried to conceive a scenario that would bring FSX down to its knees. I chose the PMDG 737 NGX and OrbX's PNW demo area for the tests, since these two are the most complex aircraft/scenery addons I have on my system. For these tests I programmed a Flight KSEA->KHQM->KSEA and recorded VAS usage on the return leg at 25nm distance to KSEA. I chose this scenario because the flight goes both over FSX default terrain as well as OrbX's addon scenery. Also, there is a lot of AI traffic at KSEA. I disabled all addons in dll.xml and exe.xml that could possibly interact with FSX during the tests and thus mess with the results (except the PMDG/OrbX libraries of course). FSUIPC unreg was also disabled. I actually wanted to record VAS usage even closer to KSEA (7nm) because it showed in some preliminary tests that VAS usage was highest there. However I got g3d.dll errors on the return leg pretty consistently shortly after passing the 25nm distance mark (at approx 24.5 nm), so I had to choose the 25nm mark as the point to record the test data. The programmed flight was low and slow to put max stress on the scenery engine (155kts, 1400ft altitude). I also opened a second window in fly-by view to keep the scenery engine busy. Additionally, I used the thunderstorms weather theme and enabled the NGX's head up display and ND terrain mode, hoping that it would further increase memory usage. The tests were all performed using a saved situation to ensure that the tests are repeatable. After loading the situation, I only pressed the NGX's TOGA clickspot, took off and enabled the autopilot at 400ft AGL (I left the gear extended). No messing around with view points or anything durring the flight. I recorded VAS usage using VMMap and GPU VRAM usage with NVidia Inspector. After each test, FSX was restarted. Once the test situation was loaded, I reset the stats in NVidia Inspector and selected the fsx.exe process to monitor in VMMAp. At the 25nm mark on the return leg, I pressed F5 in VMMap to display the current memory usage and took a screenshot to record the results. Additional test and system details: Windows 7 Pro 64bit FSX Acceleration NGX Sp1c Orbx PNW demo area (the current one with KHQM) Latest Orbx libs at that time (120328) FTX night mode on REX2 with HD textures installed (DXT5) Bojote's shader 3.0 mod JustFlight's TrafficX with recompiled traffic bgl All kinds of freeware replacement textures by Aime Leclerq installed (including TreeX) FSX ran in windowed mode for the tests, window maximized at 1680x1050 resolution (minus what the Windows task bar and window frame steal from that) Screensaver disabled NVidia driver v295.73, NVidia inspector v1.9.5.11 GPU settings as detailed here, using 8xS settings, frames locked to 30fps in the driver, no VSync My fsx.cfg and the saved situation files are included as attachments (please rename to .zip): Test Results I ran tests using VideoMemoryOverride (VMO) settings for 0.25,0.5, 1 and 3 GB of video memory. This is a screenshot of a typical test situation: During these tests, VAS usage was pretty high (300-500 MB free VAS left). Occasionally, VAS usage went further up (100-200MB free VAS) but dropped shortly thereafter. However, sometimes during these VAS usage peaks an OOM would occur. In those cases where I didn't get a g3d.dll error at 25nm before KSEA, I let the test run to see what happens when getting closer to KSEA with all its AI traffic. At approx 10nm distance, VAS usage went up (100-200MB free VAS left), but unlike above, it stayed at this level. I did not include these test results as there were too few of them. Furthermore, I ran a series of tests using FSX's DX10 preview mode. As expected, the VAS usage was significantly lower during these tests. But the VideoMemoryOverride switch didn't work there either, which I didn't expect since video memory is adressed differently anyway. The actual VRAM usage was a little higher in DX10, but it was the same for all values of VideoMemoryOverride. Also, here is a representative screenshot from one of the DX10 tests: Summary As you can see, there is little variation in the numbers apart from the differences between DX9 and DX10 which leads me to the conclusion that the VideoMemoryOverride config switch does not work. However, I do not want to write off this switch so early. There's still a possibility that the switch can work in other situations. So I would be interested if someone else (especially those people with a 3GB GPU) can try these tests on his or her system and post their findings.

Many of you might be aware of this already but for those who aren't I've found a way of reclaiming up to 200Mb of VAS which may be the difference between getting an OOM and not. This is with the MS version of FSX. Flying FS Labs Concorde-X out of Fly Tampa Dubai the VAS available dropped down to 500-600Mb. As I flew away from the city I selected Options - Settings - Display and changed Filtering from Anisotropic to Off. Pressed OK and then went back into the menu and set it back to Anisotropic again. The net gain from this was around 200Mb. I'm enroute to HESH and available VAS is now up to 1072Mb. That's more than enough for my approach and landing. Hope it works for you. :smile:

Hello readers So sure, I could delete my FSX and start over to clean up my add-ons, scenery and more but I was wondering if there is another way to solve my problem of "too little VAS" causing regular OOM (Out of Memory) errors now. I have been reducing my settings (radius, texture-load, scenery all off) to increase VAS availability to FSX but without real success. I notice minimal improvements, and while yes, all those things reduce memory load, there is some culprit in my add-ons because I have only started having this problem recently and so far have not been able to find out what add-on this is. I start FSX and notice that FSUIPC is showing me 3GB left, shortly after 2GB and then I load a payware aircraft, let's say 737 NGX; some drop is normal here with the PMDG, then I have about 1,7 GB left and soon 1GB by just making myself dizzy in the spot view.... So if I were to start a flight, i would be starting with only 1GB left... this only start happening recently. With only 1GB left I would see the FSX ran out of memory error and have been. So I was wondering how I could find out how much memory each add-ons are using, is there a tool to display this? This would also be interesting to try and manage the limitations. I have also tried to regain some space by disabling some add-ons in the dll.xml but not much difference, I expect some add-on is not using memory correctly. Is there a table of reference? Some information already published that you are aware of? Thanks for any and all replies! Always much appreciated! Greetings, Joe

My memory is rated at 1066MHz 5-5-5-15 2.1V and has an Extreme Memory Profile (XMP). In BIOS the options are "Auto", "Profile2", and "Disabled". I'm currently overclocking the CPU but planning to keep the memory at stock values. My overclocked system passes Intel Burn Test and OCCT at 3.99GHz but keeps failing Prime95 at even 3.90GHz. So I'm wondering if it's the memory settings? Q1) What exactly does "Auto" configure (I assume Profile2 is the XMP profile)? Q2) Does the XMP profile keep the dram voltage at 2.1V? Q3) Should I disable XMP and set all the memory values manually? Q4) Is it better to set the dram voltage manually when overclocking the system? Current memory BIOS settings are below (I set "Performance Enhance" to "Standard" when testing a higher overclock). Thanks in advance for your replies.

Hello pilots, I´ve made an update of a small tool of mine that I would like to share with you. VAS Monitor is a tool that allow you to see how much VAS memory you have on your flights on FSX and P3d. You can see the VAS amount, set a value to alarm you and pause the sim when a minimum VAS is reached (with visual and audible alarm) and a button to scramble your ambient music of FSPassengers, so not all your flights will have the same music sequence. It´s very simple and free. I hope it helps you in some way. Requeriments: FSUIPC (not registered); VAS Monitor Download P.S. Sorry about my english, it´s not my main language. Cheers Fred Matias

Hello captains, I don't know if here is the right place to put this but I think that this is an interesting tool. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6atkUYYWmkteHhkaG5aUkVpcnc/edit?usp=sharing This is a software that I wrote to myself but I think that it can be helpful to many people. This software monitors your FSX VAS. It's very intuitive. Just double click on setup to install. After the installation, double click the FSX VAS Monitor icon. If the FSX is already started, FSX VAS Monitor should automatically start to read the FSUIPC offset 024C. If the FSX was started after the FSX VAS Monitor, click the Connect Button and it will start monitoring. there are only 4 adjusts to set, the minimum quantity of memory avaliable before trigger the alarm (in MB), if the alarm will run with the red text blinking and a ding sound, and if the FSX VAS Monitor should start directly on system tray. System Requeriments: FSX (obviously) with FSUIPC installed. It works with WideFS too (Ideal to people that use two or more computers). This software is free to distribute. have a good flights... Fred Matias spilfred@gmail.com B)

Can anyone give me an idea how much memory FSX is using with the 777 loaded? PMDG minimum requirements state that the 777 might run on a 32 bit OS but it isn't supported. So basically 32 bit users buy at their own risk. I'm trying to get an idea of what memory usage actually is to see whether it might be worth a shot running it under XP-32. Migrating to Win 7 64 bit from XP would be a major headache, apart from the additional cost of the new OS. Given PMDG's refund policy (or lack of one) I don't want to buy the 777 and then find it won't load on my system. If anyone has managed to get the 777 running using 32 bit windows I'd be interested to hear how well it runs. Thanks in advance.

Recently, I was flying the PMDG 777 from EGLL to KSFO (flight BA285/BAW11M), and my route took me ever so slightly south of Iceland and over the southern part of Greenland. After leaving the west coast of Greenland, I received a high VAS warning from FSUIPC, and I realised that my VAS usage was at 94%. This was significantly higher than I would have expected, and - eventually - I got an OOM error (my first one in Prepar3d V3). I honestly can't figure out what caused it; P3D handles VAS very well, and I have flown this flight once before with exactly the same scenery and settings, and there were absolutely no issues. The only difference between this flight* and my previous flight** is that this flight's route took me much closer to Iceland (further north). Therefore, I can only think of three possible causes: 1) Something in Iceland led to an extremely significant increase in VAS usage (in spite of the fact that I don't own any scenery in Iceland); 2) Orbx recently updated the Orbx Libraries, and this was related to whatever caused the OOM error; 3) I flew over Manchester, and UK2000's EGCC caused a dramatic increase in VAS usage (which I find difficult to believe). I am aware that Orbx have a free Iceland demonstration product; however, I have never installed it. I would like to emphasise that the VAS usage when I flew this flight previously was nowhere near 94% when I was leaving the west coast of Greenland, and all of my scenery and settings were exactly the same. The only difference (as far as I am aware) was the route. Thank you for taking the time to read this; I would be very appreciative if anyone could provide a possible explanation for this seemingly random increase in VAS usage. Cheers, Oliver *This route (with an OOM error): WOBUN UL10 DTY DCT SAPCO UN57 TNT UL28 PENIL UL70 BAGSO DCT ERNAN DCT BALIX DCT BREKI DCT 66N040W 66N050W DCT EPMAN NCAE YYN J530 GTF J7 LKT DCT LLC J32 FMG J94 ECA RISTI4 **Previous route (without an OOM error): WOBUN DCT WELIN UT420 TNT UL28 RODOL UM65 TENSO UL603 REMSI DCT DIMLI DCT GINGA DCT GOMUP DCT 61N020W 63N030W 65N040W 66N050W DCT EPMAN NCAE YYN J530 GTF J7 LKT DCT LLC J32 FMG J94 ECA