bobcat999,

 

Are running Steve's DX10 scenery fixer?

So, that's where I'm at.  I think that as soon as iFly 737 is supported on P3D I'll make the switch.

 

 

The iFly does have a P3D version but unfortunately it is a separate purchase. There is not an upgrade path. Back in time they did offer an upgrade price for P3D but it is long since gone..

 

http://www.iflysimsoft.com/ProductsDetail.aspx?PID=17

Slayer,

 

Wow, this nightmare just never ends.

bobcat999,

 

Are running Steve's DX10 scenery fixer?

 

Yes I am.  His later versions are superb and addressed some of the black high level cloud flashes etc.  Once again, it took a day or two to tweak the fixer settings to my liking, but I couldn't use FSX without it now.  DX10 mode is definitely a lot smoother and more stable on my machine, and of course it looks much better as well.  

Well, for 30 bucks, maybe Steve's fixer is worth a try.  I really just want it for a smoother experience.  I have Mytraffic 2013 installed, not for AI traffic, but for Vatsim traffic.  Would anyone be able to share how AI models do in Steve's fixer?  

 

Incidentally, I flew my Aerobus A319 from KCLE (stock airport) to KCLT (Imaginesim) last night.  Pretty smooth experience at KCLE.  Not surprising at a stock airport.  Landing at KCLT wasn't bad.  I had some stutters exiting runway 18C as turning while taxiing usually produces stutters, but they weren't bad.  Overall, not a bad experience.

Yes, it is well worth it.  My machine is virtually identical to yours and it did help with smoothness as with DX10 a bit more work is given to the graphics card, and the in cockpit shadows are superb.  I also think the environmental lighting is better.  There are about fifty changes, improvements, or little tweaks now I think in the DX10 fixer.

 

Let me know if you get the fixer and I will share my settings with you.  Steve has got it fairly well optimised now.  I have had no problems with any AI traffic textures.  The fixer converts everything to DX10 now it seems.  It can convert them back to DX9 if you want.  The only aircraft I have ever had problems with is the old CLS A330/A340, which had opaque windows after conversion.  There is a specific issue with that aircraft though.  All the rest have been fine, even freeware.

 

I use ultimate traffic 2 with FSX.  I chose it because once again it takes load off the FSX bound processor and runs in a separate windows process (on the first core, not the second that FSX runs on), it then injects the traffic in to the sim from outside.  Fairly cool, good models and smoothness, and fairly easy to set up.

 

The list goes on doesn't it?  But it is possible to get a fairly smooth experience eventually. At all but the most complex airports, I can actually run at 4k resolution 30 fps with the 780 card and DX10 now - looks superb.  I was lucky and managed to get a deal on a Samsung 4k 27 inch monitor though; I understand it would be a significant cost for most people. 

Thanks, bobkat999. I'll let you know what I decide.

 

I use ultimate traffic 2 with FSX.  I chose it because once again it takes load off the FSX bound processor and runs in a separate windows process (on the first core, not the second that FSX runs on), it then injects the traffic in to the sim from outside.

 

Does FSX take up less VAS because UT2 "injects the traffic in to the Sim from otside" compared to say MT6 and other traffic generators at the same aircraft count?

 

Thanks,

Dirk

Does FSX take up less VAS because UT2 "injects the traffic in to the Sim from otside" compared to say MT6 and other traffic generators at the same aircraft count?

 

Thanks,

Dirk

 

Good point.  Obviously the program runs outside of FSX on the processor core running Windows, so the main benefit is saving processor cycles on the processor core running FSX, and it will run in its own memory space, but the memory space for the aircraft graphics will probably still be attributed to FSX when they are generated/displayed inside of FSX.

 

All I can say is, since using the later and very well optimised FSX steam versions, I have never had any VAS issues.  The VAS fixes are similar (if not exactly the same) to those in P3D.  The longest session I have had in FSX is eight and a half hours non-stop before I turned it off; in this time I flew lots of legs and loaded in different aircraft - no VAS out of memory issues.  I run just about every add on you can think of - ORBX global, vector, Active Sky, REX etc.  The latest version of FSX:SE (and possibly the last now as Dovetail more on to other projects) is very stable and fairly well optimised.  The only crash I have had (but not for a while) is the famous UIAutomationCore.dll issue when persistently right clicking the mouse to bring up the menus inside FSX.  I swapped the file for another version as advised (I think here on Avsim) and I haven't had that issue for a while.

 

The SweetFX (graphics enhancer) in its original form also caused me a few crashes, but version SweetFX 2 runs fine, and the free version of FSUIPC fixes at least one other common FSX crash.  It takes some pain to get there like bobterri is having, but after weeks and weeks of tweaking and optimising, it is possible to get a good set-up.  I was reluctant to go with 'Steam' as I had reservations, but these have proven totally unfounded.  It has been no problem whatsoever, and the Steam version is definitely better with the tweaks, fixes, and optimisations.  I came from the boxed deluxe version, and there is no comparison.  Put DX10 and the fixer on top and it is one hell of a sim, and it is not really comparable to the original versions of FSX.

 

One point about Ultimate Traffic 2 - I use it because it injects the AI traffic from outside, the models are very good, and it has a fairly decent config program where you can set various options and AI levels etc.  But it is no longer under development, and it does have a few issues (I haven't found a perfect AI traffic program yet). Some people say that some traffic goes missing over the ocean (haven't seen that myself), and if you run 100% traffic at major airports, it still causes the sim to slow down.  I use 25% traffic set from inside its own config program and it is fine - enough to see plenty of movement at airports,and some nice airline colour schemes without slowing the sim down too much.  I aim for 30 frames per second and I can sustain that in the main at 25% traffic.

Good point. Obviously the program runs outside of FSX on the processor core running Windows, so the main benefit is saving processor cycles on the processor core running FSX, and it will run in its own memory space, but the memory space for the aircraft graphics will probably still be attributed to FSX when they are generated/displayed inside of FSX.

 

All I can say is, since using the later and very well optimised FSX steam versions, I have never had any VAS issues. The VAS fixes are similar (if not exactly the same) to those in P3D. The longest session I have had in FSX is eight and a half hours non-stop before I turned it off; in this time I flew lots of legs and loaded in different aircraft - no VAS out of memory issues. I run just about every add on you can think of - ORBX global, vector, Active Sky, REX etc.

Very interesting, thank you for taking the time. I have very similar add-ons, including UT2 and MT6 (I switch between them), I'm also on FSX-SE and Steve's DX10Fixer. I may have OOMS flying AS Airbus 320 in heavy wx conditions from EGCC to EGLL (all UK2000). My VAS remainder may drop below 300mb at the gate in EGLL. So what are your Scenery complexity, Autogen complexity, LOD and max. texture settings?

 

Thanks

Just to report back.  I have fixed my stuttering problem in FSX-SE!  I downloaded and installed P3D v3.1!!!

 

Too bad I couldn't get FSX-SE to run right, but P3D is running really well with a few more bells and whistles.  Anyway, I wouldn't really mark this "solved."  I have no idea why FSX-SE wouldn't run well on my system but it didn't.  I don't think it was my system as both X-plane (As previously stated, I downloaded the free evaluation version and tried it.), and now P3d run extremely well on my computer.  

FSX Gold works really well with a recently installed W10 upgrade from W7.I had to fiddle with PMDG products which did not work as per their web site(the 737NG required reactivation) but eventually they did.I have loads of addons with a modest i5 based system.Even the addons LAX,SFO.LHR etc are pretty smooth and I have a lot of AI in there.

 

However I get severe stutters with sound and vision when performing certain actions.Usually when using the drop down menus in flight or sometimes after pausing the sim.And on initial loading too.

 

Once flying the experience is probably slightly better than it was with W7.Apart from the above which I have yet to resolve.

On 2/23/2016 at 1:14 PM, SteveW said:

 

 

One fps above the limit destabilises the flow of frames. There's a constant battle to run at the vsync rate. Here's good ol' FSX with 20fps fixed and 1/3 vsync 60Hz monitor, quite obviously outperforming 21 fps:

 

 

 

 

 

And forcing it to run at just 1 fps above 20 requires another 5% CPU throughput, totally wasted.

Hello Steve:

I came across your work here in my research to understand the "stutters" I thought I have with FSX on my rig.

4790k @4.4

970 GTX 4 Gig

8 Gig DDR3 1860 RAM

2 TB hard drive

FSX with GEX, UTX, all traffic @20%, UT2, ASN, FSUIPC, and many freeware and payware airports.

Tweaks to fsx.cfg

Highmemfix=1

AM=84

TFF=.33 (Default)

 

frames pegged at 30 internally

LOD=5.5

Texture_Bandwidth_whatever=160

In the sim:

Sliders all pegged to the right except very dense Autogen and water at 2.0 low

Anti-aliasing tic

Filtering highest

Frames at 30.

My question is regarding your graphs above. As I said above, I was having what I thought were stutters and was searching the Forum to see what I might find. In fact what I was seeing in my system looked exactly like your plots. If one would watch the frame rate display (shift + z) the frames would set at 30, 29.5, and so forth but then if we counted 1000, 1001, 1002, 1003, the frames would for a second dip to 16, 18, something like that. So fast back to 30 that it could easily be missed. Looked like your plots.

So after all that, here is my question: Is that dip in the frames simply a feature of the processing which cannot be overcome by tweaks?

BTW, based on your and other remarks in this incredibly useful thread,

I went to

Bufferpools=1

Poolsize = 2000

This made a noticeable difference.

Thank you and best regards,

Rick

Hi Rick,

Yes, there will be times when the rendering can't keep up and the buffered frames run out and are not replenished fast enough. Locked fps is hard on the system because it's not a limiter, the next frame always processing look ahead, could try lower fps lock. AM=84 leaves core zero free but is beaten slightly by 116 which also frees core zero but gives more bandwidth to the rendering and can alleviate that dip a little - worth a try. A tiny improvement over that can be had with 85 and move addon exe apps to the third and fourth cores LPs 5 and 7 keeping off LPs 0,1,2,3.

Regards Steve

On 6/23/2017 at 4:33 PM, SteveW said:

Hi Rick,

Yes, there will be times when the rendering can't keep up and the buffered frames run out and are not replenished fast enough. Locked fps is hard on the system because it's not a limiter, the next frame always processing look ahead, could try lower fps lock. AM=84 leaves core zero free but is beaten slightly by 116 which also frees core zero but gives more bandwidth to the rendering and can alleviate that dip a little - worth a try. A tiny improvement over that can be had with 85 and move addon exe apps to the third and fourth cores LPs 5 and 7 keeping off LPs 0,1,2,3.

Regards Steve

Thanks for getting back Steve. Very helpful.

It looks like AM=84 is the only one that works well for me as both 85 and 116 seem to bring with them the 8 minute freeze. I should have mentioned that I am flying the MADDOG as it is such a wonderful product with such a tiny VAS footprint for FSX. So I am flying largely at 350 watching the terrain go by. I found today that in addition to the tweaks I mentioned earlier, I now have frame rate unlimited and that seems to give me the smoothest visuals. The frame rate still has the dips we discussed but somehow it is less noticeable. Also I should have mentioned that I am running stop_wait_swap (or whatever it is) = 2. What is your opinion on that one?

Thanks again

Rick