FSDreamTeam forum
Products Support => Vancouver CYVR support FSX/P3D => Topic started by: LuisKMIA on January 05, 2013, 03:46:21 am
-
The scenery looks fantastic, but I've tried making a flight from CYVR using the PMDG 737NGX, and I get an out of memory error usually within a minute. I don't have this problem with other the other FSDT airports. When I use default FSX airplanes, this problem does not happen. I've tried four times already.
I also use ORBX PNW (I removed their default CYVR files and put FSDT CYVR on top), and I keep my autogen at sparse.
I'm wondering if anyone else is having this problem.
Luis
Intel Core i7 27000
Processor Cores:4
Processor Speed:4.6 Overclocked
RAM:16GB DDR3 SDRAM
Video Board Manufacturer:NVIDIA
Video Board Model:GeForce GTX 580
Video Memory:3GB
Operating System:Windows 7-64
-
Just tried..have the same issue....Pmdg NGX , Orbx, REX, AS2012...dig within 7 mins of exploring the scenery followed by Oom message. Excellent / Magnificent textures through and through...shadows/ shade and shine amazing..Fix please/ Recommendation please
-
The scenery looks fantastic, but I've tried making a flight from CYVR using the PMDG 737NGX, and I get an out of memory error usually within a minute. I don't have this problem with other the other FSDT airports. When I use default FSX airplanes, this problem does not happen. I've tried four times already.
I also use ORBX PNW (I removed their default CYVR files and put FSDT CYVR on top), and I keep my autogen at sparse.
I'm wondering if anyone else is having this problem.
Luis
Intel Core i7 27000
Processor Cores:4
Processor Speed:4.6 Overclocked
RAM:16GB DDR3 SDRAM
Video Board Manufacturer:NVIDIA
Video Board Model:GeForce GTX 580
Video Memory:3GB
Operating System:Windows 7-64
Notice you are on Win7-64 - have the same config and was looking forward to using with Orbx PNW and PMDG 737. Going to hold off until some more reports come in on OOM issues.
Do you happen to have the Microsoft OOM patch in that addresses the heap limitation? I got my first OOM message about a month ago with another scenery, came across this patch, installed, and have not had a repeat of the issue.
1 description of the patch - http://kostasfsworld.wordpress.com/2012/09/24/oom-out-of-memory-helperfix/
direct link to MS site with patch - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/947246
-mug
-
And that fix has nothing to do with the issues we are seeing in FSX and OOM errors. It does nothing...
The issue on 64bit systems has to do with the way DX9 maps the texture memory via the VAS (and FSX being a 32bit appliction it is limited to 4GB, no more, no less).
If you are using a video card in DX9 with a large amount of GPU memory it actually makes it worse for OOM errors.
Matter of fact, my OOM issues were few and far between on my old 1024MB 460. Now with my 660 3GB I get them much more often.
Look at this thread as it has a discussion and some links to some tweaks you can try (like switching to DX10 as it maps GPU memory in a different way than DX9).
http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=7527.0
For me (and keep in mind I too still get them but not as often) turning down the LOD/traffic and Autogen helped reduce the OOM issues since getting my new video card.
With FSX it seems like one step forward and then two steps back... :'(
-
And that fix has nothing to do with the issues we are seeing in FSX and OOM errors. It does nothing...
The fix did resolve the type of repeatable OOM message I was receiving with my i7 950 / GTX460 setup with with another scenery - so likely there are multiple issues and multiple approaches to the problem. It was the only change I made to address the issue, and it was successful in my case. Certainly agree that cranking back the heavy hitters such as Autogen/traffic/lod goes a long way.
Here's hoping that YVR runs well on all of our systems!
-
Excellent / Magnificent textures through and through...shadows/ shade and shine amazing..Fix please/ Recommendation please
There's nothing we can "fix" from our side, increased RAM requirement comparing to, let's say, KLAX, is what makes such good graphics possible.
What you can do is:
- Don't use so many add-ons at the same time. We tested CYVR with PNW+UT2 at 100% AI and the PMDG NGX, and were never able to surpass 3.0GB of RAM usage in total, which means there should be at least 1GB spare. If you got an OOM, it means you were way closer to the 4GB limit, so I'd say you are simply using too much stuff and/or too high settings.
- Try without HD Textures.
- Switch to DirectX10. The scenery is fully compatible with it, and DX10 saves a lot of memory, because it doesn't address VRAM into user RAM as DX9 does. This is more and more effective, the more VRAM an application uses, and FSX with many addons can use a lot of it.
-
noted...awesome awesome awesome...rebooted and turned down my settings they where too high (Orbx recommended settings) no Oom now.
I did notice a bit of scenery flashing on departure and while circling airport
-
I found by unchecking HD Textures, it eliminated the OOM errors and I was still able to use all my usual addons (i.e. PMDG aircraft, OrbX, ActiveSky, etc.)
-
I will use Umberto's suggestion and run it in DX10
Thanks!
-
UPDATE: Running in DX10 preview fixed everything!
Now it's time to fly.
Thanks again!
-
I just had the OOM error and crash while on approach. In the 3 years I have had this machine I have never had a OOM error. I have all of your US scenerys and have all the fixes in place for win 7 64bit. I am also using the NGX and Orbx PNW scenery. These OOM can't all be our computers fault. Something in the NGX, Orbx and this scenery don't get along. I will try running the DX10 preview.
I turned on the DX10 preview and I have jaggy lines on my aircraft. I looked up the settings again for the Nvidia Inspector and while checking that I noticed PMDG does not reccomend running FSX in the DX preview mode. they say it's slower and buggy. Any suggestion other than not flying in with the NGX and PNW?
-
I was getting some OOM's because I really push my system too hard. I lowered the LOD radius to 6.0 from 10.0 (I have a lot of photoscenery and 10.0 really takes away the blurries for me). Now running NGX with Vancouver Plus (old version 2.0) and the CYVR demo does not cause OOM's. I fly in DX10 with the 3.2.2 shader fix from AVSIM and 100% custom AI.
My System I7 2700K sandy bridge O/C to 4.8 MHZ
16 GB Ram
680GTX OC edition at 1200 MHZ, 6000 MHZ memory.
-
These OOM can't all be our computers fault. Something in the NGX, Orbx and this scenery don't get along. I will try running the DX10 preview.
If you are saying this, you haven't followed the explanation, really.
First, FSX can't address more than 4GB in total. That's nothing we can do about this. CYVR has been TESTED to work perfectly with the PMDG737 + FTX PNW + UT2 at 100% complexity. Under this configuration, it takes about 3GB of RAM, meaning you have about 1GB of spare room, under a 64 bit OS, of course.
If you try to run MORE stuff than that, you are approaching the 4GB limit and sorry, you'll have to start to make CHOICES, you simply can't just add and add stuff, and expect it will always run.
I turned on the DX10 preview and I have jaggy lines on my aircraft
This means you haven't setup the antialiasing correctly.
. I looked up the settings again for the Nvidia Inspector and while checking that I noticed PMDG does not reccomend running FSX in the DX preview mode. they say it's slower and buggy. Any suggestion other than not flying in with the NGX and PNW?
DX10 was slower and buggy as it was released, but with the recent tweaks that has been made to it, made it very usable and a concrete alternative, chech the DirectX10 forum over at Avsim
http://forum.avsim.net/forum/569-dx-10-discussions-hints-and-help/
And, that information might be obsolete by now, since later drivers from nVidia (if you have an nVidia, of course), improved DX10 support a lot. I don't find it any slower than FS9, but it makes for a smoother flight for sure.
Any suggestion other than not flying in with the NGX and PNW?
You can try turning off HD Textures.
-
I will try these solutions. thanks for the quick response. Starting my descent into there now with the QW757. Fingers crossed.
-
Gentlemen, keep this in mind too.
If you are using ORBX PNW along with some of the addon airports they provide such as KORS/74S/KBVS/3W5/WA56 and the freeware 7WA3 this is going to kill the VAS 4GB limit.
Not to mention when flying ORBX PNW most user like me, fly G/A airplanes that do not require the resources big iron do such as the the NGX.
Some of the mentioned airports there are close to 1GB in size each, far larger a footprint than FSDT CYVR.
Running ORBX PNW with some of their addon airports with the PMDG NGX (something we are all doing now) will certainly start to clobber and impact the 4GB VAS limit.
Not to kiss the ass of FSDT, I call a spade a spade. But, I hardly think FSDT are to blame for the rash of OOM errors people are seeing when we are using so many other addon's in the area, and then adding the PMDG (or similar types) to the mix.
-
Completed a flight using the QW757. I would rather just not use the NGX there instead of messing with my system that hasn't had a OOM error since I got it 3 years ago. I am a payware snob so my rig is loaded.
-
In the FWIW department:
I'm running Win7-64 with a 2GB 670GT. I got the OOM within 5 minutes sitting at A4. I have PNW, the NGX, UT2 (0% GA, 100% airline), UTX, GEX. I also have REX but only use the 1024 textures. I also use TrackIR. Following the suggestions here I:
1) Turned on DX10 and applied Steve Parson's Shader Release 3.2.2
2) Set Autogen to Sparse (from Very Dense)
I saved an NGX flight on downwind to 26L (I did not run REX with the test) at about Fix YVR13. I loaded the flight and after the NGX initialized I engaged LNAV to turn to NOXOB and stayed in CMD until about 980' AGL and hand-flew the landing. I ran this about a dozen times trying various settings but found that only DX10 and Autogen made any significant diffference.
I ran in Windowed mode so I could monitor the memory size in Process Explorer. Total max Virtual Size dropped from 4 GB to 3.3 GB. I also tried autogen Sparse with DX9 and the Virtual Size was 3.8. The sim always froze for 1-3 seconds as it turned onto final at NOXOB. I have my frames locked at 24 and I averaged 20 on final. After turning off to taxi back to A4, my frames would drop to about 18 while I was looking the beautiful terminals as I taxied by.
Next I'll see how it behaves after flights from PAKT and KSFO. I've had many OOMs with Orbx at YMML, YBBN, and YSCB, and the FSDT KLAX after long flights. The DX10/Autogen combo may well take care of those, too. I have to avoid to urge to turn all the knobs up to 11, just because I built a new system.
Larry
-
I have to avoid to urge to turn all the knobs up to 11, just because I built a new system.
Larry
Agreed, while the developers may push the envelope, FSX is still a 32bit application and has that darn 4GB limit.
-
Some memory test results I've just made, showing the difference between DX9 and DX10 and the impact of having HD textures on (which doesn't affect just CYVR, but everything else that might use 4096x4096 textures)
The tests were made starting with the default C172 at CYVR
After a while, I've loaded UT2services.exe, which started UT at 100% AI
Then, I've loaded the PMDG 737NGX, and measured the occupation when it finished loading, and after looking around in the VC, to have it load all its textures, at least the internal ones
Then, I've switched from fair weather, to the default Rain them, which triggered clouds and rain, and had CYVR switching its objects to the "overcast shadows" variant. That 200MB spike is to be expected, because in order to to horribly disappear in front of you, CYVR objects are first loaded, then exchanged, then the old ones are removed, so they are both present on screen for about 5 seconds. But that memory IS reclaimed correctly, in 5 seconds, which means the scenery is not "leaking".
Then, I've waited for the CYVR Trial time to expire, and observed what left with the PMDG + UT2 still running.
The test was repeated both under DX9 and DX10, which clearly shows DX10 is giving some memory savings.
The 2nd set of screenshots shows the impact of turning on or off HD textures, both in DX9 and DX10.
This indicates:
CYVR takes about 500MB
UT2 takes about 200MB (at CYVR, at this time/date)
PMDG NGX takes about 800MB when fully loaded
Switching textures and shadows in CYVR takes about 200MB for 5 seconds only, IF you switch in flight (not if you prepare the flight with the right weather in advance)
Default Clouds+Rain take about 100MB
DX10 can save about 300MB
HD Textures disabled can save about 200MB
This doesn't includes other addons like PNW, which I personally don't have (but some of our testers have, so I'll ask to repeat it with it), other airports you might have in the area, and doesn't include Vancouver+ too.
But the conclusion is:
- The most consuming item on that test was the PMDG737, at 800MB
- The CYVR entire memory requirements are about 500MB, which is significant, but is about 1/8 (or 12%) of the maximum 4GB limit you have for FSX, in total. I believe it's fair to say a detailed airport should be allowed to take 12% of the total available memory for itself.
- By turning on DX10 and turning off HD textures, you can save as much memory (300+200 = 500MB) as the ENTIRE CYVR airport, this means you HAVE options.
-
Completed a flight using the QW757. I would rather just not use the NGX there instead of messing with my system that hasn't had a OOM error since I got it 3 years ago. I am a payware snob so my rig is loaded.
Fair Enough ;)
-
Some memory test results I've just made, showing the difference between DX9 and DX10 and the impact of having HD textures on (which doesn't affect just CYVR, but everything else that might use 4096x4096 textures)
The tests were made starting with the default C172 at CYVR
After a while, I've loaded UT2services.exe, which started UT at 100% AI
Then, I've loaded the PMDG 737NGX, and measured the occupation when it finished loading, and after looking around in the VC, to have it load all its textures, at least the internal ones
Then, I've switched from fair weather, to the default Rain them, which triggered clouds and rain, and had CYVR switching its objects to the "overcast shadows" variant. That 200MB spike is to be expected, because in order to to horribly disappear in front of you, CYVR objects are first loaded, then exchanged, then the old ones are removed, so they are both present on screen for about 5 seconds. But that memory IS reclaimed correctly, in 5 seconds, which means the scenery is not "leaking".
Then, I've waited for the CYVR Trial time to expire, and observed what left with the PMDG + UT2 still running.
The test was repeated both under DX9 and DX10, which clearly shows DX10 is giving some memory savings.
The 2nd set of screenshots shows the impact of turning on or off HD textures, both in DX9 and DX10.
This indicates:
CYVR takes about 500MB
UT2 takes about 200MB (at CYVR, at this time/date)
PMDG NGX takes about 800MB when fully loaded
Switching textures and shadows in CYVR takes about 200MB for 5 seconds only, IF you switch in flight (not if you prepare the flight with the right weather in advance)
Default Clouds+Rain take about 100MB
DX10 can save about 300MB
HD Textures disabled can save about 200MB
This doesn't includes other addons like PNW, which I personally don't have (but some of our testers have, so I'll ask to repeat it with it), other airports you might have in the area, and doesn't include Vancouver+ too.
But the conclusion is:
- The most consuming item on that test was the PMDG737, at 800MB
- The CYVR entire memory requirements are about 500MB, which is significant, but is about 1/8 (or 12%) of the maximum 4GB limit you have for FSX, in total. I believe it's fair to say a detailed airport should be allowed to take 12% of the total available memory for itself.
- By turning on DX10 and turning off HD textures, you can save as much memory (300+200 = 500MB) as the ENTIRE CYVR airport, this means you HAVE options.
Umberto,
Thank you for taking the time to run the tests.
I would really appreciate it if you can explain how I or anyone else can run a test and see if I'm over the 3gig.
I had an OOM about 10 miles south of CYVR (HQ on) using FTX PNW (poles on) and the 737NGX. AI was only at 15%, dense AG, but the weather was hard winter with heavy snow and the flight was conducted in dusk.
Can you also confirm if a better card like a gtx 680 with 4gig is better that my gtx 480 1.5gig for this type of scenery. Will a better card prevent OOM errors or is this system ram related with FSX only being able to use 4gig max?
Thanks for another great add-on
-
I suggest turning down cloud resolutions not a big deal but helps a lot.
-
I would really appreciate it if you can explain how I or anyone else can run a test and see if I'm over the 3gig.
We made another test with the help of a tester that has lots of stuff installed:
CYVR
PNW
PMDG737
Vancouver+
UT2 at 100%
Orbx KORS (we found this doesn't affect memory consumption at CYVR, at least not if starting a flight there, maybe it could be different if you overfly it and land at CYVR)
And, we asked him to put every possible slider in FSX all the way to the right, and create a weather situation with 3 overcast layers.
Whenever the situation was, he was never able to surpass 3.2GB in total, and this should give lots of spare room against crashes. And besides, his frame rate was so low (in the low teens, with a fast i7 with a GT670 card), that he would never use such configuration anyway, because he'd start disabling add-ons and turn down settings BEFORE reaching a possible OOM, because the sim was basically unflyable.
He didn't had things like Megascenery and REX and hi-res cloud textures, that might have added up and finally reach the memory limit.
At a certain point, you'll have to start making choices about what to use, this area has a lot of available add-ons, so either turn off some of them when flying *here* or use a less memory-consuming airplane, for example.
-
I would really appreciate it if you can explain how I or anyone else can run a test and see if I'm over the 3gig.
We made another test with the help of a tester that has lots of stuff installed:
CYVR
PNW
PMDG737
Vancouver+
UT2 at 100%
Orbx KORS (we found this doesn't affect memory consumption at CYVR, at least not if starting a flight there, maybe it could be different if you overfly it and land at CYVR)
And, we asked him to put every possible slider in FSX all the way to the right, and create a weather situation with 3 overcast layers.
Whenever the situation was, he was never able to surpass 3.2GB in total, and this should give lots of spare room against crashes. And besides, his frame rate was so low (in the low teens, with a fast i7 with a GT670 card), that he would never use such configuration anyway, because he'd start disabling add-ons and turn down settings BEFORE reaching a possible OOM, because the sim was basically unflyable.
He didn't had things like Megascenery and REX and hi-res cloud textures, that might have added up and finally reach the memory limit.
At a certain point, you'll have to start making choices about what to use, this area has a lot of available add-ons, so either turn off some of them when flying *here* or use a less memory-consuming airplane, for example.
After applying the OOM fix and disabling paging, I ran several test flights checking the task manager with 100% AI extreme AG, cloud visibility at 100%, I was able to successfully complete flights without any OOM issues. I noticed 2.7-3.2GB with the 737NGX. BTW, I have KORS and that's has not an issue at all. I can confirm that HQ does use up the memory as you've stated. Thanks again.
I have one thing that I need to resolve, when the scenery initially loads I get two pauses instead of one pause. I normally get one on all FSDT sceneries. Do I need to re-install the Add-on Manager or is this the way it's supposed to load?
-
After applying the OOM fix and disabling paging
Hi
I have applied the mr fixit 'fix' but can you explain what you mean AND how you disable paging please?
Thank you
Andrew
-
Over the last 24 hours, I played with disabling startup and background programs for Windows. I used AVG's PCTuneUp to determine what I can disable without causing problems.
I just started a flight in DX9 mode from FSDT CYVR to MMPR at dawn on a PMDG NGX, running TrackIR 5, ASE, UT2, and ORBX PNW. My FSX.cfg is based on Kostas's now famous "Software and Hardware Guide" http://forum.avsim.n...-guide-for-fsx/
As of now, I'm 80NM out of Vancouver and well on my way to FL370.
My next test will be to try to approach, land, and park at CYVR without any OOMs.
-
Over the last 24 hours, I played with disabling startup and background programs for Windows. I used AVG's PCTuneUp to determine what I can disable without causing problems.
Under a 64 bit OS, turning off other background processes won't help anything with OOM in FSX.
Those external applications can address up to 4GB each, and Windows services that are 64 bit, don't even have that limitation. The other .exe running in the system won't affect the memory available to FSX. Even if you don't have too much RAM in total, as long as swapping is enabled and configured to be handled by Windows, the system will never crash, because additional memory will be allocated by simply growing the swap file space. Of course, the system will slow and stutter, but it won't crash.
-
Hi Umberto,
first thank you for this wonderful Scenery! The departure over the city northwards into the mountains is just magnificent.
Im also using the NGX and PNW and have also the OOM problems. Departures are no problem - but approaching can be a problem. Looking at the taskmanager "processes" Mermory column - FSX takes about 2.300 K over the city of Vancouver - then i get about 10miles to CYVR and i get the "load-freeze" (about 3-5sec) and teh load jumps to 3.100-3.400. Continuing the apprroach i get OOM warnings, i can disregards them and continue - unfortunatelly the water turns black and the ground tiles dont load (But still better than a CTD).
But something is strange. Looking at the taskmanager i get the warnings and OOM messages at about 3.200-3.500 K. Having Win7 64 i though a 32-application can take 4gigs of Ram /I would assume 4.000 K in the taskmanager). Or am i looking at the wrong indications?
Maybe you could shed some light on that, until i will use CYVR just as my departure airport.
kind regards,
chris
-
Hi,
Just so i understand, When you guys say having too many addons being the problem do you mean too many addons in general or do you mean with a specific radius of a flying area?
I'm getting oom errors also using Prepar3d. Just trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong. I'll sometimes get the oom message before loading up completely using the stock airplane. I've turned down my HD settings as well as turned off the paging file and using the MS Fix it tool. I have PNW & Vancover 3.0 addons loaded.
Any suggestions would greatly be appriecieted.
Thanks,
Bryan
i7 2700k
Gtx 560
16GB RAM
Windows 7
-
Just so i understand, When you guys say having too many addons being the problem do you mean too many addons in general or do you mean with a specific radius of a flying area?
Too many addons within a specific area. Which is not so easy to evaluate. For example, we feared the additional Orbx small airport sceneries nearby could cause problems but, we tested the closest to CYVR, which is KORS (Orcas Island) and, although the installation is very large, it didn't affect memory usage at CYVR.
I'm getting oom errors also using Prepar3d.
Unfortunately, P3D doesn't support DX10, that could be a significant help. You'll have to wait for the next version, which will add DX11.
I'll sometimes get the oom message before loading up completely using the stock airplane. I've turned down my HD settings as well as turned off the paging file and using the MS Fix it tool. I have PNW & Vancover 3.0 addons loaded.
We found that PNW takes about 300MB and Vancouver+ about 100MB, I find strange you would get OOM with a default airplane. However, yes, Prepar3D seems to use more memory than FSX, with just CYVR installer, I have 2.3GB taken under P3D, while I would be at about 1.6GB in FSX, perhaps the sliders don't behave the same.
-
Andrew check this out if you have an ssd
http://windows7themes.net/how-to-disable-swap-paging-file-in-windows-7-ssd-optimization.html
-
Andrew check this out if you have an ssd
http://windows7themes.net/how-to-disable-swap-paging-file-in-windows-7-ssd-optimization.html
Reading now - thanks mate
Andrew
-
After applying the OOM fix and disabling paging
Hi
I have applied the mr fixit 'fix' but can you explain what you mean AND how you disable paging please?
Thank you
Andrew
Andrew,
I see a member has provided a link for disabling paging. If you have an SSD, try it.
OOM error fix can be found here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/947246
I also lowered my settings to ensure that I can fly the NGX.
-
Umberto,
Thanks for your help/ suggestions.
Bryan
-
I would bet all these oom are only affecting users that have their LOD to high, I have mine set at 5.5 and have never seen an OOM.
-
I've had to not activate AS2012 to populate the sky with REX-E clouds. I've found that it does not play nicely... all others are on
FTX- PNW
Airbus x extended
Kors
NGX
no HD or forced 4096 textures
-
Hi Umberto,
first thank you for this wonderful Scenery! The departure over the city northwards into the mountains is just magnificent.
Im also using the NGX and PNW and have also the OOM problems. Departures are no problem - but approaching can be a problem. Looking at the taskmanager "processes" Mermory column - FSX takes about 2.300 K over the city of Vancouver - then i get about 10miles to CYVR and i get the "load-freeze" (about 3-5sec) and teh load jumps to 3.100-3.400. Continuing the apprroach i get OOM warnings, i can disregards them and continue - unfortunatelly the water turns black and the ground tiles dont load (But still better than a CTD).
But something is strange. Looking at the taskmanager i get the warnings and OOM messages at about 3.200-3.500 K. Having Win7 64 i though a 32-application can take 4gigs of Ram /I would assume 4.000 K in the taskmanager). Or am i looking at the wrong indications?
Maybe you could shed some light on that, until i will use CYVR just as my departure airport.
kind regards,
chris
Yep iam the same as you still trying to figure what settings i need to be able to land at cyvr tried different aircraft tried the qw146 still got the oom as the ngx, next going to try the js4100 see how that handles it, departures as same as you can depart with no problems at all (Flights are between ksea and cyvr for testing)
-
Everything good and well, but I see many (most?) users reporting OOM issues, including myself. I surely believe that everything was tested but it can't be the case that we've bought an unusable airport if we want to use it in combination with commonly used addons like the NGX and ORBX.
As other users also stated, we never had these OOM issues at any other airport. It's not fair to tell people to lower their texture size (the manual emphasizes to set it to HD!) or not use ORBX anymore.
So far, I haven't seen a solution that really works for everyone.
Mark
-
I surely believe that everything was tested but it can't be the case that we've bought an unusable airport if we want to use it in combination with commonly used addons like the NGX and ORBX.
As I've said already to another user, which after my explanation got my point, it's just wrong to automatically assume the "commonly used addons" automatically means the newest product arrived should RESTRAIN in detail, just because there's are already many other products that use lots of memory and someone might want to use them all together at the same time in the same place.
If you bought CYVR today without having the NGX, you wouldn't get ANY OOM, because you would immediately save 800MB, which is more than what CYVR takes. If you decided to buy the NGX the next month, you might start seeing OOMs, then which one is to blame ? You would get the impression the newly purchased airplane broken an airport which was otherwise working very well and it still works with "any other airplane".
I'm sorry, but it's nobody's fault if there are many addons to choose from, and FSX only supports up to 4GB. The only real problem here, is the unfortunate situation we are in, with no short term hope to have a 64-bit FSX, since LM said it will be very complex to port P3D to 64 bit, and they are probably the only ones that can do that.
Let's assume this reasoning that you don't accept either to stop using many addons together, and you don't accept to lower your settings either, which is of course agains the cold hard fact that a certain point your 4GB WILL end, you know what will happen in a few months/years, if you continue to use this kind of reasoning ?
You will not be able to purchase or add ANYTHING anymore, because the more pre-existing stuff you have on the market, which will then fall into the "commonly used addons", the less memory you have for a NEW product, because if this year your FSX config starts at 3.2GB, the next year, if you keep adding things which you pretend to use, all together, without any limitation, your FSX will start maybe at 3.8GB, so ANY scenery added in such situation, even the smallest one, will NOT fit in memory, and you'll blame that poor future scenery developer, that maybe took great care to make a scenery that takes half size of a current one...
As other users also stated, we never had these OOM issues at any other airport. It's not fair to tell people to lower their texture size (the manual emphasizes to set it to HD!) or not use ORBX anymore.
First, nobody said to stop using OrbX which, even if it obviously has an impact, it's not the largest one. We offered many choices, that don't involve stopping using anything, which are:
- Try to use DX10, this will immediately save you about 300MB
- Turn off HD textures
- Lower your settings, especially the scenery radius
You don't have to do everything: you can CHOOSE which solution to use. OR, you lower other settings, OR you simply don't fly with a certain airplane there.
-
I just want to remind everyone that DX10 is a 'preview' setting and has a lot of glitches. While it may help with CYVR, you'll probably experience issues with many other addons.
Consider it a "band-aid" solution for CYVR but you'll most likely will have switch back to DX9, which is what FSX is based upon, and figure out alternate solution(through FSX tweaks/settings) for your OOM errors with CYVR.
You're pretty much guaranteed compatibility with all FSX software in DX9 mode.
Cheers!
Todd.
-
I just want to remind everyone that DX10 is a 'preview' setting and has a lot of glitches. While it may help with CYVR, you'll probably experience issues with many other addons.
And many of them are being fixed
You're pretty much guaranteed compatibility with all FSX software in DX9 mode.
Have you actually *read* my explanation ?
We ARE compatible with ALL FSX software in DX9 mode!! Switching to DX10 it's just ONE of the SEVERAL options you have available, but that's not obviously the only one. You can lower your settings, you can use different airplane, you can turn OFF HD textures, you can choose not to use so much stuff all together. You have several option.
Pretending your memory it's "infinite", when it's not, and pretending that ANY new addon will magically fit into this limit and they all keep working together at the same time, forever, just doesn't make any sense.
And it's not I'm saying you can't use addons or this scenery works only with default stuff. As I've indicated in my test, CYVR+PMDG+UT2 at 100% is still well below safe memory limits, even in DX9 with HD textures ON.
-
I just want to remind everyone that DX10 is a 'preview' setting and has a lot of glitches. While it may help with CYVR, you'll probably experience issues with many other addons.
And many of them are being fixed
You're pretty much guaranteed compatibility with all FSX software in DX9 mode.
Have you actually *read* my explanation ?
We ARE compatible with ALL FSX software in DX9 mode!! Switching to DX10 it's just ONE of the SEVERAL options you have available, but that's not obviously the only one. You can lower your settings, you can use different airplane, you can turn OFF HD textures, you can choose not to use so much stuff all together. You have several option.
Pretending your memory it's "infinite", when it's not, and pretending that ANY new addon will magically fit into this limit and they all keep working together at the same time, forever, just doesn't make any sense.
And it's not I'm saying you can't use addons or this scenery works only with default stuff. As I've indicated in my test, CYVR+PMDG+UT2 at 100% is still well below safe memory limits, even in DX9 with HD textures ON.
Easy Umberto.... I'm on your side here. I know this is a sticky subject. I've read everything about it. I have all of the addons stated above(minus Vancouver+) with CYVR and I have it working fine in DX9.
I just want to make sure everyone else knows what may result for other addons on the market when using DX10 preview mode. Probably not the best option in the grand scheme of things. IMHO, DX9 would be the better route to take and then tweak all other settings until resolved.
Note: Very nice scenery btw! Well done!
Todd.
-
DX9 with NGX, ORBX, UT2, REX+E textures, ActiveSky 2012. OOM'ed in about 4 seconds, on a i7-2600k, 8gb, GTX680ti setup. Seems activesky is whats pushing it over the max for me.
Coming from a loyal and proud user of previous FSDT products, This scenery was the one I was looking forward to the most expecially residing in western canada. I must say from what I have been able to see that this is fantastic scenery, its just a shame I cant have my cake, and eat it too. :(
-
DX9 with NGX, ORBX, UT2, REX+E textures, ActiveSky 2012. OOM'ed in about 4 seconds, on a i7-2600k, 8gb, GTX680ti setup. Seems activesky is whats pushing it over the max for me.
Coming from a loyal and proud user of previous FSDT products, This scenery was the one I was looking forward to the most expecially residing in western canada. I must say from what I have been able to see that this is fantastic scenery, its just a shame I cant have my cake, and eat it too. :(
Few things I did to resolve the OOM's in this area:
-use 1024 for cloud resolution (ActiveSky or REX).
-set maximum texture size in your FSX.cfg to 2048.
[GRAPHICS]
TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=2048
-make sure your LOD is set to 4.50 (I had 6.50 which increases video mem. consumption, therefore VAS (virtual address space) consumption)
[TERRAIN]
LOD_RADIUS=4.500000
-"Autogen Density" set to Dense and "Water Effects" set to no higher than High 2.x.
I too have CYVR, PNW, REX+E Textures, AS2012 Weather, NGX and GEX. With these settings above and doing circuits off of RWY 08L in the NGX with overcast rainy conditions(worst case scenario) in full screen mode, the maximum VAS being consumed by FSX is around 2.89Gb. Red line for me is around 3.4Gb.
Give it a try.
Todd.
-
DX9 with NGX, ORBX, UT2, REX+E textures, ActiveSky 2012. OOM'ed in about 4 seconds, on a i7-2600k, 8gb, GTX680ti setup. Seems activesky is whats pushing it over the max for me.
I wonder if anyone (probably they are) is running AS over a network - would be interesting to see if doing this helps?
Please excuse my ignorance in if this is a naive question :)
It would be interesting to know though
Regards
Andrew
-
Unfortunately, these troubleshooting steps have not worked for me, and I'm not even running the NGX in here.
So far, here's what I've "attempted" to do:
1. Start at CYVR at gate 73
2. I load using the cessna, and then switch to the Aerosoft Airbus X Extended
3. I have a 50/50 chance of getting to pushback before I OOM.
After doing multiple tests, I would definitely say that going into spot view and looking around the aircraft will make it happen faster.
Now, after reading the original posts, I figured I could go ahead and lower some tweaks I had made earlier to try and resolve this.
However, to my surprise, when I opened my FSX.cfg, all these things were already set. LOD was 4.5, MaxTextureSize was already 1024.
I tried removing Vancouver+, which seemed to help. I managed to taxi to the runway before I OOM'd. I then tried turning on DX10.
DX10 helped immensely (or so I thought at the time), and I was able to get out of CYVR and enroute. Then, on approach into KLAS (also FSDT), I noticed that none of the terminals or ground textures were there. I noticed this on my downwind, and figured it just needed time to load. By the time I got turned around and onto final, nothing.
Made it all the way to the jetways (which oddly were there, floating in midair) without the rest of the airport loading. I promptly went in, disabled DX10 and restarted FSX. Loaded up at KLAS, and everything was back to normal.
So turning to DX10 made my night-time landing into KLAS not have buildings or ground textures. Weird. Very very weird.
As a test, I loaded up my NGX at CYVR. I pressed the battery button and it OOM'd. LOL.
Here are the addons I'm running in these tests:
-> FSDT CYVR
-> FSDT GSX
-> ORBX PNW
-> AS2012
-> UT2 running ~40% traffic load
That's it.
I had one other flight where I was able to get out of the terminal area without an OOM. I didn't use GSX features except for pushback, I didn't leave the cockpit to look around in spot plane mode. Ironically, the flight was from CYVR -> KLAX (FSDT, of course :D) and I got my first ever OOM into KLAX.
I have every single FSDT scenery (except for LSGG/LSZH) and have never had a problem. Do my frames slow down a touch when I'm going into rush hour at KLAX or KJFK? Sure... but never an OOM or missing buildings, or anything else bizarre.
If I had to bet money, I'm thinking there is a problem in Couatl, and NOT CYVR.
Other things I've tried to remedy the problem:
-> Re-install GSX
-> Re-install standalone manager (twice)
-> Wiped my FSX.cfg and let it rebuild default
-> Cried
-> Prayed
Also, for reference, here are my system specs:
CPU: i7|2600K OC@4.4Ghz
RAM: 16Gb DDR3 @2000Mhz
Video: nVidia 560ti (No OC)
HDD: FSX is on dedicated 7200RPM SATA6b/s
To be clear: I'm not expecting a miracle fix, and I understand you are not psychic. If there are logs or any further info I can provide, I'm more than willing to help out. :) I still love FSDT, and I think you guys are really pushing the boundaries of what's possible. With new frontiers, are unforseen landmines, and I'm more than willing to help clear them out with you. :)
Let me know.
-
I wonder if anyone (probably they are) is running AS over a network - would be interesting to see if doing this helps?
Please excuse my ignorance in if this is a naive question :)
It would be interesting to know though
Regards
Andrew
I run AS2012 on a secondary PC but that wouldn't matter. The problem is FSX itself. It's a 32bit application which can only address up to 4Gig memory. Any other application has it's own memory address space when it's started.
Say you have 8GB total system RAM, you run FSX and it takes up say 3Gb for example, you still have around 4GB(5GB minus memory used by the OS system processes) of RAM that can be addressed by other programs. That 3GB used by FSX is like a reserved chunk for the FSX.exe process only. The OS will give it more if it requires but will only be able to access a maximum of 4GB. It is not shared by any other applications that are running in the background. All other processes or applications have their own chunk of memory.
So running other apps off on a secondary system will not help with the OOM's. It will help, however, with CPU usage and FSX stability. You'll probably get better frames by offloading anything you can to another PC over the network. I highly recommend it.
Todd.
-
Hi Todd
I was half expecting an answer like this. Fundamentally whatever AS does it does NOT use FSX allotted memory then.
Thanks for your explanation
Regards
Andrew
-
Unfortunately, these troubleshooting steps have not worked for me, and I'm not even running the NGX in here.
So far, here's what I've "attempted" to do:
1. Start at CYVR at gate 73
2. I load using the cessna, and then switch to the Aerosoft Airbus X Extended
3. I have a 50/50 chance of getting to pushback before I OOM.
After doing multiple tests, I would definitely say that going into spot view and looking around the aircraft will make it happen faster.
Now, after reading the original posts, I figured I could go ahead and lower some tweaks I had made earlier to try and resolve this.
However, to my surprise, when I opened my FSX.cfg, all these things were already set. LOD was 4.5, MaxTextureSize was already 1024.
I tried removing Vancouver+, which seemed to help. I managed to taxi to the runway before I OOM'd. I then tried turning on DX10.
DX10 helped immensely (or so I thought at the time), and I was able to get out of CYVR and enroute. Then, on approach into KLAS (also FSDT), I noticed that none of the terminals or ground textures were there. I noticed this on my downwind, and figured it just needed time to load. By the time I got turned around and onto final, nothing.
Made it all the way to the jetways (which oddly were there, floating in midair) without the rest of the airport loading. I promptly went in, disabled DX10 and restarted FSX. Loaded up at KLAS, and everything was back to normal.
So turning to DX10 made my night-time landing into KLAS not have buildings or ground textures. Weird. Very very weird.
As a test, I loaded up my NGX at CYVR. I pressed the battery button and it OOM'd. LOL.
Here are the addons I'm running in these tests:
-> FSDT CYVR
-> FSDT GSX
-> ORBX PNW
-> AS2012
-> UT2 running ~40% traffic load
That's it.
I had one other flight where I was able to get out of the terminal area without an OOM. I didn't use GSX features except for pushback, I didn't leave the cockpit to look around in spot plane mode. Ironically, the flight was from CYVR -> KLAX (FSDT, of course :D) and I got my first ever OOM into KLAX.
I have every single FSDT scenery (except for LSGG/LSZH) and have never had a problem. Do my frames slow down a touch when I'm going into rush hour at KLAX or KJFK? Sure... but never an OOM or missing buildings, or anything else bizarre.
If I had to bet money, I'm thinking there is a problem in Couatl, and NOT CYVR.
Other things I've tried to remedy the problem:
-> Re-install GSX
-> Re-install standalone manager (twice)
-> Wiped my FSX.cfg and let it rebuild default
-> Cried
-> Prayed
Also, for reference, here are my system specs:
CPU: i7|2600K OC@4.4Ghz
RAM: 16Gb DDR3 @2000Mhz
Video: nVidia 560ti (No OC)
HDD: FSX is on dedicated 7200RPM SATA6b/s
To be clear: I'm not expecting a miracle fix, and I understand you are not psychic. If there are logs or any further info I can provide, I'm more than willing to help out. :) I still love FSDT, and I think you guys are really pushing the boundaries of what's possible. With new frontiers, are unforseen landmines, and I'm more than willing to help clear them out with you. :)
Let me know.
Unfortunately I do not have either UT2(I prefer to fly on Vatsim/IVAO) or the Airbus X Extreme. I'm not sure how much more memory these items would consume. I use the NGX for the testing. My suspicion would be UT2. Try reducing or disabling that completely as a test.
Keep in mind FSX is an 8 year old program. In the high tech industry, that's ancient archive worthy! Definitely expect some tweaking to get things to work nicely. Just like having an old classic car. Lots of tinkering involved!
-
Hi Todd
I was half expecting an answer like this. Fundamentally whatever AS does it does NOT use FSX allotted memory then.
Thanks for your explanation
Regards
Andrew
That's correct! It will use, however, any textures it pushes into FSX. So, I would recommend using no greater than 1024 res. for your clouds if you do use AS2012.
Todd.
-
DX10 helped immensely (or so I thought at the time), and I was able to get out of CYVR and enroute.
Sure it did...
Then, on approach into KLAS (also FSDT), I noticed that none of the terminals or ground textures were there. I noticed this on my downwind, and figured it just needed time to load. By the time I got turned around and onto final, nothing.
Don't mind this issue, that's not a DX10 issue, you fixed it by restarting FSX, not switching DX10 off.
This problem is entirely unrelated to the memory usage issue, and it's possibly a problem of fine-tuning the loading strategy of the dynamic shadows objects which, if made too slow, will result in the scenery building up too slowly, which can by annoying for some users, but if it's done too fast, we risk stalling Simconnect with too much things to do, resulting in FSX stopping to "talk" with Couatl, which handles the sceneries (all of them, including KLAS), so it wasn't able to create KLAS, after being at CYVR.
We are still working on this, because it's a matter of finding a good value that will work for most users, but it should be an easy to distribute fix, with just one small file to update. This doesn't really have anything to do with the memory issue.
-
Fair enough. I'll do some more testing. The boys above might be onto something with AS2012. I'll try running with it off and see what happens. I'll report my results.
What's interesting though, is that last test where I got an OOM at KLAX (never happened before, ever). Is it possible something from CYVR is still being held onto in memory even after leaving the region? I'm not sure how FSX handles the loading/unloading of terrain data... so I'm not being confrontational with this question, I just literally don't know how it works. I've had several jammed flight between KJFK/KORD into KLAX with max UI and never had any OOM issue, using the aforementioned addons (AS2012, UT2, etc.), which is what is making me think something isn't being unloaded when leaving the CYVR region.
Cheers.
-
I checked to see which dx I was using from the run box and it said dx11. Should I change this back to dx10 or leave it. I too get oom errors and would like to fix this, Also should I check the dx10 preview box in FSX.
-
I checked to see which dx I was using from the run box and it said dx11
Yes, because DX11 supports DX9 apps too. That info shows your video driver supports up to DX11 apps.
Should I change this back to dx10 or leave it. I too get oom errors and would like to fix this, Also should I check the dx10 preview box in FSX
Yes, you have to check the DX10 box into FSX.
-
Fair enough. I'll do some more testing. The boys above might be onto something with AS2012. I'll try running with it off and see what happens. I'll report my results.
What's interesting though, is that last test where I got an OOM at KLAX (never happened before, ever). Is it possible something from CYVR is still being held onto in memory even after leaving the region? I'm not sure how FSX handles the loading/unloading of terrain data... so I'm not being confrontational with this question, I just literally don't know how it works. I've had several jammed flight between KJFK/KORD into KLAX with max UI and never had any OOM issue, using the aforementioned addons (AS2012, UT2, etc.), which is what is making me think something isn't being unloaded when leaving the CYVR region.
Cheers.
I noticed that you have orbox as well did you remove the cyvr bgl files that are in the orbox scenery folders which might help since have you check if you got duplicates towers as i had? dont forget to save the bgl files some where else once you removed them from the orbox folders
-
Fair enough. I'll do some more testing. The boys above might be onto something with AS2012. I'll try running with it off and see what happens. I'll report my results.
I meant disabling Ultimate Traffic 2, not AS2012. If you're using HD cloud textures(2048 or 4096) from AS2012, I'd recommend reducing them to 1024.
Todd.
-
Hi Todd,
I have been running AS2012 with 1024 textures, with no appreciable benefit.
As for UT2, Umberto has said that they tested with UT2 running at 100%, while I'm running it around ~40%. In my eyes, AS2012 definitely seems like the rogue agent here. I'm starting another round of testing now. I should have some results shortly.
-
I noticed that you have orbox as well did you remove the cyvr bgl files that are in the orbox scenery folders which might help since have you check if you got duplicates towers as i had? dont forget to save the bgl files some where else once you removed them from the orbox folders
I never even knew about this. I never noticed if there were duplicate towers or not, but I wasn't really looking for it. I'll check for this and add it to my testplan. Thanks!
-
Excellent scenery, . I also get oom errors at KLAX must be because I have LA limesim senery installed. Can we turn off the lighting effect to reduce memory usage. If FSX has reach this limit then we dont need extra features that use more memory.
-
I don't know if it could help but i had OOM's but after changing LOD from large to medium and scenery complexity from very dense to dense i have no more OOM's. (with the Carenado Super King B200) I haven't tried it with the PMDG B737 yet. I'll see tomorrow.
Best regards
Real Deraps
-
I don't know if it could help but i had OOM's but after changing LOD from large to medium and scenery complexity from very dense to dense i have no more OOM's. (with the Carenado Super King B200) I haven't tried it with the PMDG B737 yet. I'll see tomorrow.
Best regards
Real Deraps
Real is on to something here...I did the same with success as well. I've executed 3 flights in and out of CYVR from relatively short distances CYVR to CYYC and CYVR to CYEG using ABX-E, NGX and CLS a330-200 v2. Also be sure to update AS2012 to the latest Build SP4 i believe to smooth out the FPS load.
My pool size internal to the addon manager is set to 13-18. and the other Slider (can't remember the name) is sitting at 20.
I found 2x Sparse Grid Supersampling to be toooo burdensome on the FPS thus this is left disable for my rig...on caused things to creep excessively
-
Unfortunately I'm still unable to use this scenery without getting OOM's. I've thourougly read all suggestions in this topic and applied tweaks where applicable. Also I understand what Umberto says that it's a matter of making choices.
On the other hand, FSDT has to consider that most users already have a range of addons installed that they consider as a "base". I'm talking about AS2012, REX, NGX, FSinn/IVAP and in this case, ORBX. These addons can be used at the same time without OOM's at any other airport on the market. If Vancouver, despite all innovate techniques, turns out to be the ONLY place where they can't be used together, FSDT should probably consider offering a "light" version of the product that can be used without creating OOM errors.
I'm just really disappointed that the scenery is not useable to me at this point. It would be kind and fair if FSDT recognizes and acknowledges the comments of a valued customer instead of waving away these comments by stating it's the customer to "blame".
Mark
-
I'm just really disappointed that the scenery is not useable to me at this point. It would be kind and fair if FSDT recognizes and acknowledges the comments of a valued customer instead of waving away these comments by stating it's the customer to "blame".
Hi Mark
Since I empathise with your fustration may I just say I too am trying to get the best balance with CYVR.
Before now I have only ever suffered from OOM's over Aerosoft VFR London in the NGX with 4096 clouds and textures, very high graphics settings and 4.5 LOD. Rather than compromise with my settings I just never flew (low) over London in the NGX - just got up and out of there (From heathrow and Gatwick) ASAP.
With Orbx, PMDG, FSDT, REX and all the 'must have' add-ons, we now have to make sacrifices - YES its really fustrating we can't have all our favourite add-ons cranked up high over detailed areas, but this is NO developers fault - they are all just giving us the option to use their products.
Some of the others on the forum have managed to get a stable balance and indeed they have compromised (even more than I want to) which does suggest it is FSX maxed out rather than a memory leak/fault in CYVR.
Has FSX reached its pinacle and have we pushed it to its limit? - probably yes
I agree that a light or lighter option to install would be a good option and give those of us with these add-ons a bit more flexibility with the virtual memory loads we impose on FSX - I would like such an option too, for use on my laptop.
When push comes to shove who actually is installing all these add-ons into their simulators, us the customers or the developers of the products? when I get an OOM its usually my fault not Umberto's ;)
I personally have reached the point where I do NOT want and am not yet ready to compromise scenery in my simpit! My Plan is:
I have all the parts for 3 more i7 PC's (I am aware this option can't suit everyone) and am going to use WideView to spread the load. I will install FSX into a 'Server' PC with all my aircraft and traffic, then use the other PC's to run my scenery via WideView thus not having to use memory that the aircraft takes up. I beleive the server can then display all my instruments at the highest resolution possible, panels and Spot View to smaller monitors. I only intend to use the spot view at the airport so don't require the surrounding scenery or LOD radius - an option.
Good luck with CYVR and dont give up! If there is a memory leak somewhere we are unaware of, if anyone will fix it it will be FSDT
Kind regards
Andrew
P.S. Please post when you have managed to get a balance in your Sim as it is useful for us all to compare the stable settings everyone is acheiving - thanks
-
On the other hand, FSDT has to consider that most users already have a range of addons installed that they consider as a "base"
It's exactly this kind of reasoning that HAS to be changed.
What people seem not to get (not many, fortunately, most understood it) is that this problem WILL happen in a few months, unless other scenery developers will keep being smarter than us (it doesn't take much, we know to be reckless and always trying to do the difficult things) and will all revert doing airports in desert areas, is that this "base" you are referring to, sooner or later WILL EAT ALL YOUR 4GB!
It happened first here, only because there are many Add-ons in this area, you make it sound as if the "OOM" message never existed before CYVR, which is obviously not true and, in fact, the cold hard reality, is that it was usually associated with other products.
Once the "add-ons you can't live without" wil reach 4GB when used all together, the "base" you are suggesting we should take into account, will not exist anymore. What would be your suggestion, in that case, keep making sceneries *lighter* and *lighter* ? Even that will end eventually, up to a point that, when we'll have 0 bytes left at our disposal, we couldn't even start adding anything, and some areas in the FSX world will be untouchable. Which, of course, happen to be the most commercially interesting ones.
We can do a "big fat" scenery in the middle of nowhere but, how many people will buy it ?
I'm talking about AS2012, REX, NGX, FSinn/IVAP and in this case, ORBX. These addons can be used at the same time without OOM's at any other airport on the market.
The easy answer is, that airport works with any other airplane too. And that doesn't obviously mean CYVR doesn't work the NGX, because it does, the problem is pretending to use *everything* at once, as if the 4GB limitation didn't existed.
And you can probably use all those products together, but you have to renounce to SOMETHING, for example making some compromises with visual quality. You can start playing with your sliders. You don't HAVE to keep your scenery range to Large, and that takes quite a bit of memory too.
We have a switch in the Addon Manager, that allows you to turn off 4096x4096 textures, and that can be used without having to restart FSX.
The CURRENT version, which we uploaded yesterday, has a 3 position switch instead of the previous on/off, so you can also choose the 2048x2048 resolution, which is still very nice, and still results in a considerable memory saving.
If Vancouver, despite all innovate techniques, turns out to be the ONLY place where they can't be used together, FSDT should probably consider offering a "light" version of the product that can be used without creating OOM errors.
It has already been discussed, here and on Avsim, that we ARE working on an update.
Not that there was anything "wrong" with the scenery in the first place, it just happened to be a bit larger than KLAX, but in an area that has far more additional purchasable scenery than KLAX. Let's hope the PMDG 777 will not use more memory than the 737 because, if you were lucky to be able to use the 737 (together with all the other stuff) until now at, KLAX or PHNL, but just barely (you don't know you are close to an OOM, until you get one), it's might be enough adding a bit more of memory requirement, and you WILL crash elsewhere other than CYVR.
What will happen then, people coming here asking for lighter versions of all our past sceneries, just because the "newest and greatest" came out ?
This to be very clear about what we believe is right.
Either people will get reasonable, and don't feel "diminished" if they are not able to run with 6-7 add-ons at the same time with all sliders to the right, or this situation will escalate soon enough with something else and, looking at the near future, it will make the sim entirely unusable, or any new product launched will fail, because nobody would be able to use it because your "minimum base" is already too near to the maximum memory limit in FSX, which is a FINITE resource.
I'm just really disappointed that the scenery is not useable to me at this point. It would be kind and fair if FSDT recognizes and acknowledges the comments of a valued customer instead of waving away these comments by stating it's the customer to "blame".
It's not your "fault" if you weren't exactly aware of the 4GB limitation in FSX, which is something that can't be fixed, unless the sim is remade in 64 bit code, which seems to be specifically difficult with FSX, since part of its code are very old and written in Assembler code, which is very hard to convert to 64 bit. But once you get to know about it, you have to live with this limit and start making choices, if not about the number of products used together, at least to the visual quality.
Since a 64 bit FSX is not coming out, not in the foreseeable future, we must do with what we have, but you can't pretend that limit doesn't exist, and keep adding stuff and pretending the developer would magically be able to "fit" in a progressively reduce space, because of the "established base", which can only grow larger. And BTW, who decides exactly *what* add-ons make the minimum base ? It takes about 1 year to do airport like CYVR, what happens if something new comes out in the mean time that takes another slice of the memory that we believe to have at our disposal, when the design of the scenery just started ?
But of course, this doesn't mean we don't listen to suggestion. We obviously do and, as I've said, we are working to change a few things, at least to allow users to choose exactly *where* they can work to reduce memory usage at CYVR.
The first improvement is already out, the updated Addon Manager will let you choose the 2048x2048 resolution (again, without a restart, so you might find convenient using 4096x4096 in less dense areas if some of your products requires it, and switch to 2048 in the more critical areas ) and VISUALLY, it's much closer to the 4096x4096 compared to going down to 1024x1024, which might be too big of a compromise.
This goes together with the upcoming CYVR upgrade, which is already done, we are just testing it, which will allow to make some choices during the installation:
- You will able to choose the resolution of the Dynamic Shadows separately from all the other textures. A screen while installing will allow you to install 1024, 2048 or 4096 versions of the shadows textures, with an estimate of how much memory each option will require. IF the dynamic shadows were just the thing that put you on the other side of the OOM threshold, you can now control them separately, without affecting the rest of the scenery quality.
- You will be able to choose the resolution of the Ground textures separately (for example buildings, etc.), another screen will provide with a sample and an estimate in memory usage for 1024, 2048 and 4096 versions.
With the resolution options, you have complete flexibility about were you can act on the scenery memory requirements. For example, choosing 1024 resolution for the dynamic shadows and 2048 resolution for the photoreal background and 4096 for everything else, will still look very good, and will bring overall memory requirements to be same or less than KLAX.
- We ADDED a new Season, but since there's only one in memory at any given time, it doesn't affect memory usage at all, but you will be also able to select how many seasons you want, with 3 choices, Winter/Spring/Fall, or Winter/Spring, or Evergreen with just Spring. ON TOP OF THAT, by changing two easy parameters in an .INI file, you can even customize the *dates* when seasons change, to allow a better compatibility with any other land-class scenery you might have.
-
The above post is *EXACTLY* what sets FSDT (and very few others) apart from all other developers.
These few provide best product and service in the business
Thank you Umberto
Regards
Andrew
-
The above post is *EXACTLY* what sets FSDT (and very few others) apart from all other developers.
These few provide best product and service in the business
Thank you Umberto
Regards
Andrew
What I don't get is how umberto has explained this issue of OOM time and time again over the past week on various diffferent forums and still the same question is asked. Does no one actually bother to read, let alone understand what he's saying?
-
Here is the clincher, seems to me that a lot of payware companies have made concessions to the NGX followers. There is nothing wrong with the scenery, as in many posts and many different forums has been proved over and over again.... The Almighty resource hungry NGX is the problem regardless how great it is. Doubt it, disagree with it, I don't care. It is the way it is.
-
The above post is *EXACTLY* what sets FSDT (and very few others) apart from all other developers.
These few provide best product and service in the business
Thank you Umberto
Regards
Andrew
What I don't get is how umberto has explained this issue of OOM time and time again over the past week on various diffferent forums and still the same question is asked. Does no one actually bother to read, let alone understand what he's saying?
I'm not sure that people do actually read ALL the posts, I must admit I can be guilty of that too ;D
Another thing is that (I certainly) am always learning about FSX and sometimes I learn lesson that I wish did NOT have to be learnt - like for example this memory limit we have to live with!
But alas I agree people should actually read the posts.
-
Here is the clincher, seems to me that a lot of payware companies have made concessions to the NGX followers. There is nothing wrong with the scenery, as in many posts and many different forums has been proved over and over again.... The Almighty resource hungry NGX is the problem regardless how great it is. Doubt it, disagree with it, I don't care. It is the way it is.
Love the NGX or Hate it (I love it BTW) - She is a hungry old bird mate!
-
thanks virtuali for that most positive feedback!
-
To be fair, this problem is not exclusively with the NGX. I have only one time fired up the NGX in YVR and it OOM'd as soon as I pressed the battery button (from C&D state). I have been using Aerosoft's Airbux X Extended and have tried everything I can think of (including everything posted by Umberto) and have had minimal success.
Now that I've removed AS2012 from the setup, I can reliably get out of Vancouver. However, arriving is just not possible for me. As a test, I set up a simple traffic pattern. Took off 8L, went to YVR VOR, downwind and base, turn to final OOM'd. At this point, the only thing I'm running is FSDT CYVR and Orbx PNW. I've removed Vancouver+ and Victoria+, removed AS2012, even turned off UT2... same thing.
My FSX.cfg has the HighMemFix enabled, LOD set to 4.5, and I've dropped the textures down to 1024. What annoys me greatly is how well KLAX works with everything cranked (including running the NGX), yet I can't even perform a traffic pattern with CYVR. In the 2+ years I've been running this beast FSX rig, the only time I've ever had an OOM is after CYVR was installed.
After I installed CYVR, I had the obvious issues in Vancouver, missing buildings in KLAS, my first ever OOM going into KLAX (although to be fair, that flight originated in CYVR). And I haven't flown the NGX for any of these tests.
For me, everything is pointing to something going on with Couatl, as it is the only thing that is consistent to all three airports in my tests. Even if you rule out CYVR problems due to Orbx (or a compendium of addons that have never affected any other airport in my payware arsenal, including everything from FSDT), that doesn't explain the sudden crop of problems with existing FSDT sceneries. While trying to get to the bottom of this, I haven't had a chance to visit KORD, KDFW or KJFK yet, but I'm fearful there will be new mysteries there, too.
-
Jesus Chris, people...removed this, remove that, decrease this, decrease that, get rid of AI-traffic, un-install ASE/REX/UTX/ORBX...it's been all predicted many many time that FSX development has reached its plank within 32-bit world. ;D
-
For me, everything is pointing to something going on with Couatl, as it is the only thing that is consistent to all three airports in my tests.
Nothing in your tests indicates that. The whole point of having Couatl as an external program, is that it CANNOT "steal" memory from FSX! Of all the things that can cause OOM, Couatl.exe is exactly the only one that CAN'T, because it's an external .EXE, and so it runs in its own address space.
And of course, if you check it with Process Explorer, you would see how little memory it uses. Not that this makes any difference anyway to FSX OOMs, because even that little amount of memory it takes, is NOT taken from FSX.
-
Jesus Chris, people...removed this, remove that, decrease this, decrease that, get rid of AI-traffic, un-install ASE/REX/UTX/ORBX...it's been all predicted many many time that FSX development has reached its plank within 32-bit world. ;D
I agree. You can't blame any current developer out there for these OOM's! It's not PMDG, FSDT, ORBX, AS, REX, FlyTampa, Aerosoft, etc.... It's quite obvious the root cause is an 8+yr old coded flight simulator that has been pushed to and reached it's limitations! Period! Screaming or pointing fingers at anyone else that is not going resolve the root issue at hand. You may as well keep beating that dead horse!
-
You and your team have done a fantastic job! I mentioned earlier that I figured out ways to lighten the load in order to enjoy the NGX and CYVR. Like you said, the problem is FSX not having a 64-bit capability. In an ideal world, a "SP3" with 64-bit functionality would have been nice. I really appreciate how you have raised the standard in scenery design. I look forward to your next airport.
Luis
-
Nothing in your tests indicates that. The whole point of having Couatl as an external program, is that it CANNOT "steal" memory from FSX! Of all the things that can cause OOM, Couatl.exe is exactly the only one that CAN'T, because it's an external .EXE, and so it runs in its own address space.
Ok, I get that. That totally makes sense.
With that in mind, is there something I can check, or some kind of log files or anything I can review to see what is going on? I've honestly tried all recommendations and at a total loss. Which is doubly sad, because for the time I spend in CYVR prior to OOM, it is absolutely amazing. It makes me a sad panda that I am not getting the same enjoyment others here have found.
-
I posted this on Avsim, but I'll make a note of it here.
I did a fresh clean install of FSX. Loaded only CYVR and a Carenado Aircraft. My VAS was only around 2.0GB. Installed and ran NGX with CYVR and I was up about 2.6-2.8GB. Traffic patterns and all it didnt change much. Added traffic, and orbx PNW with cloud textures and im bumping up to the 4gb limit again. I did the brave thing and went with DX10 and everything is sharper and I gained a couple hundred MB. Took off the HD textures, and Im flying routes in and out of seattle back to Vancouver with no OOM.
Reduced the cloud textures to 1024 which dont look all that bad, and reduced autogen, as well as some non aircraft traffic sliders, and its running ok. Still up there but no OOM.
So it can be done folks. The scary thing is when bigger and better aircraft come along like the T7. We will have to compromise once again.
-
Nothing in your tests indicates that. The whole point of having Couatl as an external program, is that it CANNOT "steal" memory from FSX! Of all the things that can cause OOM, Couatl.exe is exactly the only one that CAN'T, because it's an external .EXE, and so it runs in its own address space.
Ok, I get that. That totally makes sense.
With that in mind, is there something I can check, or some kind of log files or anything I can review to see what is going on? I've honestly tried all recommendations and at a total loss. Which is doubly sad, because for the time I spend in CYVR prior to OOM, it is absolutely amazing. It makes me a sad panda that I am not getting the same enjoyment others here have found.
Download and run process explorer in the background. You will see the "Virtual Size" your at with FSX. When its getting close to 3.9 your really going to have to make some quick choices. Save your flight.
-
Not to be a pest, but I just wanted to check if the new version has been uploaded? I'd rather not download the whole file and find out it's the old version. :)
Best,
James
-
Google 'kosta OOM' no issues here with the Microsoft fix.
-
After some testing and testing finally found the settings that i can able to fly out of cyvr without getting the oom. I been using 737 ngx,with fscrew2, orbox scenery and rexe textures and weather program and using dx9. Changed my cloud settings from 4096 to 2048 in the rexe option, changed the a1 to 10% traffic, set my autogen to dense, tml set to 2048
-
On the other hand, FSDT has to consider that most users already have a range of addons installed that they consider as a "base"
It's exactly this kind of reasoning that HAS to be changed.
What people seem not to get (not many, fortunately, most understood it) is that this problem WILL happen in a few months, unless other scenery developers will keep being smarter than us (it doesn't take much, we know to be reckless and always trying to do the difficult things) and will all revert doing airports in desert areas, is that this "base" you are referring to, sooner or later WILL EAT ALL YOUR 4GB!
It happened first here, only because there are many Add-ons in this area, you make it sound as if the "OOM" message never existed before CYVR, which is obviously not true and, in fact, the cold hard reality, is that it was usually associated with other products.
Once the "add-ons you can't live without" wil reach 4GB when used all together, the "base" you are suggesting we should take into account, will not exist anymore. What would be your suggestion, in that case, keep making sceneries *lighter* and *lighter* ? Even that will end eventually, up to a point that, when we'll have 0 bytes left at our disposal, we couldn't even start adding anything, and some areas in the FSX world will be untouchable. Which, of course, happen to be the most commercially interesting ones.
Hi Umberto!
I am praying to God that you will bring FSDreamteam products to XPlane 10 64-bit! No more 4GB limit unless the user only has 4GB of RAM. I have 16GB and some folks even have 32!
Please, consider bringing the very fine products from FSX over to xPlane 10! I already buy almost every product you offer including GSX! I would be so happy if I could buy them all AGAIN for xPLANE 10 and I would buy them over again! Think of it, a built-in market of loyal FSDT users who would likely never have the OOM in 64-bits XPlane 10!
Please?
Thank you sir!
Robert McDonald
California
-
I am praying to God that you will bring FSDreamteam products to XPlane 10 64-bit! No more 4GB limit unless the user only has 4GB of RAM.
I fear that when you'll have enough stuff to fill more than 4GB, even if you won't have any more OOM, the frame rate will go down to unflyable levels anyway.
The way to go is trying to now waste memory, instead. We are looking around at various places when this is happening and, for example, found a big one in the FSX SDK Max exporter, which could be more optimized, and probably will end up writing our own version...
-
Really nice job on the update options. Just did circles around yvr and up and around downtown near the north short mountains, and I never peaked above 3GB. This will help out alot of people Umberto. Great job!
Went with low dynamic shadows, mid sharpening, and 2048 textures. Clouds are 1024, and it was in the NGX. Running orbx PNW. Scenery sliders are near max, on most. FPS is about 17-25
Seasons are set to just one. Evergreen, since thats what it mostly is here all year except summer dryness.
Now we just need the T7 for a CYVR - RJTT run!
-
Im right with you on that one brother!
YVR - NRT/HND are going to be great :)
Cheers,
-
Thanks for the update. The OOM warning bell still rings regularly after reducing dynamic shadows to the lowest setting (1024) but at least FSX keeps running. Reducing the ground texture size to 2048 probably solves the issue completely.
Again, thanks for the quick update and for listening to us. It's appreciated.
Mark
-
So far for me the update has been very good! I managed to get out of CYVR without any issues. Had an issue getting into KLAX with terrain.dll crashing, but I think that's unrelated and I'm trying an alternative fix. I will be doing the reverse route later, and hopefully (fingers crossed) I won't have any issues getting into CYVR! :D
-
Thanks for the update. The OOM warning bell still rings regularly after reducing dynamic shadows to the lowest setting (1024) but at least FSX keeps running. Reducing the ground texture size to 2048 probably solves the issue completely.
Again, thanks for the quick update and for listening to us. It's appreciated.
Mark
Where about is the place where you change the dynamic shadows to 1024
-
Where about is the place where you change the dynamic shadows to 1024
In a place where you can't miss it: the installer. Yes, you have to re-run the installer again if you want to change the option, because textures are being rebuilt from scratch at your chosen resolution.
-
Where about is the place where you change the dynamic shadows to 1024
In a place where you can't miss it: the installer. Yes, you have to re-run the installer again if you want to change the option, because textures are being rebuilt from scratch at your chosen resolution.
Thx just worked that out after i posted the question was looking at the addon manager side of things :)
-
Just did my first flight in - CYWG to CYVR on vatsim. Orbx PNW, Rex textures, PMDG 737, FSDT Vancouver installed with lowest options, was just above 3.6 on the virtual mem size of fsx - in just under the wire. Fantastic rendition of YVR!
-
Just did my first successful arrival into CYVR! The update resolved my issue(s). Thanks Umberto!
FYI for anybody else... the terrain.dll/atc.dll crashing thing I fixed by setting the following:
1. Excluded the FSX folder from active scanning in my AV
2. Re-stabilized my O/C
3. Prayed.
Loving CYVR... unbeatable FSDT quality at its best.
-
Just did my first successful arrival into CYVR! The update resolved my issue(s). Thanks Umberto!
FYI for anybody else... the terrain.dll/atc.dll crashing thing I fixed by setting the following:
1. Excluded the FSX folder from active scanning in my AV
2. Re-stabilized my O/C
3. Prayed.
Loving CYVR... unbeatable FSDT quality at its best.
Re number 3 - I'm on it now!!!!!
LOL ;D
-
Can you use DX10 with all non-DX10 compatible airports?
Also it seems none of the prescribed fixes helps against jaffed edges when using DX10
-
Does GSX use very much memory when used at yvr? Assume it would depend on which animations are active, but wondering if the impact is significant. Right now, my setup is stable after a long flight in the ngx at a bit over 3.6 gb. (Rex textures, orbx, minimal trafficx). On approach and taxi in, it was close to 3.7, but then came back done again. Would like to see some of the GSX activity at the airport, but don't want to push the virtual mem much closer to the limit.
Btw, will GSX enable the rear jet bridges at the westjet gates (a1 to a5)?
-
Does GSX use very much memory when used at yvr?
Not much for the objects, because they are fairly small compared to airport buildings+ground+textures and are only a few around your airplane, and exactly ZERO for its own logic, because it runs entirely inside the Couatl.exe that, being a different .exe, has a separate VAS (up to 4GB for its own usage) not shared with FSX.
-
I also have OOM messages when landing in UK2000s Heathrow using ORBX UK... It's pretty impossible for me to fly into these areas!
-
I also have OOM messages when landing in UK2000s Heathrow using ORBX UK... It's pretty impossible for me to fly into these areas!
With regards to Heathrow; do you have other UK2000 London airports active? If so try disabling all except to the one your flying into.
-
Yes I do have also Gatwick and Manchester. I need to deactivate them? Why? I never had this issue before
-
Yea, right after purchasing the CYVR I applied the memory tweak and took off with my flight in hopes of success, those hopes were short lived, on final approach to CYVR my game has crashed. Hopefully lowering settings to 1024 in FSX.cfg will do the trick.
By the way it takes quite a while for the OOM to happen, therefore the demo could have never warned us about it.
Besides DX10 and switching to lower textures, is there a way to avoid the OOM?
Board: Rampage IV
CPU: 3820 @ 5Ghz
Memoery: 16GB Kingston hyper series
GPU: 660Ti
-
Yea, right after purchasing the CYVR I applied the memory tweak and took off with my flight in hopes of success, those hopes were short lived, on final approach to CYVR my game has crashed. Hopefully lowering settings to 1024 in FSX.cfg will do the trick.
If, with "memory tweak", you mean setting the texture size options to values lower than 4096 (the previous 1.0 default) in the 1.1 CYVR installer, if you are still getting OOM after that, there's something else you are running which is really eating all your memory, since CYVR with lower settings (such a 2048 for ground and 1024 for dynamic shadows) takes about the same memory as KLAX.
By the way it takes quite a while for the OOM to happen, therefore the demo could have never warned us about it.
Since the OOM is not CAUSED by CYVR, the demo surely doesn't know if you are going to have an OOM after it has expired.
I'm sorry, but the OOM problem, which was NEVER a problem with CYVR, is entirely fixed now. Not because there was something to fix or the scenery had anything "wrong" in the first place, but because you now have the ability with the installer to make CYVR a bit smaller, to make more space for other add-ons you use.
What causes an OOM is the TOTAL amount of things installed, it's never a single add-on, there's nothing else add-ons can do, other than giving you OPTIONS to lower their footprint, which is exactly what the 1.1 installer does.
-
No, I used the microsoft fix (kosta's) for the memory tweak. I will see which textures I have set for CYVR.
Thanks for the help, I'll keep you posted on my progress of eliminating OOM.
Sorry just to clarify to set textures lower, I will have to reinstall CYVR?
-
Yes I do have also Gatwick and Manchester. I need to deactivate them? Why? I never had this issue before
In London I think that heathrow and gatwick are both loaded even though you are only at 1 of the airports, Manchester shouldn't be an issue.
Try it - nothing to lose
-
So I am still getting OOM fix , when looked into Processes my FSX was using ~3000M at the time of the crash. here is the list of things I have done.
Lowered my Texture size to 1024.
Applied HIGHMEMFIX
Applied the registry fix.
Lowered everything to medium settings.
Any more suggestions?
-
So I am still getting OOM fix , when looked into Processes my FSX was using ~3000M at the time of the crash. here is the list of things I have done.
Are you referring to CYVR or UK2000 airports ? I can only repeat and confirm that, with textures all at 1024, CYVR takes LESS memory than KLAX so, it's fairly obvious your memory is being used by something else.
-
Well I have no applications running. In Flightsim I have ORBX and UTX enabled in the area but still its weird why it crashes. I've lowered things to the lowest. I will try rebuilding my VM today and will let you know.
-
Well I have no applications running
Running applications don't have the slightest effect on FSX OOMs. The only thing that cause OOM in FSX are too many FSX addons running at the same time.
.In Flightsim I have ORBX and UTX enabled in the area but still its weird why it crashes. I've lowered things to the lowest. I will try rebuilding my VM today and will let you know.
You haven't said which airplane you use, I bet it's the PMDG and, if CYVR is installed with 1024 textures, as you said, it takes about HALF size of what the PMDG takes so, your 3GB must have been taken by something, but surely not CYVR, which is about 400MB in total, at 1024 size.
-
No I was actually using Wilco E-Jets Embraer 175.
I I kind of don't want to turn off Orb and UTX.
-
I also have OOM messages when landing in UK2000s Heathrow using ORBX UK... It's pretty impossible for me to fly into these areas!
With regards to Heathrow; do you have other UK2000 London airports active? If so try disabling all except to the one your flying into.
I have the same issue. Be sure to moved autogen to "Normal". Helped tremendously in most cases. (I have all of UK2000 major airports plus EGLC). I have to bite the bullet when flying to CYVR as well in losing some of this eye candy just to enjoy an uninterrupted landing. Depending on the Destination or and Departure Scenery my slider varies between Normal and Dense and sometimes very Dense.
-
No I was actually using Wilco E-Jets Embraer 175.
I I kind of don't want to turn off Orb and UTX.
Wilco Jets hurts in Fs9. I see about the same in FSX. Be sure not to sit at the Departing terminal too long in these buckets. If flying to CYVR or almost any detail airport with sliders high or even modest will cause the dreaded Oom issue
-
Im wondering just out of interest, I know a lot of people fly FSX ... why aren't there that many reports on OOMs...
-
Im wondering just out of interest, I know a lot of people fly FSX ... why aren't there that many reports on OOMs...
There are in fact quite a number of disappointed campers. If you look around the forums; where in some cases views are extraordinarily high in comparison to the actual replies, though hard to accurately compute, it's still a very busy and anticipated subject.
Here is another thought:
FSX is now what ....7 yrs of age and prior to the time I made the jump (1 year to date) most aired on the forums that FSX was used for low and slow (VFR) while FS9 handled the heavies (IFR), (A practice that I believe it still prevalent today).
I think many people have come to terms with the FSX limitations and only a small few of us really enjoy all the bells and whistles of the platform, whilst others, possibly the majority, just embark upon the shear joy flying.
I can add to that in that with addons such as GEX and UTX and soon Orbx world most will be content with these packages and the advanced aircraft(s). As such, flying into the default scenery can be exhilarating especially when you can max the sliders.
Notwithstanding; in cases like mine, the work that these guys produce and others takes you to that edge of reality in that giving you the essence of immersion. I privilege that I very much appreciate from these folks and give them much acclaim for their talents and commitments
-
I read up a lot regarding these OOM and people discuss, and I agree with them, that the FSX has reached the limit it can handle. A good example was give as "trying to jam 6 people inside a car that takes 5, at some point something will happen"
Only question for me is why, why do developers develop such demanding addons when they know that 90% of people will have trouble using them. And please understand I am not pointing the finder to FSDT, they have done an amazing job with optimizations. But aircraft addon manufactures as well as ORBX and UTX couple have done possibly better.
I mostly 99% of the time fly Wilco E-Jets and people agree that Jet takes up a lot of Virtual space.
-
Well CYVR got me to give DX10 a more serious look and I am glad that I did. I made this video to show a few online friends how FSX is working with DX10 to show its smoothiness and benefits. I used KSFF and CYVR Day and night as my show pieces. These two represent the more recent and heavy on the computer areas to kind of stress test it. While the a/c is the default Bell and I had weather clear, I still dont get a performance hit when using real weather or the more advanced a/c.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOFt89W4KN0&feature=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOFt89W4KN0&feature=youtu.be)
-
Only question for me is why, why do developers develop such demanding addons when they know that 90% of people will have trouble using them.
Because there is a demand for it. Lets get real here, there is a quote from an E-Jets pilots "I kind of don't want to turn off Orb and UTX." There has to be some give and take on everyone's part. Umberto has met the OOM pilots more than half way with 1.1, it sure allowed me to use the HIGH resource CoolSky DC-9. Having the sliders all the right and refusing to budge is just unrealistic and without compromise.......OOM's. Take it or leave it. It's your choice.
-
Well, I can only take it haha. I already bough vancouver and I used to fly there a lot. I just have to find the optimum point. Gonna do few short hops from kelowna and see whats what.
-
One thing that works for me is to only load the addon DLL's you are actually using. Addon's with internal DLL's declare them in the DLL.xml file. (many aircraft addons, including PMDG) These will normally load at startup whether you are using them or not, eating up precious VAS. To avoid this, add the following line to each section in the dll.xml file that is optional. Do not add it to addon dll's you use on all flights. If the line is already there, but set to False, change it to True.
<ManualLoad>True</ManualLoad>
Now when you startup FSX it will ask you for each addon you want to load. Select yes only to the ones you are using for the flight you are on. (There's no need loading Wilco's or CS's DLL's when you are flying the NGX) It's a little inconvenient, but it will give FSX some more breathing room to work with.
-
One important feature in FSX compared to various versions is that it allows you to setup "Slider profiles" to suit different situations. I believe because of this feature I have not experienced the dreaded OOM or CTD. If you're wondering what I'm talking about its under Options -> Settings -> Load & Save. If you have never saved any slider profiles, obviously you have nothing to load. So first step is to create slider profiles. Eg, move all sliders to the right. Then go to Options -> Settings -> Save your "profile". Then redo your sliders to medium eg, Autogen = dense, Scenery Complexity = normal, etc, then Save your sliders again with a different name. You can save as many profiles are you wish. You can load these saved profiles anytime during flight or on the ground. I personally select my less intense profile when I'm about to turn finals to a highly complex airport, high AIs, and/or bad weather or about to depart from one. I have even incorporated this step to my landing and takeoff checklists so I don't forget to cross check my slider profiles in preparation for landing or takeoff.
With so many resource intense aircrafts/sceneries out there and more coming, I cannot really see any other way to optimize my FSX experience. Definitely, keeping all sliders to the right and expect everything to work because it is payware is a sure recipe to eventually kill my system.
-
I am starting to feel like the default vancouver area [like seattle] is very poorly modelled in terms of performance.
HAs anyone worked out how to rid this area of the issues? I still get awful performance here
-
I don't think anywhere else has such large variances of landclass, waterclass, complex coastlines, and mountainous terrain all in close proximity.
-
I am starting to feel like the default vancouver area [like seattle] is very poorly modelled in terms of performance.
HAs anyone worked out how to rid this area of the issues? I still get awful performance here
That's not a fair assessment, taken alone, it's probably no more then any other airport they develop. When you combine that though with the most detail rich general area scenery area (ORBX) and the most detailed aircraft which eats Virtual address space (NGX), on a 32bit platform, what do you expect? It's not the airport that is the issue it's the combination of all 3, The airport scenery is just the straw that broke the camels back.
-
I have to agree the comment is unfair. I've run CYVR with all the PMDG NGXs and default scenery and traffic and other addons without a hitch. I've had the OOM problem when I've included Orbx PNW. I've changed the plane and the problem goes away. I think the simple fact is CYVR is as high-end as you get as far as airports go - PMDG planes are the high-end of Aircraft - and Orbx the high-end of scenery. Your asking a lot of even the best available systems to handle all three at once. I find simply cranking back some of my other addons gets rid of the issue.The answer lies in freeing up the system from other tasks and running as clean as you can. Haven't tried the DX10 solution yet - will give that a go. It's also a bit much to ask the developers of these products to consider every other bit of software when making their product. They all produce outstanding work that performs well (individually) within the main FSX framework. That or rewrite the FSX code so it better uses memory - hyperthreading etc etc (Now who wouldn't pay money for that!) :)
-
I am starting to feel like the default vancouver area [like seattle] is very poorly modelled in terms of performance.
HAs anyone worked out how to rid this area of the issues? I still get awful performance here
If you think the default Vancouver has issues, you could try Vancouver+ V3, but I think you will find it harder on your system. I run ORBX PNW, Vancouver+ V3, REX (at 1024 and lower settings), CYVR (at 2048) and the iFly 737NG (not exactly a lightweight) and have never had an OOM in a variety of seasons and weather conditions. Seattle is definitely overloaded, but I don't think Vancouver is in the same category. Of course, I have a different slider profile (lower autogen, cloud density and car traffic) for airliners than for GA.
-
I am starting to feel like the default vancouver area [like seattle] is very poorly modelled in terms of performance.
It's not "poorly modeled", and there isn't anything "wrong" with the area.
Just like Seattle, and New York area, they present quite a bit of custom scenery objects. In JFK, there are hundreds of custom buildings to represent Manhattan, and Vancouver in FSX has quite a bit of custom objects in the ports, downtown, etc. Same with seattle.
Of coarse, you can always turn this down with the "scenery complexity" slider, but you may sacrifice losing objects in your custom scenery add-ons.
-
Try switch to DX10 - its a OOM/VAS killer (saving 1GB here )
Michael Moe
-
I have jagged edges when running in DX10, have you resolved it?