Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ChinNoobonic

Nassau Issues

Recommended Posts

Seippg,

 

If you read the previous posts you'll see that the update seemed okay in P3D (one report) but not with FSX:SP2. Until the developers respond there's not much more to add.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ray.  I wonder if it's the same problem they have in Sacramento...a huge spike in VAS that P3D3 can release but FSX can't.  I have left Sacramento off of my sim waiting for a patch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesting suggestion from JPL19 in #92 asking if the airport scenery could be separated from the harbour and town. As I (and perhaps many other IFR pilots) only need the airport that would be a welcome change.

 

P3D definitely handles VAS better than FSX but I'm not about to change just for one airport. All my others are absolutely fine with VAS. I don't have Sacramento and don't plan on getting Manchester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There was an interesting suggestion from JPL19 in #92 asking if the airport scenery could be separated from the harbour and town. As I (and perhaps many other IFR pilots) only need the airport that would be a welcome change.

 

P3D definitely handles VAS better than FSX but I'm not about to change just for one airport. All my others are absolutely fine with VAS. I don't have Sacramento and don't plan on getting Manchester.

While I can see that separating them would help, I don't see it as the problem.  It's not Los Angeles.  The island without the scenery is very light as I remember.  I don't have it yet but, I'd guess that they didn't consider VAS as they developed and may have something in the library that's a big problem.  Sacramento is a relatively small airport with nothing at all in the surrounding area and yet it's VAS footprint is...certainly the spike...is quite large. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with you seippg. For such a small island the amount of VAS consumed is extraordinary. Read the second sentence in #91. That may give you a clue.

Hopefully IGS will respond as I know they are reading these posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm honestly glad they're developing and I hope they're taking this all somewhat constructively.  I'm keenly interested in Nassau (and Freeport!...lots of good sceneries to do!)  Overall it looks like a nice scenery...just needs some fixing so that it plays well. Even the best devs have to tune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to try the Nassau X update version 1.01 as my version consistently runs out of VAS memory.   However, I do not see how to install the update.  Could someone please send me the link?   

Thanks

 

By the way, I am using FSX from MS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to your account wherever you purchased it and re-download the scenery.  It is not an incremental update or patch.  It is a new installer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I did a flight from KIAH (FSDreamteam) to MYNN with the A320 (Aerosoft) in v1.1. Had my first OOM ever :(:( I did not occur in v1.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, is in FSX SP2... I can complete even a flight from Aerosoft EGLL to EDDF without any OOM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're in the same boat as me Erik. I have most of the FSDreamTeam, T2G, LatinVFR and UK2000 airports and none give me OOMs. Just Nassau. :(

 

The fix appears to have fixed little. I trust IGS are reading this and will respond soon.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found several very large textures in the texture folder (1 of 65MB, several of 21 MB...) I resized them all to 1024x1024 in order to save VAS. I do not see visual difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Er!k said:

I found several very large textures in the texture folder (1 of 65MB, several of 21 MB...) I resized them all to 1024x1024 in order to save VAS. I do not see visual difference.

 

That's interesting. What's the VAS like after doing that? Can you describe how amateurs like me can do this please? Specialist tools required?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I tried the update. I run prepar3d v2.5 and had no problem whit VAS.

To begin with my test, I started from the floor, turned off most of the settings in the config tool (i never use statics o 3d grass in airports where I can elmiminate these features).

I fly with a low demanding aircraft (feelthere embraer 175) from LATIN VFR Miami (an authentic permormance killer). I share some captures from 100 miles, few miles from the airport and at the gate.

 

From now on I´ll try with other aircraft and some options turned on via the config tool. In case OOM is not a problem there will not be another post.

The fact is that I finished with 1.2 GB free so I´m quite sure I´ll not have problems with aerosoft airbus for example.

 

My specs are: Intel I 4990k and GTX 750, 8GB RAM.

 

I used AS Next, FTX GLOBAL, FTX vector (only highways turned on because I realized FTX VECTOR is one of the keys to prevent OOM). I share my prepar3d settings also. 

Another clue to prevent OOM is the level of detail radius -LOD- (in my case never more than 3.5, that is what I need for IFR).

 

Finally, the performance was good.

Bye.

********

100 miles out (2.2 GB used)

1.png

 

Few miles out, on final rwy 14 (2.78 GB used)

2.png

 

At the gate (2.83 GB used)

3.png

 

***********

 

Prepar3d settings

22.png

23.png

24.png

25.png

26.png

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

 

Thanks. You didn't say what impact it had on VAS.

Ray,

 

I haven't bought Nassau...still waiting for a resolution of the VAS issues.  I did try the tool on Sacramento as I recall...it did reduce some textures (no visual change) but I didn't see much serious improvement overall. I should add, however, that there is very little surrounding area at Sacramento.  It's very flat and sparse as it is in the real world.

 

Gregg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Esteban759 said:

Hi, I tried the update. I run prepar3d v2.5 and had no problem whit VAS.

To begin with my test, I started from the floor, turned off most of the settings in the config tool (i never use statics o 3d grass in airports where I can elmiminate these features).

I fly with a low demanding aircraft (feelthere embraer 175) from LATIN VFR Miami (an authentic permormance killer). I share some captures from 100 miles, few miles from the airport and at the gate.

 

From now on I´ll try with other aircraft and some options turned on via the config tool. In case OOM is not a problem there will not be another post.

The fact is that I finished with 1.2 GB free so I´m quite sure I´ll not have problems with aerosoft airbus for example.

 

My specs are: Intel I 4990k and GTX 750, 8GB RAM.

 

I used AS Next, FTX GLOBAL, FTX vector (only highways turned on because I realized FTX VECTOR is one of the keys to prevent OOM). I share my prepar3d settings also. 

Another clue to prevent OOM is the level of detail radius -LOD- (in my case never more than 3.5, that is what I need for IFR).

 

Finally, the performance was good.

Bye.

23.png

 

 

 

Interesting.  I wonder how much sliders have an effect and, if so, what slider settings.  It could, at least, be a clue to what's going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you set the line in your fsx.cfg to "TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024" this will force the sim to not load the larger textures, and may give some performance increases (I don't own this scenery so can't say for sure). It is a lot easier than resizing all your textures anyway, and should have the same effect!

 

Mat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, seippg said:

Ray,

 

I haven't bought Nassau...still waiting for a resolution of the VAS issues.  I did try the tool on Sacramento as I recall...it did reduce some textures (no visual change) but I didn't see much serious improvement overall. I should add, however, that there is very little surrounding area at Sacramento.  It's very flat and sparse as it is in the real world.

 

Gregg

 

Hi Gregg,

 

Oh, okay. So if there's no visual change and little/no change to VAS / fps I'm mystified why people would use this tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

 

Hi Gregg,

 

Oh, okay. So if there's no visual change and little/no change to VAS / fps I'm mystified why people would use this tool.

 

Ray, with some sceneries there is improvement.  With Sacramento, not much.  It'd be kinda nice if devs would use the tool before sending scenery out to verify everything is optomized.  I've not seen it have an adverse affect yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, seippg said:

 

Ray, with some sceneries there is improvement.  With Sacramento, not much.  It'd be kinda nice if devs would use the tool before sending scenery out to verify everything is optomized.  I've not seen it have an adverse affect yet.

 

I agree sceneries should be optimised by developers to ensure maximum performance and minimum memory usage.

 

It's 8 days since IDS commented on this thread (the official support forum) so it would be nice to hear from them on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

 

Hi Gregg,

 

Oh, okay. So if there's no visual change and little/no change to VAS / fps I'm mystified why people would use this tool.

 

38 minutes ago, seippg said:

 

Ray, with some sceneries there is improvement.  With Sacramento, not much.  It'd be kinda nice if devs would use the tool before sending scenery out to verify everything is optomized.  I've not seen it have an adverse affect yet.

 

 

Whenever ingame changes are applied to any of the graphics settings, this specific setting will revert back to its "default" value of 1024. (Manual edits to other entries in the fsx.cfg will not change this setting, though). So scaling down the textures will only have an effect when this setting is constantly kept at higher values like 2048 or 4096.

 

This is true for FSX-MS at least, not sure about FSX-SE or P3D.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

we're still in the process of resolving issues. 

Splitting the city from the airport is not that easy and would take long.
That's why we're investigating into possible solutions with current files and features available.

This process wont be quick. It requires checking all sourcefiles and different methods. So if we're maybe not so active here, we haven't forgotten about Nassau and work on another fix. It worked on P3D so what should stop us from finding a solution for FSX SP2? ;)


Ps. A Sacramento updates was released few days ago and we saw that it's available already. For anyone out there with SMF. Check your account :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...