MichaelMoe 6 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Well i am also running 11-15 fps and OOM on normal Autogen not even starting the NGX systems up. AI traffic is 0 . I have 30fps in EDDF,25FPS in EDDM etc. even 25FPS in EHAM . ????? This is very bad i7-950@4,2 w7 64 bit HD5870 1gb SSD 512GB tweaks Usepools=0 HIGHMEMFIX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelMoe 6 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 FOUND THE PROBLEM. I HAD TML=4096. SWITCHING BACK TO 1024 GAVE ME 41FPS AND VAS 3GB Michael Moe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimon 3 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 And FS2004 could never show this level of detail and if it could it would be dead slow because it is limited to one CPU core. I The latest post shows the funny realization of "this level of details". People in FSX sometimes have no choice but to shift back to 1024 resolution and scale back to reduced DDS textures. Actually, this modernization calls simply - FS2004. I also hope for FS2004 version. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtualstuff 76 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I would recommend that running the scenery with a complex add-on airliner with high-resolution textures (such as NGX), the system should have a Sandy Bridge (i5 or i7 2600k) processor with at least 4gb of ram and GTX570, 580 (Or HD7950 -7970) (or higher) graphics card with 1GB+ memory and definetly a 64-bit Windows 7 OS. We had several test systems with the scenery and all the Sandy Bridge systems with a good graphics card and 64-bit OS performed really well with complex airplanes. The truth is with a less powerful system, you can't always run FSX + complex airplane + complex scenery with high fps. Also, when in full screen mode, FSX has a bug that when you cycle between views there's a memory leak which can cause out of memory situation. Well as a dev some parts are overkill even on my high end system 64 bit O/S Win 7 :-) Thanks for downsizing the textures to FSX default of 1024*1024 Well that's a huge difference of 700 mb less in memory :-) Great work love the scenery... In general the one that invented larger textures as default size of 1024*1024 as Aces on purpose meant for FSX should be banned form the internet lol Why, because it looks great but it throws most system out of balance even high end systems, only high end systems with 1.5gb or more memory for the GPU can manage the load barely ;-) Tweaks like larger lod ranges and extremely large textures sizes of 2048*2048 and 4096*4096 adds too the total count of memory and throws most systems in an OOM state and leaves the user behind with no clue at all... Even performance issue blurriness loading times etc due to large memory footprint... With complex aircraft/airports/photo real scenery and mesh it should all be in balance that's why I prefer 1024*1024 and have best of both worlds.... Hence running myself as a dev a highend system on 64bit os Win7 but some parts are unfortunately just overkill on my system ;-) Have now with a very complex aircraft and also tested with the 737NGX over 30 FPS at night :-) and a 2.2 gb memory footprint :-) That said I love the scenery at 1024*1024 and without the 3d taxi lights performance is great :-) Cheers, André Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alehead 126 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Thanks to A-Flight for putting out the patch today. That has to be one of the fastest responses to an issue. This has definitely improved my experience of Vantaa in FSX so far. A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronMyers 23 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Thanks to A-Flight for putting out the patch today. That has to be one of the fastest responses to an issue. This has definitely improved my experience of Vantaa in FSX so far. A They did? Where? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim (Joe) 48 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 They did? Where? In the support/faq area, select product Helsinki. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronMyers 23 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Ah, got it thank you. Are they just resized textures or are there other optimizations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Raphael Jakob 457 Posted October 6, 2012 Administrator Share Posted October 6, 2012 Ah, got it thank you. Are they just resized textures or are there other optimizations? Hi, just new textures. with this patch i have really good frames and i don't get an oom and i have to say, i have a really bad and old machine. If you want the old files back....just go into the texture folder of helsinki, there should be a backup folder with the old (high-res) textures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim (Joe) 48 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Hi, just new textures. with this patch i have really good frames and i don't get an oom and i have to say, i have a really bad and old machine. If you want the old files back....just go into the texture folder of helsinki, there should be a backup folder with the old (high-res) textures. Oh. I thought installing the patch fixes a problem causing the memory usage to be extremely high, so installing this patch actually just lowers the quality and nothing else? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel EBCI 23 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 I Just bought ... and I'm happy by the Fps without patch ... I have a similar rate versus another Mega Airport ... I just disable the 1000 cars in the parking. and the result are best for me ! I'm just a little sad from the missing AES lite on this modern product versus another actual project with this size from another compagnie... The life in and out airport are very very poor ... O.K. that's the north ... Please for an possible futur update, make it ! Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel H 10 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Hey, anybody also experiences that AI traffic is missing after installation of the patch? Strange thing, on other airports it's there (Prepar3D) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrzI 0 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 May or may not be relevant... I have mid-air artifacts bearing 222 from 04L distance 16 miles at about 10000 ft. The only add-on I have is GE X Europe. Installed the patch and get much better FPS. Still had OOM on final. Disabled landside scenery, cars and 3D taxilights. Great performance now. I am happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magalhaes 16 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Actually purchased the product and with the NGX my FPS are horrible as the image below. I installed the new patch yet more performance with the NGX still bad. Has anyone else with the same problem here, what they are doing to solve it. My machine: I7930 / GTX 460 / 6GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developer Antti (A-Flight) 31 Posted October 8, 2012 Developer Share Posted October 8, 2012 Read the pinned topic on top of this forum posted by Kepti about some tweaks you can apply to FSX. You can also try disabling the cars and baggage carts in the tweaking tool. We are also working on another update that will further optimize the scenery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magalhaes 16 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Read the pinned topic on top of this forum posted by Kepti about some tweaks you can apply to FSX. You can also try disabling the cars and baggage carts in the tweaking tool. We are also working on another update that will further optimize the scenery. As to the tweaks already have set here. Only problem I had with FPS even with the NGX, with other aircraft all quiet for now. I ended up disabling the Hi-resolution 3D Virtual Cockpit, and frames with the NGX again run satisfactorily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtAir 3 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Antti (A-Flight) Could you confirm "work in progress" of Mega airport Helsinki for FS2004? There is still no clear statement about that. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimon 3 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Since, FSX users are definitely expriencing problems in full AI envirnment with UT, GEX Europe and FS Global, perhaps it would be good idea to produce FS2004 version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelMoe 6 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 with everything turned off i am back at 11-12 FPS at night but 30+ in day time Michael Moe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelMoe 6 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 The frames seem to have its week spots around. At gate 18 looking right towards tower gives me 15fps but 40fps looking left. Using EZDOK and jump out same thing happens moving the camera around. Jumping frome 40-45fps down to 11fps with no technical big differents in what is showing on screen relativ to mass or buildings Michael Moe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelMoe 6 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Forgot to tell that using BOB from ORBX around the scenery makes the same experience. So it has nothing to do with the NGX for instance. Michael Moe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magalhaes 16 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 And then when we have any news about the update .... Scenario with horrible FPS ..... actually almost unusable for a quiet flight ... I feel cheated when buying this type of product,,,,,,, where are the updates???????? That is disrespectful to customers .... did not have to beta testers see this kind of problem?? No one will appear to talk about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocky 118 Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Well here we go again. Sorry fellas, Aerosoft, as much as I love you guys and your products, I no longer purchase any of the big airports, they are a bit of a joke. I gave up after trying to get CDG and Madrid to give any kind of smooth flying, not to mention Barcelona and Heathrow. Running my rig, 4.6Ghz with 8Gb Ram, GTX 580, hot tweaked cfg and autogen at normal, with fine weather in the NGX and all I get is stuttering and low frames around the airport. It seems rediculous that Aerosoft is still commissioning the development of these airports when so many simmers complain about bad performance. There must be a simple way of offering guys who experience poor performance to switch to a less hungry scenery, instead of just switching off things, which in my experience, do little to alleviate the problem. Sorry to be on a downer, guys, as I said, I love Aerosoft, but IMHO they really need to address these sceneries and either stop producing them or develop them in such a way that we can use them instead of having to make changes to our FSX installation! Apologies Mathjis, but every time I read a thread about these frame hungry airports, you come back saying you get 25fps with no tweaks etc etc. Is this with AG set at no less than normal, with reasonable amount of AI and from the VC of a third party plane such as the NGX? If so I would love to know your secret when everyone else is reporting frames in the early teens? As I said, good guys, but please offer some light at the end of the tunnel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridgey 26 Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Well here we go again. Sorry fellas, Aerosoft, as much as I love you guys and your products, I no longer purchase any of the big airports, they are a bit of a joke. I gave up after trying to get CDG and Madrid to give any kind of smooth flying, not to mention Barcelona and Heathrow. Running my rig, 4.6Ghz with 8Gb Ram, GTX 580, hot tweaked cfg and autogen at normal, with fine weather in the NGX and all I get is stuttering and low frames around the airport. It seems rediculous that Aerosoft is still commissioning the development of these airports when so many simmers complain about bad performance. There must be a simple way of offering guys who experience poor performance to switch to a less hungry scenery, instead of just switching off things, which in my experience, do little to alleviate the problem. Sorry to be on a downer, guys, as I said, I love Aerosoft, but IMHO they really need to address these sceneries and either stop producing them or develop them in such a way that we can use them instead of having to make changes to our FSX installation! Apologies Mathjis, but every time I read a thread about these frame hungry airports, you come back saying you get 25fps with no tweaks etc etc. Is this with AG set at no less than normal, with reasonable amount of AI and from the VC of a third party plane such as the NGX? If so I would love to know your secret when everyone else is reporting frames in the early teens? As I said, good guys, but please offer some light at the end of the tunnel I completely agree with the above statement, There is just something about the Aerosoft Mega Airports which is ridiculous. I feel cheated out of 25euros from a project I was genuinely excited about. Don't say its our computers, other developers [uk2000, FSDT FlyTampa] have major airports with staggering difference in fps compared to Aerosoft. You used to be at the top, but I think a re think is in order. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.