Jump to content

Archived

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

Emanuel Hagen

Out of memory with Helsinki

Recommended Posts

We shouldn't have to remove bufferpools, the issue is obviously with the scenery, not, the users PC

:clap_s:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not try to remove anything or modify my perfect FSX.cfg..why: I have tons of addons which works just fine without any oom or ctd. The only problem I have is Mega Airport EFHK with oom, ctd, bad frames and strange artifacts in the air around the airport. Solution bitte!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not try to remove anything or modify my perfect FSX.cfg..why: I have tons of addons which works just fine without any oom or ctd. The only problem I have is Mega Airport EFHK with oom, ctd, bad frames and strange artifacts in the air around the airport. Solution bitte!

Just make a safe backup of your Fsx.cfg and then see if removing the Bufferpools helps, not like you have to keep it just test it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just make a safe backup of your Fsx.cfg and then see if removing the Bufferpools helps, not like you have to keep it just test it.

Shaun..I have already tried that and no, it did not help! So no more try to modify .cfg here and there. Again, the problem is Mega Airport Helsinki! :boohoo_s:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shaun..I have already tried that and no, it did not help! So no more try to modify .cfg here and there. Again, the problem is Mega Airport Helsinki! :boohoo_s:

:clap_s:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back on the amount of posting around this scenery tells only one thing - someting is not good in this package.

One could ask if it has been tested good enough before release looking at the response.

I feel that the distributor and the developer needs to iron out all the problems and inform the market what is been done or beeing done to fix this situation.

Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back on the amount of posting around this scenery tells only one thing - someting is not good in this package.

One could ask if it has been tested good enough before release looking at the response.

I feel that the distributor and the developer needs to iron out all the problems and inform the market what is been done or beeing done to fix this situation.

Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk 2

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, you should remove it because it slows down FSX, not because of Helsinki :bigdrink_s:

Common sense prevails :cheers_s:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents, I am not the project manager of this project and actually I got very little knowledge of it. But I have been reading some comments and some advise that I like to comment on.

  • We sold a (very) good number of Helsinki and as always the vast majority of users do NOT have problems. That's not saying there are no problems, that's saying they are on some users systems and not, as implied on this topic inherently with the product. I for one have no problem what so ever and we got a few hundred other users without problems. That means we got to solve problems some users have.
  • We are 100% sure that if you install Windows and FSX, both fully updated, there will be no problems. And unfortunately that's all we can promise. We have no idea how a users system looks like.
  • The problems are really focused on systems that have not enough memory. And that is understandable as this is a very memory intensive scenery (in fact I do not know of any other scenery that uses as much). So I am not very surprised there are issues there. FSX is a 32 bit program and needs to work in the ever more limited memory space.
  • I read some advise on tweaks to the fsx.cfg here that are just plain wrong. In our support we solve 15% of problems by telling people delete the FSX.cfg and letting FSX build a new one. If you are not very very very sure the advise you get is solid and is applicable to your system, leave it alone and save yourself a shit load of problems. I run FSX 8 hours a day and never felt the need to tweak it. I also know of only two tweaks that actually make a more or less important difference on my system. And with important I mean 5% better FPS. To be honest, I don't care.

Okay so what do we got? We got a scenery that is for sure tough on all systems but that's because it simply contains more polygons then most others. You pay a price for each polygon and solving the problems we face means removing stuff. There is very little to gain in optimizing as that almost always means making it better for some users and worse for others. See this are bits and bytes, they work or they do not work. If it works fine on a system that is 100% clean it means by definition the software is good. It does not mean we should not do our best to make it work on systems that are NOT that clean. It just means that getting it to work on those systems is hard, sometimes impossible. If you try to compress a highly complex aircraft, together with a highly complex scenery, together with weather tools, high res replacement textures etc etc into the 32 bit memory space you are going to run out of memory. If you got a 64 bit OS you can go a bit further, but as FSX is a 32 bit exe it still is limited. There is no way you can pile add-on on add-on and think it will run. It is just impossible.

Saying the scenery is faulty is just not right. If it would be it would not run on any system. It might be faulty in combination with your setup. And we should try to sort out those problems. So keep in mind the problems are limited to some systems and that the developers are working hard to help those people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mathijs: How do you know that majority have no problem? Is it based on the number of sold copies versus how many people are complaining here on the forum?

If I say that I have 100% perfects flights between heavy dense scenerys without oom and ctd and 3d spikes, like the flight I´m doing now: Scansim EKCH - UK2000 EGPF with Horizon VFR UK, Treescapes, Ulitmate Traffic 2, iFly. I have done 3 flights between EKCH and EFHK all the flights ended with oom, bad fps, ctd and 3d spikes. Do I have a problem with my system, setup, FSX, cgf or can it maybe be something with Mega Airport EFHK? In my eyes It´s not ok to design an airport with to many polygons if that is the problem with the scenery..

I did not bought this scenery to use it with the default cessna but that seems to be the only way right now.

My system:

Intel Core i7-3770K@4.4

Asus P8Z77-V Deluxe

Corsair 16GB 1600Mhz Vengeance

Zotac GTX 680 2gb AMP

Western Digital Black 2TB 7200RPM

Intel SSD 520 120GB

Corsair 1200W PSU

Corsair H100 Hydro

Corsair Obsidian 800D

Windows 7 64bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm i am really sure that you just have not got all the complaints yet.

Well its easier to run YBBN or EHAM or KLAX from FSDT (IN HD4096 btw)smooth with the NGX ,REX,UT2,AS2012,EFB,SB4 than running Helsinki.

Anybody who has tried BOB in Helsinki and see the BIG changing in frames ? They go from 15 to 40 all the time on my rig.

Again nice scenery but even with BOB its just not a smooth airport for now.

Bufferpools or not btw . have testet it

Michael Moe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matthias, with all due respect.

I think it is extremely unfair to put the blame on the customer for a problem that is so blindlying obvious to be out of our hands. There is a massive issue with the scenery, that is the plain truth of the matter,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use the Update for Helsinki. (Run as Admin)

AS_MEGA-AIRPORT-HELSINKI_OUT-OF-MEMORY-FIX.exe (Online Shop USER)

My old FSX.CFG

[bufferPools]

PoolSize=8388608

RejectThreshold=131072

UsePools=1

I change to

[bufferPools]

PoolSize=8388608

RejectThreshold=131072

UsePools=0

But i think UsePools=0 didn´t work

Also delete all Files in FSX.CFG under and with [bufferPools]

Delete

[bufferPools]

PoolSize=xxxx

RejectThreshold=xxxx

UsePools=0

Perhaps its work

Make a copy of your old FSX.CFG before change anything

Sorry 4 my english ;)

NG

Markus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, although we can see several mega airports around full of details and with pretty good FPS I can't see the point in making a scenery with a ton of polygons just to make it look ultra mega realistic and unusable at the same time. I think performance should be the developer's first goal when they're planning to make a scenery.

I'm sure Aerosoft could sell even more copies of Helsinki even if it didn't look so beautiful but had a better performance.

Take myself as an example. I simply gave up on purchasing this scenery after seeing so many complaints on this forum. I won't buy it to use with a trike or a default Cessna.

I also don't understand how other devs like FSDT, FB and FT can make larger airports, full of details and still provide good performance and others can't.

Nothing personnal here, just my 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, although we can see several mega airports around full of details and with pretty good FPS I can't see the point in making a scenery with a ton of polygons just to make it look ultra mega realistic and unusable at the same time. I think performance should be the developer's first goal when they're planning to make a scenery.

I'm sure Aerosoft could sell even more copies of Helsinki even if it didn't look so beautiful but had a better performance.

Take myself as an example. I simply gave up on purchasing this scenery after seeing so many complaints on this forum. I won't buy it to use with a trike or a default Cessna.

I also don't understand how other devs like FSDT, FB and FT can make larger airports, full of details and still provide good performance and other can't.

Nothing personnal here, just my 2 cents.

+1

Would realy love a usable EFHK, but

very happy I did not jump on it on release.

Soeren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, just to be able to say I tried everything :

Deleted my tweaked FSX Acceleration fsx.cfg and had the application rebuild it.

Default fsx.cfg settings. Simply adjusted for native monitor resolution, no music, 2D panel default and Anisotropic filtering. Nothing complicated.

FPS dropped from high twenties to single digits at 04R. After takeoff got graphics corruption with the NGX. Simply unusable.

Oh yes, I have 12 GB of 1600 DDR3 memory running at 3.99 Ghz on a i7 920 with 1 GB of video RAM. Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit.

I can just hope they are taking this one seriously. Been buying from Aerosoft since FS2002 days back in 2003. This is the first product I had ANY problems with.

Fingers crossed. :mecry_s: :mecry_s:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Mathijs said, we are working on an update to try help those remaining users who are running out of memory with other add-ons combined with the scenery. We've got a bit of testing help from someone having this problem, and the results so far are promising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping that the problem was only in landing at EFHK but is not so.

This morning while starting from EFHK with the PMDG 737NGX with destination to Sestri LIMJ getting the same OOM "beep"

in the approach runway 29 in Genoa and once landed CTD.

The problem running out of memory seems to be that you get from the moment you touch (landing or departing) at EFHK.

I'm flying continuously for years (in Deltavaairlines I'm over 800 hours of flights and now new entry in Alitalia) and I use hundreds scenarios even heavier than EFHK but something like that had never happened.

Doing various tests I found that my memory at startup (nothing opened no FSX no EZDOCK no REX...)after 10 minutes is filled for 2,44Gb with 53 normal processes opened (see picture1).

Now I open FSX and automatically it opens EZDOCK CAMERA and REX OVERDRIVE both in the taskbar (see picture2) and the memory is climbed around 3,36GB.

Now continuing testing I position a 737 "default plane" at day to the gate 29 of EFHK, the memory is now filled at 5,16 GB !!!! (see picture3).

Something is wrong, it is impossible to take up so much ram for a single airport.

Has anyone thought about the fact that EFHK already has a (heavy) scenery under the default FSX?

Continuing the test I close FSX and all the application and restart the PC.

When desktop is ready I open FSX in sequence as I had done before, but now starting from another AS MEGAIRPORT in specific LEMD at gate 334 but always with the same default 737 aircraft.

The memory is now filled better at 4,42GB (see picture4).

All I say you can see in the picture attached.

Thanks for your opinion.

post-23687-0-47639600-1350572923_thumb.j

post-23687-0-63344100-1350572945_thumb.j

post-23687-0-07553000-1350572960_thumb.j

post-23687-0-60354200-1350572976_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try instead seach the web for VAS and FSX and use Process Explorer to determine the magic 4GB spot in FSX.

Have patient, they will fix it (i am more concerned about the frame tearing)

Michael Moe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try instead seach the web for VAS and FSX and use Process Explorer to determine the magic 4GB spot in FSX.

Have patient, they will fix it (i am more concerned about the frame tearing)

Michael Moe

At the time a few years ago I made the correction of the file header with CFF Explorer "App can handle> 2GB address space" so there should be no problem having a 64-bit system with 24 GB of RAM !

Is there any other correction to make I do not know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its more where you look for the OOM.

The Adress space is NO physical RAM as i think you show us . Instead you can look at VAS (virtuel adress space) with Process Xplorer. When FSX hits the 4GB you will get the OOM

Michael Moe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time a few years ago I made the correction of the file header with CFF Explorer "App can handle> 2GB address space" so there should be no problem having a 64-bit system with 24 GB of RAM !

Is there any other correction to make I do not know?

This sounds interesting, are you saying with this method you can have FSX behave more like a 64bit application that will make better use of the memory installed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did another flight EDDP - EFHK today and all works fine from beginning to the end. The FPS were in midle range with the NGX, all buildings and trees were there, i was very happy. I've never get an OOM but always when i close FSX it crashes due to ase...dll.

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds interesting, are you saying with this method you can have FSX behave more like a 64bit application that will make better use of the memory installed?

No that is not the case but it let you "stamp" that FSX should look above the 2GB VAS which is the normal 32bit array as i recall (correct me if i am wrong)

Michael Moe

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...