Thessaloniki X City Configurator [v3.0] (if you have OOM issues)

[Piper9t3 2]

What about in P3Dv2? With the pending update a lot of memory management issues will be fixed.

[WebMaximus 320]

Maybe one way around this issue and to please as many different kind of users as possible would be to

- clearly state in the product description about the limitations using it with other heavy addons

- include a configuration tool similar to the City Configurator where you can choose how you want to use the product, flying light weight GA aircraft with a limited number of other addons or doing longer flights with more demanding aircraft such as the NGX and T7 and also using other addons such as ASN and FTXG.

What I still find puzzling in this particular case though is how some (like you Mathijs) can do circuits in these demanding aircraft without any issues where others (like me) ends up in a close to OOM situation simply by loading up the NGX in a cold and dark state at the apron and simply switch between the different views a few times.

Maybe the difference is what addons you're using on top of the aircraft. Addons I have active on top of the NGX are

- ASN

- FTXG

- FA Global Ultimate

- UTX

- GSX

- AES

Not sure how much impact each of these addons have on VAS. What I am sure about though is I can't have a more clean and better optimized FSX installation than I already have so must be these extra addons mentioned above that do the difference.

[Cheyenne Chief Pilot 829]

I haven't requested AES or GSX services in LGTS yet. But they definitely introduce additional "textured objects" (read: "increase VAS usage") - don't know, though, to what extent exactly? GSX runs as an external *.exe, while AES uses a dll within FSX, so AES will maybe have the higher impact (how much higher exactly???).

The current weather can make a change, too. ASN can be configured to a higher no. of cloud layers than the default no. which will have an impact as well. The worst scenario, wx-wise, would probably be an overcast with good visibility on the ground?

The amount of AI traffic, the total amount of photoscenery areas activated in the scenery.cfg, causes for different VAS readouts are nearly endless ...

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

- clearly state in the product description about the limitations using it with other heavy addons

What I still find puzzling in this particular case though is how some (like you Mathijs) can do circuits in these demanding aircraft without any issues where others (like me) ends up in a close to OOM situation simply by loading up the NGX in a cold and dark state at the apron and simply switch between the different views a few times.

Sorry but the moment we write that there 'could be problems' we would be inundated with request if this and that would cause problems. Are you going the tests for all of that? With all FSX.cfg tweaks etc? We are not planning to do any of that. Certainly now with only a handful of problems reported. And all of those problems that are very obvious because of pushing the simulator too much.

I got FSX, AES, NGX and Thessaloniki installed on one of my test machines, no problems. You got a huge list of memory hungry stuff running and I am not at all surprised that you will need to use very low FSX settings to avoid problems. As said, you will find that you will have the same issue with many of the advanced scenery products being developed right now. And when aircraft get more complex your problems will get bigger. And when weather add-ons get more complex your problems will get even bigger.

And gents, this is really all I can say about this. We have been repeating the same thing a few times now. The City Configurator is now available on your Order History Page and in the FAQ/Updates.

[WebMaximus 320]

What information should be there? A complete list with products it might have problems with? We have none, I got no problem landing with the NGX there. There might be issues if you stack memory hungry applications on top of each other and have certain FSX settings. But that would be a massively complex list of conditions and nobody would buy the product. It would also mean the product would have spend months longer in testing and would have to be more expensive for that. As always we only claim this to work with a standard FSX. If there are other add-ons it works with we'll say so. If this would affect all users there is an issue, but we got many hundreds of users without problems and a handful that have. That's rather normal. If this would affect all users there is an issue, but we got many hundreds of users without problems and a handful that have. That's rather normal.

On your system the combination of NGX and ASN (I had to search what that was actually) leave very little resources for scenery. You will have problems with ANY scenery of this complexity and magnitude.

I have a very hard time believing I belong to a minority simply by using a combination of the NGX together with some mesh, landclass and texture improvement addons plus a weather engine. The stand you take on how your products will only work on a vanilla FSX installation is quite...hmm...selfish don't you think? Simplified it's like you're saying "We only care about the exclusive usage of our products. If you mix our products with other products you're on your own."

Of course that is up to you but I know of lots of other developers that in every regard not only care about their own products but also go a long way trying to make sure their products will also work in combination with other products since they are well aware of what the reality looks like in the FSX community and I dare to say that is not a simple vanilla installation.

Then what you say about how it would be a problem running ANY airport scenery with the kind of setup I'm running is in no way true. So far my setup has been able to handle every single airport scenery and situation I've thrown at it with great both visuals and performance but this of course requires to have your FS "sorted" ;-)

Should you want to see this for yourself do a Google search for my full name and you'll quickly find my YouTube channel where I've recorded some 30 complete flights using this setup flying to nothing but payware airports mostly of them made by you and some of them very detailed and all with great both visuals and performance as seen in the videos.

Edited a second time to include the direct link to my YouTube channel and should you want to you're welcome to use any of my video clips for showing any of your airport sceneries "in action" :-)

http://m.youtube.com/channel/UCpwfj9D3locrQsX2qbake1A?desktop_uri=%2Fchannel%2FUCpwfj9D3locrQsX2qbake1A

[altstiff 28]

And yet we got hundreds of customers doing just that. I Just did circuits in the Twin Otter Extended, Airbus Extended, NGX and 777. No problems. Optimizing is a pseudonym for removing objects or reducing their visual range. That's needed for your system (and for a dozen more as we know so far), but not for the vast majority of users.

So in your statement you are missing 'on my system' at the end. I feel that is very important.

Ok "On My System" that is fair enough Mathjis. "On my system" I have OOM errors (like I did with Helsinki before it was optimized).

And you can say the same right, "On your system"?

You don't have this issue "On your system". But I ask, are you running a 3rd party weather program? Are you sitting in the virtual cockpit? Are you running 3rd party AI? Do you have other sceneries installed? (Skiathos, Corfu for example)?

Maybe one way around this issue and to please as many different kind of users as possible would be to

- clearly state in the product description about the limitations using it with other heavy addons

- include a configuration tool similar to the City Configurator where you can choose how you want to use the product, flying light weight GA aircraft with a limited number of other addons or doing longer flights with more demanding aircraft such as the NGX and T7 and also using other addons such as ASN and FTXG.

What I still find puzzling in this particular case though is how some (like you Mathijs) can do circuits in these demanding aircraft without any issues where others (like me) ends up in a close to OOM situation simply by loading up the NGX in a cold and dark state at the apron and simply switch between the different views a few times.

Maybe the difference is what addons you're using on top of the aircraft. Addons I have active on top of the NGX are

- ASN

- FTXG

- FA Global Ultimate

- UTX

- GSX

- AES

Not sure how much impact each of these addons have on VAS. What I am sure about though is I can't have a more clean and better optimized FSX installation than I already have so must be these extra addons mentioned above that do the difference.

To be fair it is clearly written on almost every addon page here at Aerosoft under "system requirements" the download and install size of each addon. If it is listed as installed at over 1GB you can be sure you will run into Virtual Address Space issues (when running other high end addons like most users do).

So I think it is clear in that respect as it is a no brianer when you see an addon scenery taking 25% of the FSX.EXE 4GB VAS limit (over 30% in the case of LGTS).

[WebMaximus 320]

Ok "On My System" that is fair enough Mathjis. "On my system" I have OOM errors (like I did with Helsinki before it was optimized).

And you can say the same right, "On your system"?

You don't have this issue "On your system". But I ask, are you running a 3rd party weather program? Are you sitting in the virtual cockpit? Are you running 3rd party AI? Do you have other sceneries installed? (Skiathos, Corfu for example)?

To be fair it is clearly written on almost every addon page here at Aerosoft under "system requirements" the download and install size of each addon. If it is listed as installed at over 1GB you can be sure you will run into Virtual Address Space issues (when running other high end addons like most users do).

So I think it is clear in that respect as it is a no brianer when you see an addon scenery taking 25% of the FSX.EXE 4GB VAS limit (over 30% in the case of LGTS).

Thanks, that's a great tip!

Although I haven't had to pay close attention to this until now with Thessaloniki I'll from now on.

[altstiff 28]

AFAIK, only VRAM actually used matters in DX9 VAS usage.

Yes, like I have said a few times already "needed" with the stress on "needed". You had said video card VRAM size has no implications and that is just not true. When I upgraded from a 2GB to 3GB video card I seen an increase (immediately) in VAS and OOM issues as a result of using a larger VRAM card.

Problem with the "needed" or "actually used" part is that nobody can answer what that is exactly. Like I said, does the AF/AA setting get mapped through the EXE VAS (in this case the FSX.EXE) or is it mapped outside the EXE?

Again, this is where DX10 is the way better option as it does not map VRAM through the FSX.EXE like DX9 does.

[Cheyenne Chief Pilot 829]

(...) To be fair it is clearly written on almost every addon page here at Aerosoft under "system requirements" the download and install size of each addon. If it is listed as installed at over 1GB you can be sure you will run into Virtual Address Space issues (when running other high end addons like most users do).

So I think it is clear in that respect as it is a no brianer when you see an addon scenery taking 25% of the FSX.EXE 4GB VAS limit (over 30% in the case of LGTS).

Some slight confusion here:

• Download size is 1 GB (that's physical size - the amount of HDD space the download requires)
• Installation size is 1.5 GB (physical again - HDD space needed for running the installer)

Neither figure tells you about the exact impact on VAS - but you are still correct, the sheer size of the LGTS installation implies something about 3D objects, polygons, textures, photorealistic ground imagery and other aspects.

EDIT: Maybe that is what you wanted to emphasize?

[altstiff 28]

Thanks, that's a great tip!

Although I haven't had to pay close attention to this until now with Thessaloniki I'll from now on.

Of course I mean for a user like you WM . A novice user would never know the difference unless it was spelled out for them.

That being said, a novice users won't be running things like the NGX and ASN and so on. Mathjis has said many times in the past that the majority of Aersoft customers do not post on the forums here and are not hard core users like we are (the folks who post on the forums).

[altstiff 28]

Some slight confusion here:

• Download size is 1 GB (that's physical size - the amount of HDD space the download requires)
• Installation size is 1.5 GB (physical again - HDD space needed for running the installer)

Neither figure tells you about the exact impact on VAS - but you are still correct, the sheer size of the LGTS installation implies something about 3D objects, polygons, textures, photorealistic ground imagery and other aspects.

EDIT: Maybe that is what you wanted to emphasize?

That is exactly what I meant, that is a no brainer isn't it?

If the install size is 30% of your 4GB address space limit?

Taking into account that this scenery wouldn't use seasonal textures nor is the area very large so you know that 1.35GB is coming in all at once at some point. Not like a very large photo area that wouldn't load all at once or like PANC (it is installed at 3.2GB) but that has seasonal and seasonal photo real areas that wouldn't all be loaded at once (so the whole 3.2GB isn't loading at the same time).

This is not the case with LGTS (and I am sure that the entire 1.35GB isn't loading all at once with night textures being part of that 1.35GB).

But you get the basic rule of thumb here....

[WebMaximus 320]

I've been thinking about going the DX10 way (and also the P3Dv2 way) but unfortunately both these alternatives still come with too many issues at this time. I'm keeping my fingers crossed P3Dv2 will eventually become the natural replacement for FSX.

Back to the discussion on how DX9 uses VAS and the fact that having a gfx card with lots of video memory could add to the risk facing OOM issues is something I find very interesting since I'm running a Titan with 6 GB. That could of course explain why some of us have bigger issues than others although using the same addons.

[WebMaximus 320]

Forgot to comment on what was said about the majority of Aerosoft users don't post in these forums and that probably the majority of these users don't use FSX in a "hardcore" way of course explains the number of sold products/number of issues radio.

[altstiff 28]

I've been thinking about going the DX10 way (and also the P3Dv2 way) but unfortunately both these alternatives still come with too many issues at this time. I'm keeping my fingers crossed P3Dv2 will eventually become the natural replacement for FSX.

Back to the discussion on how DX9 uses VAS and the fact that having a gfx card with lots of video memory could add to the risk facing OOM issues is something I find very interesting since I'm running a Titan with 6 GB. That could of course explain why some of us have bigger issues than others although using the same addons.

I posted this over a year ago on FSDT forum. It is a pretty interesting read (make sure to read the entire thing as Virtuali is not correct in his first few statements).

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/topic,7527.0.html

And this discussion on AVSIM from a long way back (although that tweak makes no difference it is still an interesting read too, it is also linked in the FSDT discussion).

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/373830-videomemoryoverride-does-it-really-work/

[WebMaximus 320]

Thanks, will check both these links.

[EmilG 239]

Guys, can you please send here your DLL.XML and EXE.XML files which should be located user %APPDATA%\Microsoft\FSX

We can make some good use of those, we can run a few 'diagnostics' on them and provide more help.

Thanks!

[altstiff 28]

Guys, can you please send here your DLL.XML and EXE.XML files which should be located user %APPDATA%\Microsoft\FSX

We can make some good use of those, we can run a few 'diagnostics' on them and provide more help.

Thanks!

10-4 Emil! I will not be at my FSX PC until later this afternoon (Canada).

Also, I notice lots of trees and buildings to the north and east of the airport (not downtown) even with the Lite II configuration. Any way to reduce those in half lets say? I run normal autogen and there is still a pile of these trees and buildings.

EDIT: BTW where do we send these files?

[Cheyenne Chief Pilot 829]

Thanks, will check both these links.

And I'll NEVER upgrade my 1 GB videocard!!!

[EmilG 239]

10-4 Emil! I will not be at my FSX PC until later this afternoon (Canada).

Also, I notice lots of trees and buildings to the north and east of the airport (not downtown) even with the Lite II configuration. Any way to reduce those in half lets say? I run normal autogen and there is still a pile of these trees and buildings.

EDIT: BTW where do we send these files?

You can attach here or via email to : support@flightsimdevelopmentgroup.com

[altstiff 28]

And I'll NEVER upgrade my 1 GB videocard!!!

Yeah, who would think that upgrading a video card would make such a mess of things . I am with WebMax on migrating towards DX10 and it explains why so many have done it (and it still isn't perfect but better than having OOM issues).

[chriskat 0]

i had OOM problem . when i use Lite II patch everything is OK .yesterday change it to default , FRPS 30 , water 2x low , all from scenery settings MAX , AI 25% and i delete from fsx.cfg this :

[bUFFERPOOLS]
Poolsize=0

flew from LGAV to LGTS with AXE , UTX EUROPE , FTX GLOBAL , OPUS WEATHER ENGINE ( heavy weather ) and i have no OMM error .

Hope to helped .

[WebMaximus 320]

Not sure if I've mentioned it already but looking at my FSX setup and how it's "tweaked" the only things I have in fsx.cfg is

HIGHMEMFIX=1

ForceWindowedVsync=1

Thanks for the tip though!

[KyleD 1027]

I just want to get something in the air here.

People are funny when they have an issue. The immediately think, well if I have it, others must have it! And the product is broken!

I fall into the category of having no issue at all with OOMs at Thessaloniki. I've taken the NGX, T7, AAX, and B407 there with no issue. Running ASN with AS2012 clouds etc. I've never heard a ding, never had a crash.

The door swings both ways here. Just because it works for me, doesn't mean it works for everyone. Someone said they don't have OOM issues at MMMX. Funny, because I OOM'd there every time I tried to go there when the product came out. Does that mean that everyone must be having that issue? No. Does that mean I am the only one? No. But I took the time to check my setup and solved the OOM's there.

Very obviously though this isn't a widespread issue, internal support and forum support would be on lockdown, and you'd see topics being brought up across the different FS forums. Just relax and help the developer help you. Emil has been on top of his game trying to help those with issues since the topic first came up.

[WebMaximus 320]

Please find attached the files that were requested.

dll.xml

exe.xml

[ChrisZet 13]

Anybody try this scenery out in DX10 preview mode with the available 3rd party fixer tool? Considering DX10 is more memory management efficient it would definitely help mitigate those OOM's.

Yes, i use this fixer since i had always OOMs with the PMDG T7. In DX10 Mode LGTS runs smooth without OOMs. I use the NGX, T7 PMDG, ASN etc with medium to high settings (i5@3,8ghz old HD5870 and 3 monitors). The only problem at daytime are some black squares around some runway lamps. At night absolut no problem with lights or textures.