JonPatch
-
Posts
682 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JonPatch
-
-
Hi Don,
When Allen gets around to updating UT Canada/Alaska and UT USA (which may be a while!), he's going to review his layer usage and that may help us all in the future. No promises, but keep an eye out.
Jon
-
Hi Franz,
FSAutostart is a freeware utility by Ken Salter that turns off ununused processes while you are running FS9. Search the AVSIM library for a description.
You can download it at http://library.avsim.net/download.php?DLID=57040
Jon
-
... and for me it makes a huge difference in stutters and loading times if I use FSAutostart to control background tasks. Frame rates aren't much improved, but it's the stutters that are most annoying to me.
Jon
-
Hi Franz,
Thx for the input. One thing to research though: I've heard differing opinions on whether memory above 1Gb helps. Certainly from what I understand you should see an improvement going from 768k to 1Gb.
Jon
-
Hi Andy,
Autogen is placed according to the nature of the underlying texture. So, for example, if the entire V+ area is replaced with forest, there will be far more objects than the normal mix of forest fields, roads, etc., and performance will drop. Every area then is going to have a unique mix of textures, hence a unique autogen load.
In V+ there are a number of custom industrial textures, which have a fairly high object density. The V+ photoscenery areas, in general, are at or close to the maximum autogen density that FS9 permits. So, in these areas, yes, V+ will produce a higher level of autogen than the default probably would.
The type of autogen object also makes a big difference. For example the default FS9 rail bridge (which is used for many of the FS9 rail bridges) has a high frame rate impact, while many other default objects have a low impact. This further complicates the predictability of the performance impact of autogen.
You are most welcome for the support. Our goal is for folks with all types of machines to be able to enjoy V+, not just the people with the high end toys. So learning more about how we can improve performance is important to us.
Jon
-
Gotcha, Andy. Perhaps then it is related the amount of RAM, esp. if the system is trying to maintain all the V+ objects and textures, the V+ photoscenery, and the megascenery photoscenery all at once.
We shall soon find out!
Jon
-
Hi Andy,
Alrighty, let us know how it goes with the RAM!
Does that megascenery have extensive autogen on top of it? Photoscenery that eliminates autogen will have a big increase in frame rates as FS9 doesn't need to calculate and place all those objects. You'd see an increase from the default as well flying into a low-autogen area.
Jon
-
Hi Curtis, sounds like you're dealing with a couple of issues here.
- make sure your Terrain_max_vertex_level is set to 21 as stated in the manual. That's the usual cause of the Grouse Mountain helipad being buried
- if you have Ultimate Terrain Canada/Alaska or Ultimate Terrain USA installed, make sure you have checked the correct boxes in the config panel
- if you have UT make sure the scenery entries are a lower priority than V+
- make sure you have read the compatibility thread and have followed the instructions. In particular make sure that you are using the V+ compatible versions of Holger's Cascade scenery, and have followed his instructions for those.
- once you've checked these, try uninstalling and reinstalling
Let us know how it goes!
Jon
-
Very cool, Don.
Yes, since UT and V+ modify some of the same default files, it is necessary for V+ to replace those.
Jon
-
Hi Don,
Thanks for looking into this, great detective work! Should you do this? First part of the answer: I'm not sure what implications it would have to move the RA and RM files as you describe. It seems that should be ok.
Second part: depends on how you can deal with the consequences! Since both UT and V+ use automated process to install files, and any updates, repairs or other modifications by UT or V+ assume the files have been untouched, modifying or moving these files presents a risk. It also could cause a problem with vicenh06 when that is released. I would not recommend it for the weak of heart, or if you want to have no risk of a future upgrade causing problems. So it would not be a solution I would recommend for users.
I'll ask Holger to take a look at this when he gets back, and get his view on it as well.
Thanks for looking into this.
Jon
-
Thanks for the comments! And thanks for explaining how you untangled some issues, hopefully this will help some other folks...
Happy flying...
Jon
-
Hi Jeff,
Welcome to the forum!
FSE sceneries are made by different folks, and would not be part of V+. We do not directly use or support FSE.
However numerous freeware FSE sceneries for the V+ area have been made by Franz Curda, and are available at http://www.vancouverlandings.com.
Jon
-
Alrighty, Andy, glad you're content. Thanks for hanging in there. When you do get around to upgrading your RAM (which should be very cheap), let us know the results you get. I am still somewhat perplexed by your system performance, and that's the only difference I can see.
Jon
-
Hi Chris! Great news! I did mention this a couple of posts back, but I probably would have been better for me to ask that at square one, rather than buried in a later post with a lot of other stuff. Lesson learned.
Enjoy!
Jon
-
Yup, Misty uses .bat files, but they don't overlap the same areas as V+. Should not be a problem.Jon...Many thanks. UT update for MF uses some bat files - perhaps I fluffed something there?
Uninstall? Possibly a good bet - but then I need to find all the old altered files, un-bat them and there are certainly a few other changed files in fs9 that are missed on various uninstalls.[whine]No kidding, it's a pain in the patouche. There is just not a clean way in FS9 to override defaults. When multiple programs access the defaults shenanigans abound, as you are finding.[/whine]
When I de-activate a scenery in the library, doesn't FS9 still access the afcad and or bgl files that are added in the "non-programme" scenery files (i.e. the ones you copy to addon scenery / scenery or scenery / world / scenery...Indeed it does, so it's usually quite pointless with UT and V+ and MF to deactivate scenery library entries.
if de-activating isn't enough, then it is probably going to be easier to wipe FS 9 complete (no - I don't want to go down that road yet again!)There is an alternative: to avoid a re-install, uninstall all your add-ons which modify defaults (like V+, UT, MF), delete some specific folders, and restore default files to those folders from your FS9 installation disks. Let me know if you want the information on that. An FS9 reinstall is less risky though. And in my experience, likely faster.
is there simpler way to identify, locate and remove files that are added by some scenery addins? Don't worry. Most of the problem is self inflicted, so i will fix in the end.No, there it is very difficult to tell what a scenery addon has removed (the files are not conspicuous by their absence) or what has been added, the filenames may be the same. There is no standard for this. But both V+ and UT try to make this as clear as possible by moving all deactivated files to special hold folders. Some other programs are really quite scary: I saw a recent popular freeware add-on that recommended deleting a default BGL without a backup. Absolute no-no.
BTW - Emma did work correctly even at TMVL 22 before the new HD went in, and it did before Vancouver (OK, and a few others), so I know it's fixable. Perhaps too, I used scanafd wrong? We shall see...That's good news. In this case, I don't see any way V+ could have caused those funnies. Your phantom CYPK runway is also quite the worry. That's not from V+ or UT, what could it be? Note that TMVL=22 acts the same as TMVL=21 in FS9.
Overall, I'm curious as to how this problem occured, although we may never find out, so we can guide other folks in the future.
Jon
-
Strange...
Thing is, I only noticed the fun after installing V+, some FSGenesis stuff, freeware Bremerton from the FSAddon site, valley Field...
Sure that can happen. Sometimes adding another product can show up existing inconsistencies.
Agreed. I think you are being quite diligent.I know it is the done thing to do one install at a time and then check - which I did. But you can't fly round the whole world to check if one scenery affects another.And the V+ stuff (water creep and coastlines) happened after adding UT - and only UT Fine before - duff after.Now I am not complaining - I know there's a conflict there somewhere. I de-installed V+ once because there were no entries in the library. Then I re-installed and the library entries appeared.
This clean windows install on a new HD is barely a week old.
Duplicate / wrong bgl's? Fine. I wish there was a "scanAFD" type programme for bgl's and also -i wish that scanAFD was more logical. It shows duplicates even if they aren't. (different file size and even different names)...
I guess there's a bat file gone awry. Or maybe my V+ config is erroneaous. Possibly I should have the enhanced rivers off or something like that... Ah well
Here's a couple of other thoughts:
Are you sure that you have checked the correct UT options in the V+ config panel? When you do that, all UT functions are disabled in the V+ area (except night lights), so it doesn't matter what settings you have in your UT config.
Have you got the latest versions of UT Canada/Alaska and UT USA? Certainly you'll run into trouble if you don't have V1.2 of Canada/Alaska, which is a free upgrade.
Jon
-
Hi Chris,
Thanks for taking the time to detail the issues you've got, and to document them so well. Your scenery priorities look correct. This is very helpful, and will move us towards getting this cleaned up.
Right, this could be a mixture of things, so please bear with me. Remember also that SW like FS Genesis, Emma Field, UT Canada etc. came out first, so these should have been in the compatibility tests...Refer to the screenies below.
ONE:
The Vancouver scenery boundary appears to run between Emma clubhouse and the waterfalls. When flying west from Emma, there seems to be a "wall" in the air which causes the sim to pause for several seconds.
Emma is TMVL 19, Vancouver 21. When flying over the Emma waterfalls, there is now a landbridge across the valley where the second cascade should be (That has ruined my "sneak up on Emma and surprise the living daylights out of Fritz" approach to the airfield!) Reverting to TMVL 19 restores the valley.
The compatibility thread in this forum describes all tested add-ons, which includes FSGenesis and UT. These work fine with V+ when installed properly. Emma Field is outside the V+ coverage area, so was not tested. The TMVL issue is a global one, and for optimum forward compatibility and to produce the highest quality product we chose to optimize V+ for TMVL=21. This means that any scenery anywhere in the world that requires a lower TMVL may have compatibility problems. Similarly, scenery that requires TMVL=19 like Emma Field may create compatibility problems with other add-ons that require higher TMVL.
Your option of course is to lower your TMVL to 19 if Emma Field is more important to you. Or try 20 as compromise. V+ will not look as good in some areas, but you'd still have your cool approach at Emma Field! Hopefully all approaches in V+ would still be OK.
TWO:
There are now double shorelines and creeping water in the Vancouver+ area. (possibly a bat file error - if so, which ones please?) Could this be a conflict between V+ and UT with rivers and shorelines enhanced?
There is a "causeway" across the water north of CYPK - the water is higher upstream and the terrain detail is more TMVL 14 (?) than 21.
I think you're on the right track here, Chris: this does indeed look like an incorrect installation of either UT or V+ with a resulting conflict. Somewhere along the line it looks an error has occured. But neither UT or V+ use .bat files. Nor we or Flight1 encourage manual modification of files or file locations. It's not necessary, and is subject to error. The file interactions are just too complex to be done manually. You may have to uninstall and reinstall UT, and V+ (although V+ won't take long). Start in the V+ configurator by clicking the "Restore all defaults for uninstallation", uninstall V+, then uninstall UT according to their procedure. Alternatively you could wait a week until our UT expert, Holger, returns and he may have another idea. BUT before you consider this, read below.
THREE:It appears that the default CYPK is not fully "hidden" - it flickers through the V+ scenery (no - I haven't re-installed the addin CYPK yet.
I HAVE INSTALLED:
a: All FSG files pertinent to the area - from LOD 8 all the way up to 9 meter (there are 5 areas in FSG that go that far - Hawaii, Black Hills, Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Monument Valley and Grand Canyon)
b: Emma, Chelan, Harvey, Orcas, Wenatchee, Misty Fjords and Moorings and others - see the screenie below.
This is interesting: this runway does not look like the default CYPK: what other add-on might you have lurking there?? The default CYPK runways are only a tiny bit off; they are nothing like the phantom runway in your screenshot. Suggest before you go any further that you disable all addons except V+ and UT and see how the scenery looks.
Let us know how it goes!
Jon
-
Alrighty, Andy. Good luck! BTW on my machine, with my particular video card, I must have anti-aliasing on, but use a low AA value on my card.
Jon
-
Hi Chris,
Area and layer number don't have to be the same. No need to rebuild your scenery file, there is no magic to that anyhow. Just ensure that your library entries look ok in the scenery library list in FS9, and that there are no duplicates.
The ridge you are seeing looks like a default shoreline, so that indicates either a priority issue, or some default files have not been disabled. Double-check your scenery library.
Jon
-
Wowza, those are great data, Andy! And well controlled, very useful. We certainly have a mystery on our hands.
These data help us see that your no-weather default aircraft 2d panel performance overflying downtown is worse than it should be, considering this occurs with scenery sliders significantly backed off. Something's afoot indeed.
Here's some suggestions:
- try without traffic, just with your downtown flight situation
- hardware rendered lights change to 4
And in general:
- terrain mesh complexity of 96 to better show off V+ detail
- limit your frame rate to 25 or 30. In areas where your frame rate would exceed the maximum, the unused CPU horses will be used to render better detail (this is an MS recommendation)
Do me a favour as well: when the sim is running press ctl-shift-esc, then select the "processes" tab, click on the "CPU" header so processes are ordered by header, and ensure that FS9 is the only process taking a significant amount of CPU time.
EDIT: I flew around downtown with no weather and the Cessna as you did (except that most of my sliders were still hard right), circling the core a bit, but usually keeping most of the downtown peninsula in sight. FPS 16-27, average 21.5. It's hard to believe that with my old video card, just another 256Mb of RAM could make such a difference.
EDIT to the EDIT: forgot to turn on 2d panel: 15-21-26, so lost almost 1 FPS or so.
Do you have the lastest drivers for your video card?
Jon
-
Hi Chris,
Do you have UT? Would you post a pic of the creeping shorelines? When you reinstalled did you remember to put other addon scenery entries above V+, except for UT, which should be below? Suggest double-check library scenery order screenshot in the manual.
Let us know how it goes . . .
Jon
-
Ah, thanks for the clarification, Andy. For my test I went to CAR3, outside the coverage area. So if you're willing, give that a shot as well so we can be talking apples.
Jon
-
Ah, the vagaries of frame rates! I noted that my frame rates reported above seemed low to what I'd tested early, so I tried it again. I must have had something chewing up cycles, because now I get something closer to my earlier benchmarks:
Lillooet: 27fps
Hope: 20-21 fps
Downtown vancouver: 15-16 fps
Same conditions as noted above. Note zoom=1, no panel.
BTW if you want an easy way to get average framerates, (courtesy of fsinsider.com) add the following line to the [MAIN] section of the fs9.cfg file.
Ave_Frame_Rate_Display=1
It's a fairly long averaging period, so you have to give it some time to stabilize.
Jon
-
Hi Andy,
Thx for the info. Even 15-16fps is poor in a remote area. Note too that Lillooet is outside the V+ coverage area, so I very much doubt this is a V+ issue. If you area starting with minimal scenery load at 12 fps, any scenery at all is going to have an impact.
This is not a video card issue, nor does it seem likely (but not impossible!) that it's a V+ issue, since your performance is so poor outside the coverage area. I have a slower machine (1.7GHz) with a much less capable video card (128Mb Ti4200) and with sliders maxed (except water effects=low, terrain detail=land only, ground shadows off) and fair weather with a payware aircraft I get 18-19 fps outside the V+ coverage area (Lilloeet). If I take this same configuration to downtown Vancouver, I get 12-13fps. In Hope I get 16-17fps. These readings are without disabling background processes.
I do have a bit more RAM (768Mb), and that might be a cheap upgrade you may consider, it made a big diff for me to go from 512 to 768Mb, esp on the blurries. But that should not be a requirement for you to get better performance.
What happens if use one of the default aircraft? Are using the VC in your aircraft? What happens if you change to cockpit view with no panel? What happens if you turn the sound off?
Jon
Frame rate
in Vancouver+ FS2004 Support Forum
Posted
Thanks for checking back in, Andy, and yes, a number of folks have noted that the lack of stutters is much more important to user perception than the actual frame rate.
And I've had some surprises with upgrades: I remember getting very poor frame rates (6 or so, with default a/c, no weather, etc.) with a Las Vegas add-on. I replaced my ancient MX440 video card with a Ti4200 and had no increase in frame rate. Turns out it was CPU-bound. But in areas with fewer objects, I had a huge increase in performance.
Happy flying!
Jon