Well with Virtuali asking LM to support legacy FS8 (circa 2001), it'll be a LONG LONG LONG time before we "might" see a 64bit P3DV2 which is obviously the real solution here. Sorry, I am a bit frustrated right now ... some of these 3rd party vendors just boggle my mind.
Anyway, back on the track of trying to be help and mask my frustration with OOMs ... the A2A C172 is a big VAS consumer for me, not exactly sure why ... for example the Majestic Q400 and QW BAe-146 use about 300MB less than the A2A C-172.
The changes to my Cameras.cfg files has helped me avoid the sudden usage of VAS (just the two views) ... but I've also had to remove FTX Vector as it was another big consumer of VAS and I'm down to Dense/Dense for Autogen ... may have to go down even more to dense/normal once the weather system if fixed and I "try" to use FSGRW P3DV2 ... but I honestly am not optimistic as I know FSGRW like to use 120 mi draw distance for weather and that's almost certainly going cause OOMs.
I'm hoping for miracles in the 2.05 patch (or 2.1 patch or whatever is released next), but I frankly don't expect it to solve OOMs. Beau's information has solidified what needs to happen to avoid OOMs ... and it's nothing this next patch is going to cure.
Rob.
P.S. and yes there is a hint of frustration in my tone, sorry but it is what it is.
VAS usage issue ...
I agree 100% Rob, though it's still early days.
I actually don't see the point of a VAS / memory tool at all. It's just going to show you how much to reduce your settings and how many add ons to turn off or uninstall. Pointless in my opinion. I am not going te uninstall and reinstall add-on airports etc. for every flight, the thought alone is ridiculous I find.
I can't wait to see what is going to happen when pmdg is going to release its planes for p3d.
I have a feeling that these forums are going to be very busy at that time.
I actually don't see the point of a VAS / memory tool at all. It's just going to show you how much to reduce your settings and how many add ons to turn off or uninstall. Pointless in my opinion. I am not going te uninstall and reinstall add-on airports etc. for every flight, the thought alone is ridiculous I find.
I can't wait to see what is going to happen when pmdg is going to release its planes for p3d.
I have a feeling that these forums are going to be very busy at that time.
I disagree. While it would of course be better not to have to worry about VAS at all, a monitoring tool would at least allow users to quickly identify the addons contributing to high usage. This would have several benefits:
1. Users can more easily work around the problem. If I have to avoid certain combinations of addons/settings, I'd prefer a quick way to figure it out, than trial and error.
2. Problems with high usage can be directed to the right support team. I think there will be less on this forum not more, as high VAS usage by addons will be reported directly to the add on developers.
3. With clearer info on VAS allocation, there will be more of an incentive for add on developers to optimize their memory usage. I can see info on VAS usage becoming commonly mentioned in reviews, much like fps is today.
So I hope such a tool can be added, as it will be a great help, while we wait for 64 bit.
1. Users can more easily work around the problem. If I have to avoid certain combinations of addons/settings, I'd prefer a quick way to figure it out, than trial and error.
2. Problems with high usage can be directed to the right support team. I think there will be less on this forum not more, as high VAS usage by addons will be reported directly to the add on developers.
3. With clearer info on VAS allocation, there will be more of an incentive for add on developers to optimize their memory usage. I can see info on VAS usage becoming commonly mentioned in reviews, much like fps is today.
So I hope such a tool can be added, as it will be a great help, while we wait for 64 bit.
Quote:
Quote from robains on January 13, 2014, 14:52
Well with Virtuali asking LM to support legacy FS8 (circa 2001), it'll be a LONG LONG LONG time before we "might" see a 64bit P3DV2 which is obviously the real solution here. /quote]
Virtuali can ask for whatever it wants. Whether it get it is a different matter.
-
Rob Ainscough
- Posts: 3289
- Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 6:46 pm
- Location: Oregon USA
I'm certainly not against an "inhouse" tool that can report of VAS usage, but FSUIPC does that already (inprocess) -- but my hunch is LM will need to build this tool anyway so they can get a better understanding of the VAS issues, so may as well make it available to the public. But I don't believe they have committed to releasing such a tool?
But OOM avoidance is still going to require the end user to do the flight from A to B in it's entirety to ensure their settings really will work for them there add-ons (if any). But even with that situation, if they have dynamic weather that could drastically change VAS usage also. Also, in some situations the VAS consumption is so rapid (think 1GB consumption in <500ms) that I'm not sure even LM's tool could capture that or help?
I have been reporting high VAS usage to the 3rd party content providers, some a receptive (Sim720 have been very receptive as has PILOT's) ... BUT, their solutions are reduce texture sizes and/or provide configuration tools to turn OFF aspects of their products ... I don't think this is a good long term plan and isn't going to help 3rd party content provider sell content. Their mission (and rightfully so) is to provide a more realistic/accurate environment ... in doing so they are going to consume more VAS ... so effectively the core product P3DV2 is reducing what content providers can do. The less their products does (visually and feature wise) the less likely it will sell. Fewer sales = less content providers. I personally don't think this is a good situation for a healthy P3D future.
A really good question to ask yourself/LM ... why do you think PMDG were so successful in sales? I'm pretty sure it's not going to be because their product uses less VAS (as we all know it doesn't, it's one of the highest consumers of VAS) ... their success comes from striving to provide the most realistic experience possible, that experience consumes A LOT of VAS. There is only so much a content provide can "optimize" without sacrificing sales.
Are we waiting for 64bit? I don't think LM have made any official commitment to a 64bit option? It would certainly alleviate my concerns over the platforms future if I saw LM provide an official statement about a 64bit release along with a realistic time frame. But that means the project needs to be spec'd and funded and business justification made/sold.
Rob
But OOM avoidance is still going to require the end user to do the flight from A to B in it's entirety to ensure their settings really will work for them there add-ons (if any). But even with that situation, if they have dynamic weather that could drastically change VAS usage also. Also, in some situations the VAS consumption is so rapid (think 1GB consumption in <500ms) that I'm not sure even LM's tool could capture that or help?
I have been reporting high VAS usage to the 3rd party content providers, some a receptive (Sim720 have been very receptive as has PILOT's) ... BUT, their solutions are reduce texture sizes and/or provide configuration tools to turn OFF aspects of their products ... I don't think this is a good long term plan and isn't going to help 3rd party content provider sell content. Their mission (and rightfully so) is to provide a more realistic/accurate environment ... in doing so they are going to consume more VAS ... so effectively the core product P3DV2 is reducing what content providers can do. The less their products does (visually and feature wise) the less likely it will sell. Fewer sales = less content providers. I personally don't think this is a good situation for a healthy P3D future.
A really good question to ask yourself/LM ... why do you think PMDG were so successful in sales? I'm pretty sure it's not going to be because their product uses less VAS (as we all know it doesn't, it's one of the highest consumers of VAS) ... their success comes from striving to provide the most realistic experience possible, that experience consumes A LOT of VAS. There is only so much a content provide can "optimize" without sacrificing sales.
Are we waiting for 64bit? I don't think LM have made any official commitment to a 64bit option? It would certainly alleviate my concerns over the platforms future if I saw LM provide an official statement about a 64bit release along with a realistic time frame. But that means the project needs to be spec'd and funded and business justification made/sold.
Rob
Rob Ainscough
Good points Rob.
I think it would be good if LM would make a big post on the forums and in the learning center, to explain to people what VAS is and how it works and affects your settings and what happens when you use 3rd party add ons.
A lot of people on here, or those who don't even come here, seem to think that more RAM and more RAM on your video card will solve their problems.
I think it is important for LM to educate those people in order to prevent them from buying very expensive hardware to try and solve their OOM problems.
At least, this way they can make a more educated decision with a more realistic expectancy of their new hardware.
I think it would be good if LM would make a big post on the forums and in the learning center, to explain to people what VAS is and how it works and affects your settings and what happens when you use 3rd party add ons.
A lot of people on here, or those who don't even come here, seem to think that more RAM and more RAM on your video card will solve their problems.
I think it is important for LM to educate those people in order to prevent them from buying very expensive hardware to try and solve their OOM problems.
At least, this way they can make a more educated decision with a more realistic expectancy of their new hardware.
I'm totally with you in this Rob. P3D 2 looks amazing but I'm seriously concerned by the VAS usage I'm experiencing - constant monitoring of it takes a lot of enjoyment out of doing what we should be doing: flying. I have been dialling settings up and down repeatedly with varying effects in different locations. I have to say that I am also a huge fan of Orbx products BUT for me they are providing scenery which simply is not fly able at the settings my hardware (and many others) is capable of showing and this is purely down to the VAS and 32 bit limits. It's very frustrating to have products being released that need to have settings dialled down and tweaked so they only look about 50% like they should - it simply isn't a solution that satisfies me as a customer. And you're right about PMDG - when they come out I imagine settings will also have to be dialled left once again - I remember people saying on forums previously with FSX that dialling down settings shouldn't matter with these aircraft as "you're only ever at 30,000ft for most of the time." That misses the point totally for me as I want to fly in and out of complex airports as developers are providing scenery that allows us to - who doesn't? I know FSX and settings have always been about compromise but the hardware is now capable of utilising the higher settings in the software but the legacy 32 bit limits are going to end up potentially scuppering all efforts by Orbx et al to provide us with a new sim.
As an aside I fly X Plane 10 64 bit too and whilst it isn't as pretty as P3D it does remove the VAS worry. I find myself heading there for long haul flights for the security of no OOM's! That said I am impressed with LM and their commitment to the platform and I am aware that the 64 bit isn't an easy one - but whilst v2 is a big step up in flight simming it does seem to be the version that is going to bring this VAS limit to a head for many.
As an aside I fly X Plane 10 64 bit too and whilst it isn't as pretty as P3D it does remove the VAS worry. I find myself heading there for long haul flights for the security of no OOM's! That said I am impressed with LM and their commitment to the platform and I am aware that the 64 bit isn't an easy one - but whilst v2 is a big step up in flight simming it does seem to be the version that is going to bring this VAS limit to a head for many.
Quote:
Quote from kakusso on January 11, 2014, 04:45
I think that this issue is related to vegetation density and not to building density.
Using Orbx FTX Global, I have this problem in Munich after 15 minutes,(Vegetation dense area), but not at Athens, (building dense area).
Settings: autogen very dense.
Can this forum help to check on this?
I agree--I discovered this very early on. For my eyes, the bang to buck ratio on the vegetation slider is very poor. I have found running vegetation at Normal is very much fine--if I want to enhance scenery in low to modern demand areas up goes the building density slider back up from Dense to Very High. Often though--dense building density is quite nice and doesn't detract from the experience at all for me. I haven't had an OOM and that is with 4-5h flights in the QW757.
Rob,
I agree with you in regards to the OOM errors and the limitation that these errors place on users who are utilizing this tool for training purposes. The 32-bit limitation inherent with the Prepar3d v2 platform currently places noticeable restrictions within training scenarios. It is important to note that as users implement more add-on products, the OOM errors will increase in frequency and the end result will be an unstable training and simulation platform. The P3D team has been exceptional in responding to the findings of the user community with regards to the v2.0 release, and I am very much looking forward to the v2.05 patch. I do, however, strongly feel that a 64-bit simulation platform is necessary to provide a stable solution that can support the current and future feature set of Prepar3d.
I agree with you in regards to the OOM errors and the limitation that these errors place on users who are utilizing this tool for training purposes. The 32-bit limitation inherent with the Prepar3d v2 platform currently places noticeable restrictions within training scenarios. It is important to note that as users implement more add-on products, the OOM errors will increase in frequency and the end result will be an unstable training and simulation platform. The P3D team has been exceptional in responding to the findings of the user community with regards to the v2.0 release, and I am very much looking forward to the v2.05 patch. I do, however, strongly feel that a 64-bit simulation platform is necessary to provide a stable solution that can support the current and future feature set of Prepar3d.
Going to 64bit is not an easy task. The solution is not for tomorrow.
Normally the 4GB of VAS are divided as follows; 2GB to the kernel and 2GB for user.
Since in a 64bit system the user share can be extended to 4GB, assuming that the 32bit application is compiled with the/LARGEADDRESSAWARE flag, could Lockheed Martin consider this option as a temporary solution?
Anyone who wants to know more could read the section "Using 64-bit Windows to run a 32-bit Process" in this document: http://www.chrisoldwood.com/articles/ut ... n-4gb.html
Normally the 4GB of VAS are divided as follows; 2GB to the kernel and 2GB for user.
Since in a 64bit system the user share can be extended to 4GB, assuming that the 32bit application is compiled with the/LARGEADDRESSAWARE flag, could Lockheed Martin consider this option as a temporary solution?
Anyone who wants to know more could read the section "Using 64-bit Windows to run a 32-bit Process" in this document: http://www.chrisoldwood.com/articles/ut ... n-4gb.html
-
Rob Ainscough
- Posts: 3289
- Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 6:46 pm
- Location: Oregon USA
Kakusso,
Windows7 64bit is already LARGEADDRESSAWARE, no need for the flag. And I agree, at no point did I ever trivialize the work involved in a 64bit transition ... I'd would like to see it officially on the "road map" (or even any road map) but understand if no such official commitments want to be made.
Quote:
The P3D team has been exceptional in responding to the findings of the user community with regards to the v2.0 release, and I am very much looking forward to the v2.05 patch
Agree 100% Mike ... I want to be clear, because I'm reporting VAS issues does NOT mean I think the P3DV2 is a bad product ... far far from it. I respect all the work and effort that went into it's release.
I was disappointed (and frustrated) that I was able to run into VAS issues so early in my usage ... my expectations were a little higher. BUT (and it's an important BUT) we have on going development of the ESP that I expect will only make the product that more stable and with any luck will eventually transition to 64bit path ... obviously that's not going to happen soon and with only a 15 person crew to work on a product as complex as this, I'll just have to be patient ... but it's progress, and I'm still pretty happy about that.
Rob.
Windows7 64bit is already LARGEADDRESSAWARE, no need for the flag. And I agree, at no point did I ever trivialize the work involved in a 64bit transition ... I'd would like to see it officially on the "road map" (or even any road map) but understand if no such official commitments want to be made.
Quote:
The P3D team has been exceptional in responding to the findings of the user community with regards to the v2.0 release, and I am very much looking forward to the v2.05 patch
Agree 100% Mike ... I want to be clear, because I'm reporting VAS issues does NOT mean I think the P3DV2 is a bad product ... far far from it. I respect all the work and effort that went into it's release.
I was disappointed (and frustrated) that I was able to run into VAS issues so early in my usage ... my expectations were a little higher. BUT (and it's an important BUT) we have on going development of the ESP that I expect will only make the product that more stable and with any luck will eventually transition to 64bit path ... obviously that's not going to happen soon and with only a 15 person crew to work on a product as complex as this, I'll just have to be patient ... but it's progress, and I'm still pretty happy about that.
Rob.
Rob Ainscough
Robains, it is Prepar3D that needs to be compiled with that flag, since it is a 32bit application running on a 64bit OS.
It is the 32bit application that needs to be made aware that it is running on a 64bit system. Windows 7 64bit can of-course address more than 4GB of VAS, it is Prepar3d that can't.
That will not make it a 64bit application but at least it will allow it to address 2 additional GB of VAS.
I also agree that Prepar3d V2 is the Greatest Leap Forward.
It is the 32bit application that needs to be made aware that it is running on a 64bit system. Windows 7 64bit can of-course address more than 4GB of VAS, it is Prepar3d that can't.
That will not make it a 64bit application but at least it will allow it to address 2 additional GB of VAS.
I also agree that Prepar3d V2 is the Greatest Leap Forward.
-
Beau Hollis
- Lockheed Martin
- Posts: 2452
- Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 3:25 pm
I am frustrated also....
I am seeing how the solutions to VAS OOM problems comes from changing new poppings feature, things inside cfg and putting down values in settings. Something we already did in FSX. It was said that P3D v2 was going to be tweaks free, but I see in forums different old FSX ones that makes it better, which is good, but again we will find in future same problem as FSX: one day, one addom or change in system or configuration will start to give us problems (headaches) again.
I would like to see how P3D v2 makes free memory from Scenaries leaved behind in future. I think this is really needed if P3D v2 is not going to be 64bits (maybe v3?)
The good thing is we have a team behind now. Something we didn't have with Microsoft.
I am seeing how the solutions to VAS OOM problems comes from changing new poppings feature, things inside cfg and putting down values in settings. Something we already did in FSX. It was said that P3D v2 was going to be tweaks free, but I see in forums different old FSX ones that makes it better, which is good, but again we will find in future same problem as FSX: one day, one addom or change in system or configuration will start to give us problems (headaches) again.
I would like to see how P3D v2 makes free memory from Scenaries leaved behind in future. I think this is really needed if P3D v2 is not going to be 64bits (maybe v3?)
The good thing is we have a team behind now. Something we didn't have with Microsoft.
Let's not forget that current OOMs usually are 'false' OOMs: you should only get an OOM when VAS reaches 4 GB but most users get them when OOM is somewhere between 2.5 to 3.5 already. So there clearly is something wrong which needs fixing. As soon as this is fixed most OOM problems will be gone (or at least will be more similar to FSX). It's not that we will have to lower settings in order to prevent OOMs for the rest of our 'P3D v2 lives': we only need to lower settings until this problem is solved and things work as they should. VAS may be (a bit) higher 'out of the box' with P3D v2 but it's not so much higher that we all reach the 4 GB limit all the time! The problem here isn't that VAS reaches 4 GB all the time but that OOMs occur while VAS is well within limits.
EDIT
With the default Acclaim and autogen at Dense I am getting OOMs all the time with the new FTX AU SP4. I just had an OOM while VAS was at 3.0. After restarting P3D v2 I had an OOM within a minute and VAS was at 2.5...! As I said, these aren't normal VAS problems. You shouldn't be getting OOMs with VAS at 2.5! This is making the sim unflyable unless you stick with default scenery and addons.
EDIT
With the default Acclaim and autogen at Dense I am getting OOMs all the time with the new FTX AU SP4. I just had an OOM while VAS was at 3.0. After restarting P3D v2 I had an OOM within a minute and VAS was at 2.5...! As I said, these aren't normal VAS problems. You shouldn't be getting OOMs with VAS at 2.5! This is making the sim unflyable unless you stick with default scenery and addons.
