Frame rates any airport bad!

I had my computer reset (windows 10), reinstalled the sim and all. Seems like at any addon major airport I'm at the frame rates take a huge hit when staring at certain areas. Before even my FSDT sceneries would work just fine and with lots of traffic. Only a select few airports I considered to be "frame-rate heavy" before this reset.

 

Right now I have my FSDT sceneries with light traffic and they just can't take it without stuttering so hard sometimes.

 

Zero traffic the problem persists.

 

I feel like maybe it has to do with how my stuff is installed into my simulator but I don't know how. The display settings I've never toyed with very much and they're 90% the same. It's never made a difference.

 

I do have a lot of static object libraries folders installed in the addon scenery library, as well as some textures installed in "flightsimular9/textures" as required already. Should they instead be somewhere else?

Edited May 10, 2022 by TheRedBadger

Did you or do you have any new anti virus etc installed? Being that it seems to be most of your airports, is there anything running in the background that’s hogging the cpu?

Sometimes the antivirus will do it.

Or can check the task manager and see if anything is running high.

 

It may not be it but it’s good to eliminate the easy stuff first.

Did you or do you have any new anti virus etc installed? Being that it seems to be most of your airports, is there anything running in the background that’s hogging the cpu?

Sometimes the antivirus will do it.

Or can check the task manager and see if anything is running high.

 

It may not be it but it’s good to eliminate the easy stuff first.

 

Nah no antivirus at all. Size does matter as my AUS scenery is ok, but not JFK or SEA (which definitely shouldn't have been a "low FRF" airport).

 

Nothing unusual on task manager. The usual google pages and discord running, but nothing out of the ordinary. The sim used to run just fine with those active.

 

Setting the mips to 1 doesn't make the sim any better. Obviously I could just set all the things to 0 and the sim works fine, but the problem is I know my computer has been able to handle much more before without issue.

Tested it a little more. Even from a relatively far distance (10 miles), the simulator gets slow anytime I'm looking at scenery, no matter how simple it may be (a small, local scenery, or a big, payware DFW-esque scenery). Tried default IAH and the sim works just fine...

 

Added the afcad for IAH without the scenery and texture folders and it still works fine. I feel this has something to do with any type of addon textures, but I don't know /what/ it is...

 

-Removed all static object libraries (no use)

-Re-installed the texture folder in the main directory too, but no use

Edited May 11, 2022 by TheRedBadger

If you're using an on-board video card it's possible the amount of allocated RAM was reset to "standard" when the machine was "reset". I remember changing my machine from whatever to 2GB made a big difference at the time, but I forget exactly how I achieved it.

If you're using an on-board video card it's possible the amount of allocated RAM was reset to "standard" when the machine was "reset". I remember changing my machine from whatever to 2GB made a big difference at the time, but I forget exactly how I achieved it.

 

I could see that as a possibility. I never changed those settings (if they exist) and I know I’ve reset the computer before. I know there’s a 4GB patch for the sim, I don’t know if it’s what I need or if I can actually allocate that much to the simulator. My computer has 8 GB of ram available, the sim was using just 1.3MB last I checked at its peak, yesterday (that was 70% of the ram which is odd that it wasn’t 35% of 4). I have a 64-bit system.

 

Actually this is “regular ram” right? We aren’t talking VRAM are we? Because there I think I only have 2 GB (or half of whatever FS2020 needs).

Edited May 11, 2022 by TheRedBadger

You aren't alone:

 

https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?337340-Framerate-Problems-in-FS2004-Requesting-Help

I could see that as a possibility. I never changed those settings (if they exist) and I know I’ve reset the computer before. I know there’s a 4GB patch for the sim, I don’t know if it’s what I need or if I can actually allocate that much to the simulator. My computer has 8 GB of ram available, the sim was using just 1.3MB last I checked at its peak, yesterday (that was 70% of the ram which is odd that it wasn’t 35% of 4). I have a 64-bit system.

 

Actually this is “regular ram” right? We aren’t talking VRAM are we? Because there I think I only have 2 GB (or half of whatever FS2020 needs).

 

On my system at least, with a built-in video card, I could re-allocate some of my 8GB system RAM for the video card to use. I seem to remember updating from 512MB of video RAM to 2GB and it made a big difference, but if you've already got 2GB of RAM on your video card that's unlikely to be an issue.

On my system at least, with a built-in video card, I could re-allocate some of my 8GB system RAM for the video card to use. I seem to remember updating from 512MB of video RAM to 2GB and it made a big difference, but if you've already got 2GB of RAM on your video card that's unlikely to be an issue.

 

Would you suggest the 4GB patch? Would that reallocated ram still be in use by RAM in general when the video ram isn’t being extensively used? I think the sim is only getting no more than 2 given what I Observed yesterday. Peaked at 1.3 I think.

 

EDIT: I don't know if that's a viable solution. With the simulator running and a couple of google windows (which I consider to be a light amount..), it's using up 5.8 GB when the simulator is "active". Still, with 2 GB available the simulator isn't even using that available amount. I don' tknow how much it would "choose" to use if more was allocated to it.

 

And sure I could just.. not use Google in the background (it does take up a good 2 Gigabytes... somehow), but before I "change my ways", why is it that this wasn't as much of an issue before and now it is? I read that other thread but it doesn't appear to give a real solution or hint as to why he's experiencing that problem.

 

As a matter of fact, I further confirmed it's any addon because without the static object libraries installed... SEA was running smoothly (the scenery is technically just a fancy afcad which does use some jetways from a library. Without them, it runs flawlessly). This must be texture related, but what... why does the simulator not have a problem with its own textures but does take issue with even just one little jetway? Much worse, an entire payware airport.

 

 

 

I could blame the paywares being technically installed outside of the addonscenery/scenery folder, but according to this dude, his Melichar Hawaii scenery (that I have also used before) gave him problems, and I assume that one was installed where they are usually installed, in the addonscenery folder. There's one more test I need to conduct actually, when I get the chance (scenery without ANY textures...).

 

Also I noticed his specs should be very close to mine if not exactly the same. Same GPU and CPU, W10 64. I don't think Ihave as much RAM (definitely not 32GB). I do keep my FS9 install outside of programfilesx86 (it's in C:/FlightSimulator9)

 

Thoughts?

Edited May 12, 2022 by TheRedBadger

Would you suggest the 4GB patch? Would that reallocated ram still be in use by RAM in general when the video ram isn’t being extensively used? I think the sim is only getting no more than 2 given what I Observed yesterday. Peaked at 1.3 I think.

 

EDIT: I don't know if that's a viable solution. With the simulator running and a couple of google windows (which I consider to be a light amount..), it's using up 5.8 GB when the simulator is "active". Still, with 2 GB available the simulator isn't even using that available amount. I don' tknow how much it would "choose" to use if more was allocated to it.

 

And sure I could just.. not use Google in the background (it does take up a good 2 Gigabytes... somehow), but before I "change my ways", why is it that this wasn't as much of an issue before and now it is? I read that other thread but it doesn't appear to give a real solution or hint as to why he's experiencing that problem.

 

As a matter of fact, I further confirmed it's any addon because without the static object libraries installed... SEA was running smoothly (the scenery is technically just a fancy afcad which does use some jetways from a library. Without them, it runs flawlessly). This must be texture related, but what... why does the simulator not have a problem with its own textures but does take issue with even just one little jetway? Much worse, an entire payware airport.

 

 

 

I could blame the paywares being technically installed outside of the addonscenery/scenery folder, but according to this dude, his Melichar Hawaii scenery (that I have also used before) gave him problems, and I assume that one was installed where they are usually installed, in the addonscenery folder. There's one more test I need to conduct actually, when I get the chance (scenery without ANY textures...).

 

Also I noticed his specs should be very close to mine if not exactly the same. Same GPU and CPU, W10 64. I don't think Ihave as much RAM (definitely not 32GB). I do keep my FS9 install outside of programfilesx86 (it's in C:/FlightSimulator9)

 

Thoughts?

 

I've no experience with the "4GB patch", sorry.

One issue I have had to deal with in the past is when 3rd party scenery overwrites default textures without asking … all the enabling and disabling of add-on features won't help if the problematic file is in the default texture folder! Examining the texture files by date can give clues here.

It's possible for one item within a library to cause problems, but only (apparently) under certain circumstances. I've spent time in the past dis-assembling library files and recompiling them in various combinations to isolate a rogue feature … probably would have been quicker to re-start from scratch, but you know what it's like ;)

Remember, if you disable the texture files for a scenery or library folder, FS will then revert to the default texture folder in it's search, so if "weird" things happen, you may find you've got the same texture filename being used in two different circumstances!

Would you suggest the 4GB patch? Would that reallocated ram still be in use by RAM in general when the video ram isn’t being extensively used? I think the sim is only getting no more than 2 given what I Observed yesterday. Peaked at 1.3 I think.

 

EDIT: I don't know if that's a viable solution. With the simulator running and a couple of google windows (which I consider to be a light amount..), it's using up 5.8 GB when the simulator is "active". Still, with 2 GB available the simulator isn't even using that available amount. I don' tknow how much it would "choose" to use if more was allocated to it.

 

And sure I could just.. not use Google in the background (it does take up a good 2 Gigabytes... somehow), but before I "change my ways", why is it that this wasn't as much of an issue before and now it is? I read that other thread but it doesn't appear to give a real solution or hint as to why he's experiencing that problem.

 

As a matter of fact, I further confirmed it's any addon because without the static object libraries installed... SEA was running smoothly (the scenery is technically just a fancy afcad which does use some jetways from a library. Without them, it runs flawlessly). This must be texture related, but what... why does the simulator not have a problem with its own textures but does take issue with even just one little jetway? Much worse, an entire payware airport.

 

 

 

I could blame the paywares being technically installed outside of the addonscenery/scenery folder, but according to this dude, his Melichar Hawaii scenery (that I have also used before) gave him problems, and I assume that one was installed where they are usually installed, in the addonscenery folder. There's one more test I need to conduct actually, when I get the chance (scenery without ANY textures...).

 

Also I noticed his specs should be very close to mine if not exactly the same. Same GPU and CPU, W10 64. I don't think Ihave as much RAM (definitely not 32GB). I do keep my FS9 install outside of programfilesx86 (it's in C:/FlightSimulator9)

 

Thoughts?

 

 

The 4GB patch in my humble opinion excluding the problem you and I have experienced is a bit of a toss up. Having used it before, I can't say it either hurts or enhances the performance of fs9. Though I have only just returned to flightsim this year, and thus my memory may have become a bit hazy over the past several years. However, I wouldn't see any harm in giving it a fair shake.

 

A quick note on my thread which was shared through here. In the instance of my performance issues, the issue is not that I cannot define what is happening, but rather why it is happening at all. Everything according to the information about my install and system is indicating all is well at the moment. Thus, I can only hypothesize why such fps loss takes place, as unless I am wrong there is no way to view in game/sim console or crash logs in order to look at what fs9 is doing behind the scenes as it runs.

 

 

 

If you do find out anything about this though, please do let us know! :)

The 4GB patch in my humble opinion excluding the problem you and I have experienced is a bit of a toss up. Having used it before, I can't say it either hurts or enhances the performance of fs9.

 

It does nothing for performance. It just allows the FS9 process to access an extra gig of memory, preventing OOM errors. Given the lower relative complexity of FS9 scenery relative to FSX, it's not a common occurrence. It won't hurt, but it won't do much either. :)

 

Cheers!

Was doing some more searching into this problem when I came across this file on flyawaysimulation:

 

https://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/files/766/fs2004-frame-rate-fix/

 

Haven’t seen this one before, but could be worth a try?

I've no experience with the "4GB patch", sorry.

One issue I have had to deal with in the past is when 3rd party scenery overwrites default textures without asking … all the enabling and disabling of add-on features won't help if the problematic file is in the default texture folder! Examining the texture files by date can give clues here.

It's possible for one item within a library to cause problems, but only (apparently) under certain circumstances. I've spent time in the past dis-assembling library files and recompiling them in various combinations to isolate a rogue feature … probably would have been quicker to re-start from scratch, but you know what it's like ;)

Remember, if you disable the texture files for a scenery or library folder, FS will then revert to the default texture folder in it's search, so if "weird" things happen, you may find you've got the same texture filename being used in two different circumstances!

 

Perhaps. Though the issue only seems to be addon sceneries (textures) and not anything default. I don’t recall FSDT actually overwrites other files. I think from experience when installing it outside of FS9 first it only has scenery and texture. Nothing in Fs9/textures.

 

My standard SLC addon also experiences a hit despite the install being entirely located in addon scenery.

 

The 4GB patch in my humble opinion excluding the problem you and I have experienced is a bit of a toss up. Having used it before, I can't say it either hurts or enhances the performance of fs9. Though I have only just returned to flightsim this year, and thus my memory may have become a bit hazy over the past several years. However, I wouldn't see any harm in giving it a fair shake.

 

A quick note on my thread which was shared through here. In the instance of my performance issues, the issue is not that I cannot define what is happening, but rather why it is happening at all. Everything according to the information about my install and system is indicating all is well at the moment. Thus, I can only hypothesize why such fps loss takes place, as unless I am wrong there is no way to view in game/sim console or crash logs in order to look at what fs9 is doing behind the scenes as it runs.

 

 

 

If you do find out anything about this though, please do let us know! :)

 

 

Guess you had no luck either eh? My next bet is to reinstall the sim (clean), then just backup the addons before dropping into the sim. I could’ve sworn when I loaded those sceneries the first time, they were fine. Wasn’t after some addons that it decided to act funny. But I’m speculating. I /could have/ sworn… I just hope I’m not convinced that resetting the computer again is my only solution. I’m not wanting to do that again.

 

I tried the FPS file. Didn’t do much I’m afraid.

 

It’s not the aircraft but I do have so many dropped into the sim… again it shouldn’t be a problem as the trigger is addon textures, not even volume of aircraft.

 

Thanks y’all

Edited May 12, 2022 by TheRedBadger

Update on the problem.

 

Did a reinstall (TWICE because abad update caused problems, and the system recovery caused new problems..), the only frame rate heavy sceneries are the FSDT ones. All others run smoothly. I don't know what initially caused all addons to be affected initially, but doing a reinstall has so far resulted in no problems.

 

I have to try other "intensive" airports to see if this is unique to those FSDT airports.

 

Correction........ OTHER airports may have the problem if I move the sliders up (EWR's Imaginesim)

 

I was really really hoping this was unique to FSDT since I can better pinpoint the problem on some install or who knows what. I seriously could have sworn the frame rates were much better before and this was with several of the sliders maxed out (scenery complexity max, dynamic scenery normal, etc.).

 

I can assure you DFW never disappointed me, but so far it has... same with ORD.

 

Also I notice that jetways drop out much closer than before; before it'd be a good... 10 miles and things like jetways would be visible (and AI). Now just several thousand feet and they're gone.

 

Maybe it's a system degrade when I reset the computer? This was originally a Windows 8 computer, though we did switch the motherboard out if that makes a difference. Maybe I need to update my video driver? Apparently that's a thing.

 

 

 

Aaaaand nevermind. Windows says I have the best already... I updated the computer today and caused a mess. I really don't feel like installing one.... arrgh.

Edited May 14, 2022 by TheRedBadger

So after a bit more trial and error, I have found that through the windows resource monitor application, it is possible under the CPU tab to check the box next to fs9.exe, and thus be able to monitor a few of the ongoing process and files being used by the game. However, it does not show the full picture as from what I can see, only the players aircraft files, and a random selection of .bgl and other game files are shown. Nonetheless, I though I should post this here as it does at least provide some insight into what fs9 is doing as it runs.

So after a bit more trial and error, I have found that through the windows resource monitor application, it is possible under the CPU tab to check the box next to fs9.exe, and thus be able to monitor a few of the ongoing process and files being used by the game. However, it does not show the full picture as from what I can see, only the players aircraft files, and a random selection of .bgl and other game files are shown. Nonetheless, I though I should post this here as it does at least provide some insight into what fs9 is doing as it runs.

 

Thanks for the post.

 

Unfortunately I've mostly thrown in the towel on this and am considering a new computer. It's disappointing because I KNOW the sim was able to handle what I've asked it to do recently wayy way better before I reset the computer. I don't know what exactly triggered such low frame rates (I even tried updating the drivers to no avail), but this is a needless problem.

 

I'm a little torn because I have massive expenses to cover and an adequate computer is going to stretch me a bit, but I digress. I have to make a good decision on this.

Hi.

 

I just scanned through this thread and may have missed something but does "I had my computer reset (windows 10)" mean you've had an operating system upgrade to Win 10 from Windows Something Else?

 

And when you wrote "Nah no antivirus at all." were you thinking only about third party anti-virus software or Win 10's own AV too?

 

Thoroughly condescending now but just in case...

 

Have you tried turning off Security Intelligence or Windows Defender or whatever MS are calling it nowadays? If not, then give it a go. There are two parts you'll have to switch off: 1. Tamper protection, which will allow you to turn off 2. Real Time Scanning (which slows lots of things right down).

 

Adding your FS9 installation to the exclusions list doesn't seem to have any effect on RTS, only on manual scans. Real Time Scan will eventually turn back on automatically but Tamper Protection won't.

 

Most importantly, don't forget to set things back to how they were before you go online.

 

D

This couldn't be a Texture Bandwidth Multi issue I suppose?

As you state you reinstalled Fs9 that could mean TBMulti has been reset to 60.

Try setting to 300 -400.

It's probably not this, but worth trying anyway.

Andy

Thinking again about the 'reset'... is it a memory timings issue?

 

My current PC works fine when left to its own devices. My previous one (somewhat dated now), if I ever reset the bios, chose to configure RAM timings by SPD which hammered the FS9 framerate. It could be that your RAM timings have been slowed right down.

 

D

This couldn't be a Texture Bandwidth Multi issue I suppose?

As you state you reinstalled Fs9 that could mean TBMulti has been reset to 60.

Try setting to 300 -400.

It's probably not this, but worth trying anyway.

Andy

 

TBMulti?

 

Thinking again about the 'reset'... is it a memory timings issue?

 

My current PC works fine when left to its own devices. My previous one (somewhat dated now), if I ever reset the bios, chose to configure RAM timings by SPD which hammered the FS9 framerate. It could be that your RAM timings have been slowed right down.

 

D

 

That may help. I'd have to look into how to adjust that.

Hi.

 

TBMulti is probably the variable TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT in fs9.cfg

 

It works with an undocumented variable TextureMaxLoad. The interaction between the two was described by a FS9 developer in his blog may years ago, and long before the wayback machine etc.

 

I have his original description at home (currently enjoying a cup of tea at work). I'll dig it out later though I personally found it affected loading times of textures much more than it influenced framerate.

 

Out of interest, his maths was wrong and doesn't make much sense. I'll get around to it in a few hours ;)

 

D

Please do share this. I am very interested in learning more about both this developers insight into the inner workings of fs9 and how to improve its performance. Also, if there is anything else you have from this individual, I would be more than happy to read about it even through a new thread or blog on flightsim. Anything which we can do to keep fs9 going strong I am all for.:)

 

I just pulled up my fs9.cfg and found the variable in question currently set to 1024, which I understand from adding textures to fs9 aircraft is the maximum width and or height a texture file can typically be for aircraft. Though that is me going off pure instinct and nothing else.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Tristar35

The piece was written in 2005 by a chap called Steve Lacey, whom I took to be one of Microsoft's developers. You can see immediately that his suggestions are a bit dated now but here it is for curiosity and who knows, maybe it will help.

 

From the defunct http://www.steve-lacey.com/category/flightsim/

 

***

 

 

Ok gather around … I have a little treat for you tweakers.

 

Before I get into this I want you to understand that if you believe 40+ frames are necessary for smooth flight and great scenery – or- you believe running ‘unlimited’ on the frame lock and nothing else… this tweak is not for you and there is probably nothing I can do to convince you that your 7900GTX does not need to be locked @ or above 38-45FPS. (Note: the unlimited frame trick does work but NOT for most systems)

 

 

Understand that blurry textures and stutters come from both the same source and difference sources all at once. Assuming you have a good CLEAN system which you have tweaked and optimized so you're not running all sorts of programs in startup and you have a good base to work from… try this:

 

The TEXTURE BANDWIDTH MULTIPLIER is just that. It multiplies, just like it says.

 

The mystery is, what does it multiply? Well, it multiplies loading a specified number of 256x256 ground textures (in file kb size depending on what ground textures you use) AND it calculates a load for the rendering engine to analyse based on the frame lock.

 

So the question is… where is that specified number?

 

Here it is:

 

TextureMaxLoad=X

 

Never seen that one? If you haven’t don’t be surprised because it is a Microsoft developers' edit which is undocumented. The DEFAULT value when the line is not present in the FS9.cfg file is 3.

 

And the formula the system produces is:

 

TextureMaxLoad -MULTIPLED BY - TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT – DIVIDED BY – FRAME LOCK = X

 

Now that you know this, how does that help?

 

Immensely!

 

Knowing that, I will go on to say the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT does NOT require a set number or to be a factor of anything. Although it is best this number remain a divisible by 20 the number used for the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT is not set in stone and it is completely based on the system being tweaked.

 

Assuming you have a x800 (or fairly close) or greater performance type card, -and- a DECENT supporting motherboard/memory/CPU... AND your Flight Sim works good but it is not as smooth or does not display the scenery as well as you would like… or you just want to play and have some fun, try the following.

 

First, save a copy of your FS9.cfg file for safe keeping.

 

Next, open your FS9.cfg and edit the following

 

TextureMaxLoad =X

 

 

……directly under the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT= entry in you cfg file.

 

 

I will make this easy and without going into a lot of chatter about testing and tweaking because I cannot possibly tweak these numbers without sitting in front of the system.

 

 

Start with these values:

 

 

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=100

TextureMaxLoad =10

 

 

YOUR FRAME LOCK MUST BE REDUCED OR THIS WON’T WORK.

 

For x800 – x1600 and comparable Nvidia cards, lock your frame @ 22

 

You read right… 22 (you might be able to nudge it up to 24 after its tweaked)

 

 

For x850xt and comparable Nvidia, lock it @ 25

 

For x1800 and comparable Nvidia cards, lock it @ 28

For x1900 and 7900GT – GTX, lock it @ 30

 

Set your PAN_RATE= to either 600 or 700 for any card (your choice)

 

For x800 – x850 x1600 and comparable Nvidia cards, disable SHADOWS in the sim. Others can test it to see how it does. The cards I mentioned can also test it but if you are not using a GOOD set of properly designed DX3 clouds such as found in FLIGHT Environment, I would leave shadows disabled. Test using "Building Storms" so you can judge the full load properly.

 

THIS TWEAK assumes you know how to correctly set up your video drivers and have all the FS9 SCENERY sliders maxed and all boxes checked (except shadows for those I mentioned above) and correctly set up your cloud sliders (60 -40 – 100 with Detailed Clouds and 100% maximum density) AA disabled in the sim and the rest of the display settings correct.

 

When you first boot … DON’T judge the tweak until you fly around for a bit. It will most likely need to be adjusted.

 

If you have blurry scenery most likely the frame lock is too high. ONLY drop it by 1 to test.

 

Also, I would NOT exceed 10 as the value for TextureMaxLoad =X Good values are (3 default) 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10… but it WILL go higher. If you experience stutters, DROP the

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT= from 100 to 80.

 

Assuming the TextureMaxLoad = 5 or GREATER, I would not go any higher than 120 on the TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT no matter WHAT you have learned in the past about that setting… most of which was the max value being 400.

 

You guys with the right video cards but slower systems may want to work with LOWER TextureMaxLoad values and HIGHER TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT values.

 

 

The idea is to find the spot where your ground textures load in a flash with no stutters when changing views over an area your flying in for the first time during a flight. With the extra time after that flash load the sim can start using the correct calculations to start sharpening and displaying them further away.

 

 

You will need to work with this setting.. It’s REALLY a gem once you learn how to CORRECTLY set up the FS9.cfg by understanding how the sim works.

 

***

 

My gripe about the maths is that he states:

 

TextureMaxLoad -MULTIPLED BY - TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT – DIVIDED BY – FRAME LOCK = X

 

and:

 

TextureMaxLoad =X

 

which means that:

 

X multiplied by TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT divided by FRAME LOCK = X

 

which means that...

 

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT divided by FRAME LOCK = 1

 

which means that:

 

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT = FRAME LOCK

 

***

 

On my old Win XP machine I saw some improvement in landclass and photoscenery load times by altering these values but last night I experimented on my Win 10 machine and saw no difference with values of...

 

TextureMaxLoad from 1 to 132

 

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT from 64 to 25600

 

but then over the ocean I've had framerates up to "D25" in the Shift+Z info top left of the FS window so perhaps I'm simply not seeing what may have become a relatively tiny improvement. I don't know...

 

D

Edited May 26, 2022 by defaid

Honestly, I can't see how its any setting in FS9(happy to be proven wrong). I agree with defaid because it being that you've done a reinstall of windows and fs9, and its quite a global issue, surely its windows/anti-virus/some program affecting performance? Especially if you have good hardware?

 

Out of curiosity...what GPU are you using?