Author Topic: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW  (Read 95722 times)

keino333

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #60 on: January 09, 2013, 05:51:25 am »
I don't know if it could help but i had OOM's but  after changing LOD from large to medium and scenery complexity from very dense to dense i have no more OOM's. (with the Carenado Super King B200) I haven't tried it with the PMDG B737 yet. I'll see tomorrow.

Best regards

Real Deraps

Real is on to something here...I did the same with success as well. I've executed 3 flights in and out of CYVR from relatively short distances CYVR to CYYC and CYVR to CYEG  using ABX-E, NGX and CLS a330-200 v2.  Also be sure to update AS2012 to the latest Build SP4 i believe to smooth out the FPS load. 
My pool size internal to the addon manager is set to 13-18.  and the other Slider (can't remember the name) is sitting at 20.

I found 2x Sparse Grid Supersampling to be toooo burdensome on the FPS thus this is left disable for my rig...on caused things to creep excessively 

 
 

markjans

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #61 on: January 12, 2013, 12:05:18 pm »
Unfortunately I'm still unable to use this scenery without getting OOM's. I've thourougly read all suggestions in this topic and applied tweaks where applicable. Also I understand what Umberto says that it's a matter of making choices.

On the other hand, FSDT has to consider that most users already have a range of addons installed that they consider as a "base". I'm talking about AS2012, REX, NGX, FSinn/IVAP and in this case, ORBX. These addons can be used at the same time without OOM's at any other airport on the market. If Vancouver, despite all innovate techniques, turns out to be the ONLY place where they can't be used together, FSDT should probably consider offering a "light" version of the product that can be used without creating OOM errors.

I'm just really disappointed that the scenery is not useable to me at this point. It would be kind and fair if FSDT recognizes and acknowledges the comments of a valued customer instead of waving away these comments by stating it's the customer to "blame".

Mark

Andrew737

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #62 on: January 12, 2013, 03:20:22 pm »
Quote
I'm just really disappointed that the scenery is not useable to me at this point. It would be kind and fair if FSDT recognizes and acknowledges the comments of a valued customer instead of waving away these comments by stating it's the customer to "blame".

Hi Mark

Since I empathise with your fustration may I just say I too am trying to get the best balance with CYVR.

Before now I have only ever suffered from OOM's over Aerosoft VFR London in the NGX with 4096 clouds and textures, very high graphics settings and 4.5 LOD. Rather than compromise with my settings I just never flew (low) over London in the NGX - just got up and out of there (From heathrow and Gatwick) ASAP.

With Orbx, PMDG, FSDT, REX and all the 'must have' add-ons, we now have to make sacrifices - YES its really fustrating we can't have all our favourite add-ons cranked up high over detailed areas, but this is NO developers fault - they are all just giving us the option to use their products.

Some of the others on the forum have managed to get a stable balance and indeed they have compromised (even more than I want to) which does suggest it is FSX maxed out rather than a memory leak/fault in CYVR.

Has FSX reached its pinacle and have we pushed it to its limit? - probably yes

I agree that a light or lighter option to install would be a good option and give those of us with these add-ons a bit more flexibility with the virtual memory loads we impose on FSX - I would like such an option too, for use on my laptop.

When push comes to shove who actually is installing all these add-ons into their simulators, us the customers or the developers of the products? when I get an OOM its usually my fault not Umberto's  ;)

I personally have reached the point where I do NOT want and am not yet ready to compromise scenery in my simpit! My Plan is:

I have all the parts for 3 more i7 PC's (I am aware this option can't suit everyone) and am going to use WideView to spread the load. I will install FSX into a 'Server' PC with all my aircraft and traffic, then use the other PC's to run my scenery via WideView thus not having to use memory that the aircraft takes up. I beleive the server can then display all my instruments at the highest resolution possible, panels and Spot View to smaller monitors. I only intend to use the spot view at the airport so don't require the surrounding scenery or LOD radius - an option.


Good luck with CYVR and dont give up! If there is a memory leak somewhere we are unaware of, if anyone will fix it it will be FSDT

Kind regards

Andrew

P.S. Please post when you have managed to get a balance in your Sim as it is useful for us all to compare the stable settings everyone is acheiving - thanks

« Last Edit: January 12, 2013, 11:36:30 pm by Andrew737 »
Regards Andrew

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50870
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #63 on: January 12, 2013, 08:48:41 pm »
On the other hand, FSDT has to consider that most users already have a range of addons installed that they consider as a "base"

It's exactly this kind of reasoning that HAS to be changed.

What people seem not to get (not many, fortunately, most understood it) is that this problem WILL happen in a few months, unless other scenery developers will keep being smarter than us (it doesn't take much, we know to be reckless and always trying to do the difficult things) and will all revert doing airports in desert areas, is that this "base" you are referring to, sooner or later WILL EAT ALL YOUR 4GB!

It happened first here, only because there are many Add-ons in this area, you make it sound as if the "OOM" message never existed before CYVR, which is obviously not true and, in fact, the cold hard reality, is that it was usually associated with other products.

Once the "add-ons you can't live without" wil reach 4GB when used all together, the "base" you are suggesting we should take into account, will not exist anymore. What would be your suggestion, in that case, keep making sceneries *lighter* and *lighter* ? Even that will end eventually, up to a point that, when we'll have 0 bytes left at our disposal, we couldn't even start adding anything, and some areas in the FSX world will be untouchable. Which, of course, happen to be the most commercially interesting ones.

We can do a "big fat" scenery in the middle of nowhere but, how many people will buy it ?

Quote
I'm talking about AS2012, REX, NGX, FSinn/IVAP and in this case, ORBX. These addons can be used at the same time without OOM's at any other airport on the market.

The easy answer is, that airport works with any other airplane too. And that doesn't obviously mean CYVR doesn't work the NGX, because it does, the problem is pretending to use *everything* at once, as if the 4GB limitation didn't existed.

And you can probably use all those products together, but you have to renounce to SOMETHING, for example making some compromises with visual quality. You can start playing with your sliders. You don't HAVE to keep your scenery range to Large, and that takes quite a bit of memory too.

We have a switch in the Addon Manager, that allows you to turn off 4096x4096 textures, and that can be used without having to restart FSX.

The CURRENT version, which we uploaded yesterday, has a 3 position switch instead of the previous on/off, so you can also choose the 2048x2048 resolution, which is still very nice, and still results in a considerable memory saving.

Quote
If Vancouver, despite all innovate techniques, turns out to be the ONLY place where they can't be used together, FSDT should probably consider offering a "light" version of the product that can be used without creating OOM errors.

It has already been discussed, here and on Avsim, that we ARE working on an update.

Not that there was anything "wrong" with the scenery in the first place, it just happened to be a bit larger than KLAX, but in an area that has far more additional purchasable scenery than KLAX. Let's hope the PMDG 777 will not use more memory than the 737 because, if you were lucky to be able to use the 737 (together with all the other stuff) until now at, KLAX or PHNL, but just barely (you don't know you are close to an OOM, until you get one), it's might be enough adding a bit more of memory requirement, and you WILL crash elsewhere other than CYVR.

What will happen then, people coming here asking for lighter versions of all our past sceneries, just because the "newest and greatest" came out ?

This to be very clear about what we believe is right.

Either people will get reasonable, and don't feel "diminished" if they are not able to run with 6-7 add-ons at the same time with all sliders to the right, or this situation will escalate soon enough with something else and, looking at the near future, it will make the sim entirely unusable, or any new product launched will fail, because nobody would be able to use it because your "minimum base" is already too near to the maximum memory limit in FSX, which is a FINITE resource.

Quote
I'm just really disappointed that the scenery is not useable to me at this point. It would be kind and fair if FSDT recognizes and acknowledges the comments of a valued customer instead of waving away these comments by stating it's the customer to "blame".

It's not your "fault" if you weren't exactly aware of the 4GB limitation in FSX, which is something that can't be fixed, unless the sim is remade in 64 bit code, which seems to be specifically difficult with FSX, since part of its code are very old and written in Assembler code, which is very hard to convert to 64 bit. But once you get to know about it, you have to live with this limit and start making choices, if not about the number of products used together, at least to the visual quality.

Since a 64 bit FSX is not coming out, not in the foreseeable future, we must do with what we have, but you can't pretend that limit doesn't exist, and keep adding stuff and pretending the developer would magically be able to "fit" in a progressively reduce space, because of the "established base", which can only grow larger. And BTW, who decides exactly *what* add-ons make the minimum base ? It takes about 1 year to do airport like CYVR, what happens if something new comes out in the mean time that takes another slice of the memory that we believe to have at our disposal, when the design of the scenery just started ?

But of course, this doesn't mean we don't listen to suggestion. We obviously do and, as I've said, we are working to change a few things, at least to allow users to choose exactly *where* they can work to reduce memory usage at CYVR.

The first improvement is already out, the updated Addon Manager will let you choose the 2048x2048 resolution (again, without a restart, so you might find convenient using 4096x4096 in less dense areas if some of your products requires it, and switch to 2048 in the more critical areas ) and VISUALLY, it's much closer to the 4096x4096 compared to going down to 1024x1024, which might be too big of a compromise.

This goes together with the upcoming CYVR upgrade, which is already done, we are just testing it, which will allow to make some choices during the installation:

- You will able to choose the resolution of the Dynamic Shadows separately from all the other textures. A screen while installing will allow you to install 1024, 2048 or 4096 versions of the shadows textures, with an estimate of how much memory each option will require. IF the dynamic shadows were just the thing that put you on the other side of the OOM threshold, you can now control them separately, without affecting the rest of the scenery quality.

- You will be able to choose the resolution of the Ground textures separately (for example buildings, etc.), another screen will provide with a sample and an estimate in memory usage for 1024, 2048 and 4096 versions.

With the resolution options, you have complete flexibility about were you can act on the scenery memory requirements. For example, choosing 1024 resolution for the dynamic shadows and 2048 resolution for the photoreal background and 4096 for everything else, will still look very good, and will bring overall memory requirements to be same or less than KLAX.

- We ADDED a new Season, but since there's only one in memory at any given time, it doesn't affect memory usage at all, but you will be also able to select how many seasons you want, with 3 choices, Winter/Spring/Fall, or Winter/Spring, or Evergreen with just Spring. ON TOP OF THAT, by changing two easy parameters in an .INI file, you can even customize the *dates* when seasons change, to allow a better compatibility with any other land-class scenery you might have.

Andrew737

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #64 on: January 12, 2013, 11:29:47 pm »
The above post is *EXACTLY* what sets FSDT (and very few others) apart from all other developers.

These few provide best product and service in the business

Thank you Umberto

Regards

Andrew
Regards Andrew

lpf20011

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #65 on: January 13, 2013, 04:33:13 pm »
The above post is *EXACTLY* what sets FSDT (and very few others) apart from all other developers.

These few provide best product and service in the business

Thank you Umberto

Regards

Andrew

What I don't get is how umberto has explained this issue of OOM time and time again over the past week on various diffferent forums and still the same question is asked. Does no one actually bother to read, let alone understand what he's saying?


marvic

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #66 on: January 13, 2013, 05:57:53 pm »
Here is the clincher, seems to me that a lot of payware companies have made concessions to the NGX followers. There is nothing wrong with the scenery, as in many posts and many different forums has been proved over and over again.... The Almighty resource hungry NGX is the problem regardless how great it is. Doubt it, disagree with it, I don't care. It is the way it is.
Cheers, Marvic.

Andrew737

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #67 on: January 13, 2013, 06:03:42 pm »
The above post is *EXACTLY* what sets FSDT (and very few others) apart from all other developers.

These few provide best product and service in the business

Thank you Umberto

Regards

Andrew


What I don't get is how umberto has explained this issue of OOM time and time again over the past week on various diffferent forums and still the same question is asked. Does no one actually bother to read, let alone understand what he's saying?



I'm not sure that people do actually read ALL the posts, I must admit I can be guilty of that too  ;D

Another thing is that (I certainly) am always learning about FSX and sometimes I learn lesson that I wish did NOT have to be learnt - like for example this memory limit we have to live with!

But alas I agree people should actually read the posts.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2013, 06:13:10 pm by Andrew737 »
Regards Andrew

Andrew737

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #68 on: January 13, 2013, 06:10:44 pm »
Here is the clincher, seems to me that a lot of payware companies have made concessions to the NGX followers. There is nothing wrong with the scenery, as in many posts and many different forums has been proved over and over again.... The Almighty resource hungry NGX is the problem regardless how great it is. Doubt it, disagree with it, I don't care. It is the way it is.

Love the NGX or Hate it (I love it BTW) - She is a hungry old bird mate!
Regards Andrew

yancovitch

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #69 on: January 13, 2013, 08:19:24 pm »
thanks virtuali for that most positive feedback!

golyaht

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #70 on: January 13, 2013, 11:50:34 pm »
To be fair, this problem is not exclusively with the NGX. I have only one time fired up the NGX in YVR and it OOM'd as soon as I pressed the battery button (from C&D state). I have been using Aerosoft's Airbux X Extended and have tried everything I can think of (including everything posted by Umberto) and have had minimal success.

Now that I've removed AS2012 from the setup, I can reliably get out of Vancouver. However, arriving is just not possible for me. As a test, I set up a simple traffic pattern. Took off 8L, went to YVR VOR, downwind and base, turn to final OOM'd. At this point, the only thing I'm running is FSDT CYVR and Orbx PNW. I've removed Vancouver+ and Victoria+, removed AS2012, even turned off UT2... same thing.

My FSX.cfg has the HighMemFix enabled, LOD set to 4.5, and I've dropped the textures down to 1024. What annoys me greatly is how well KLAX works with everything cranked (including running the NGX), yet I can't even perform a traffic pattern with CYVR. In the 2+ years I've been running this beast FSX rig, the only time I've ever had an OOM is after CYVR was installed.

After I installed CYVR, I had the obvious issues in Vancouver, missing buildings in KLAS, my first ever OOM going into KLAX (although to be fair, that flight originated in CYVR). And I haven't flown the NGX for any of these tests.

For me, everything is pointing to something going on with Couatl, as it is the only thing that is consistent to all three airports in my tests. Even if you rule out CYVR problems due to Orbx (or a compendium of addons that have never affected any other airport in my payware arsenal, including everything from FSDT), that doesn't explain the sudden crop of problems with existing FSDT sceneries. While trying to get to the bottom of this, I haven't had a chance to visit KORD, KDFW or KJFK yet, but I'm fearful there will be new mysteries there, too.

Dimon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 491
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #71 on: January 14, 2013, 12:04:03 am »
Jesus Chris, people...removed this, remove that, decrease this, decrease that, get rid of AI-traffic, un-install ASE/REX/UTX/ORBX...it's been all predicted many many time that FSX development has reached its plank within 32-bit world.  ;D
i7-6700k@4.6Ghz, Z170 Delux, 980Ti-6GB5700, 2TB EVO850, 16GB DDR4 RAM Win7/64 PRO.

virtuali

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 50870
    • VIRTUALI Sagl
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #72 on: January 14, 2013, 01:34:14 am »
For me, everything is pointing to something going on with Couatl, as it is the only thing that is consistent to all three airports in my tests.

Nothing in your tests indicates that. The whole point of having Couatl as an external program, is that it CANNOT "steal" memory from FSX! Of all the things that can cause OOM, Couatl.exe is exactly the only one that CAN'T, because it's an external .EXE, and so it runs in its own address space.

And of course, if you check it with Process Explorer, you would see how little memory it uses. Not that this makes any difference anyway to FSX OOMs, because even that little amount of memory it takes, is NOT taken from FSX.

viperxbr

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #73 on: January 14, 2013, 04:16:09 pm »
Jesus Chris, people...removed this, remove that, decrease this, decrease that, get rid of AI-traffic, un-install ASE/REX/UTX/ORBX...it's been all predicted many many time that FSX development has reached its plank within 32-bit world.  ;D

I agree.  You can't blame any current developer out there for these OOM's!  It's not PMDG, FSDT, ORBX, AS, REX, FlyTampa, Aerosoft, etc....  It's quite obvious the root cause is an 8+yr old coded flight simulator that has been pushed to and reached it's limitations!  Period!  Screaming or pointing fingers at anyone else that is not going resolve the root issue at hand.  You may as well keep beating that dead horse!
Thanks,
Todd.

Sim PC: Intel i7 7820x OC 4.8GHz, XSPC RayStorm D5 EX240 Cooling, Rampage VI APEX MB, 32GB DDR4-3200 RAM, EVGA GTX 1080ti SC 11GB, 2xSamsung EVO 970 1TB NVMe, Samsung 840 SSD 1TB, Corsair 1200AX PS.


LuisKMIA

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: CYVR OOM when using PMDG NGX and ORBX PNW
« Reply #74 on: January 15, 2013, 12:49:27 am »
You and your team have done a fantastic job!  I mentioned earlier that I figured out ways to lighten the load in order to enjoy the NGX and CYVR.  Like you said, the problem is FSX not having a 64-bit capability.  In an ideal world, a "SP3" with 64-bit functionality would have been nice.  I really appreciate how you have raised the standard in scenery design.  I look forward to your next airport.

Luis
« Last Edit: January 15, 2013, 02:24:01 am by virtuali »