Simviation Forum - Stutters, Stutters and Microstutters... a fix?

Mar 5^th, 2009 at 3:43pm

NickN Offline
Colonel
FSX runs fine... the problem
is you or your system

Posts: 6317

This was introduced in another forum

Credit goes to Gizmo and Noel for bringing to our attention

Download this tool

http://rapidshare.com/files/205205148/FPS_Limiter_0.2.rar

or from here

http://files.filefront.com/FPS+Limiter+02rar/;13233637;/fileinfo.html

Unrar/unzip

Be aware that where you place the folder must remain or it will break its use and you will need to reconfigure the bat file

USE:

Run FPS_Limiter_GUI.jar and click SEARCH EXECUTABLE

browse for and select FSX.exe

set frame limit to 30 under MAXIMUM FPS

Click CREATE BAT

Once complete close the interface and use the created file fsx.exe.limited.bat to start FSX (double click it)

set frame lock to UNLIMTED in FSX and use the AG slider to tune

You MUST have JAVA installed to use that interface

http://www.java.com/en/

Now here is the deal... this attacks the UNLIMITED FRAME LOCK problem related to Vsync introduced by Aces in SP1/SP2. Instead of tuning the FRAME LOCK you will tune the AUTOGEN slider for smooth results where you are flying. Leave the FSX frame lock slider at UNLIMITED at all times.

You can fine tune this app as well...

I found 30 was the sweet spot for all occasions. I would suggest no less than 24 and no more than 30 but start with 30.

FSX must always be started by clicking the created command line BAT file.. NOT the FSX desktop icon

See if this has a positive effect... especially you i7 people

and try this WITHOUT the affinity mask setting in the config file

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Mar 5^th, 2009 at 9:21pm

jwenham Offline
Colonel
Clear to Land... Are you
sure?

Posts: 266

I ran several tests and all I noticed is that when using the FPS limiter I was unable to maintain a locked rate ie 28 or 30. It was constantly changing even going higher than the FPS limit set at times. It did however allow me to run with the lock at unlimited which I could not do before. When using the FPS lock in FSX I am able to hold my locked FPS at a consistant amount without the constant changes in the FPS. I saw no performance advantage nor any big disadvantages with the exception of the fps changes.

So to sum it up I saw no use for it on my system and the FSX lock was better than using the limiter.

Intel i7 940 2.93 clocked to 4.0ghz Asus P6T Deluxe 6gb OCZ 1600 8-8-8-24 EVGA GTX 260 Superclocked Edition Thermalright 120 CPU Cooler Power PC & Cooling 750w PSU 1 tb Seagate Barracuda HD 500 gb Seagate Barracude HD 22" Viewsonic Widescreen Track IR 4 XP Pro x64 www.fairtax.org

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Mar 6^th, 2009 at 3:03pm

NickN Offline
Colonel
FSX runs fine... the problem
is you or your system

Posts: 6317

Thanks jwenham

.. I am just going to keep the responses in the FSX forum thread since that is where everyone seems to be seeing this

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Mar 6^th, 2009 at 5:52pm

stevehookem Offline
Colonel
Hello!

Gender:
Posts: 388

I tried it too. I'm getting an overall smoother experience by not using this and keeping FSX locked at 28 FPS.

With this running, I see huge swings in frame rates over high density areas. In the Houston area, flying near downtown at 2500 feet, my frames will drop to 10-15 and back to 28. In the same area locked in FSX my frames will only fluctuate 2-3 frames.

i7 940 at 4.0ghz • Asus P6T Deluxe • 6gb OCZ Gold 1600 • BFG 285 Superclocked • Velociraptor 300gb HD • LG BlueRay Burner • Thermalright 120 cooler • PC Power 750W PS • Antec 1200 • Windows XP 64

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Mar 6^th, 2009 at 6:40pm

NickN Offline
Colonel
FSX runs fine... the problem
is you or your system

Posts: 6317

i7 systems may not see a difference because they provide more overhead than any other.. normal frame limiting with i7 may produce the same result regardless

This utility does a lot if used correctly and with the hardware most effected which is typically Intel C2 and Q on DDR2/DDR3

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Mar 7^th, 2009 at 7:46am

Ulf B Offline
Colonel
Fly FS
Sweden

Posts: 35

NickN wrote on Mar 6^th, 2009 at 6:40pm:

i7 systems may not see a difference because they provide more overhead than any other.. normal frame limiting with i7 may produce the same result regardless

Nick,

My test flights with the FPS Limiter utility confirm this. I can't notice any difference on my system.

Ulf B
Asus P6T Deluxe, Intel Core i7 940 @4.1GHz
OCZ Platinum XTC DDR3 1600MHz 3x2GB
ZOTAC GTX 480 AMP!
Vista Home Premium 64 SP1, FSX SP2 on VelociRaptor, NOD32

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Mar 7^th, 2009 at 9:46am

golfcart22 Offline
Captain
Maywood, NJ

Gender:
Posts: 3

I ran a battery of my own tests last evening and there is aboslutly no benefit from this with my rig. All I use is BufferPools and and fairly high TBW and things are very smooth for me.

I did notice one thing though - if you set the app to run at 30fps and Unlimited in the Sim - the FPS in FSX shows half (15) while flying and is pretty choppy. If you set the app to 60 then FSX reports 30 so either I messed something up or this app is not functioning correctly.

Tony

Intel i7 940 @ 4.05ghz&&Asus Rampage II Extreme&&6gb Corsair Dominator&&EVGA GTX 285 FTW&&Vista64 HP

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Mar 7^th, 2009 at 10:19am

SubZer0 Offline
Colonel
KLNA

Gender:
Posts: 3882

Ulf B wrote on Mar 7^th, 2009 at 7:46am:

NickN wrote on Mar 6^th, 2009 at 6:40pm:

i7 systems may not see a difference because they provide more overhead than any other.. normal frame limiting with i7 may produce the same result regardless

Nick,

My test flights with the FPS Limiter utility confirm this. I can't notice any difference on my system.

On the other hand, my system has smoothed out a bit, although not much. I think it's just a matter of your own system and 'your mileage may vary' as Nick said.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Mar 7^th, 2009 at 11:23am

Ulf B Offline
Colonel
Fly FS
Sweden

Posts: 35

SubZer0 wrote on Mar 7^th, 2009 at 10:19am:

Ulf B wrote on Mar 7^th, 2009 at 7:46am:

NickN wrote on Mar 6^th, 2009 at 6:40pm:

i7 systems may not see a difference because they provide more overhead than any other.. normal frame limiting with i7 may produce the same result regardless

Nick,

My test flights with the FPS Limiter utility confirm this. I can't notice any difference on my system.

On the other hand, my system has smoothed out a bit, although not much. I think it's just a matter of your own system and 'your mileage may vary' as Nick said.

Andy,

Have you overclocked your system and if so at what speed do you run that i7 920 and RAM?

Ulf B
Asus P6T Deluxe, Intel Core i7 940 @4.1GHz
OCZ Platinum XTC DDR3 1600MHz 3x2GB
ZOTAC GTX 480 AMP!
Vista Home Premium 64 SP1, FSX SP2 on VelociRaptor, NOD32

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #9 - Mar 7^th, 2009 at 11:56am

SubZer0 Offline
Colonel
KLNA

Gender:
Posts: 3882

The proc is OC'ed to 3.8ghz. The memory is 6GB of OCZ Platinum (DDR3 1600mhz 7-7-7-24) and I have it running at that timing and at ≈1550mhz. The video card is also overclocked by about 18% or so.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #10 - Mar 7^th, 2009 at 12:28pm

Ulf B Offline
Colonel
Fly FS
Sweden

Posts: 35

SubZer0 wrote on Mar 7^th, 2009 at 11:56am:

The proc is OC'ed to 3.8ghz. The memory is 6GB of OCZ Platinum (DDR3 1600mhz 7-7-7-24) and I have it running at that timing and at ≈1550mhz. The video card is also overclocked by about 18% or so.

Hmm...The big difference seems to be our graphic cards then. Mine is running at 720MHz.

Edited: Forgot to mention that i run the 940 at 3.8GHz. Memory at 1600 (8-7-7-24).

Ulf B
Asus P6T Deluxe, Intel Core i7 940 @4.1GHz
OCZ Platinum XTC DDR3 1600MHz 3x2GB
ZOTAC GTX 480 AMP!
Vista Home Premium 64 SP1, FSX SP2 on VelociRaptor, NOD32

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: