Now I'm confused...again!

[Cruachan 705]

Hi,Two things happened in the past couple of days:1. On running FSX I was presented with the screen inviting me to activate the product! What!!!!FSX has been on my rig since day one, I've never needed to reinstall it and this is the first time this has happened.Anyway, reactivation proceeded without a hitch and I moved on with barely a grumble... LOL.2. Having recently experienced the joy of using Bojote's (*******') UsePools=0 tweak which has all but eliminated the stutters on my setup, I thought I would give his other tweaks a try. Does make you wonder why the BufferPools PoolSize variable was ever used - I assume it was introduced with SP2 to meet the changing demands of evolving hardware and the consequent effect on performance of FSX.I backed up my existing FSX.cfg prior to deleting it and FSX created the new file. I made the few necessary adjustments from within the running sim to meet the capabilities of my humble, but still quite capable, hardware and then exited the sim to view the content of the newly created FSX.cfg before adding Bojote's tweaks for dual core machines. That's when I noticed something very strange:(Note: Hardware has not changed - same CPU, same GPU, same DDR2 memory and same HDs. The only thing that has changed recently are the graphics drivers. I moved from Forceware 195.62 to 197.45 which seem to be doing a good job.)FSX.cfg prior to rebuild of file:ProcSpeed=6111PerfBucket=5FSX.cfg after rebuild of file:ProcSpeed=5984PerfBucket=7To me, this doesn't make any sense since I had always understood that the PerfBucket value determined the initial settings within the sim following the hardware detection routines. I note the ProcSpeed value has dropped a little despite CPU-Z advising me that the core speed of my Athlon 64 X2 6400+ remains unchanged at 3200.MHz with minor upward variations of + .1 - .5MHz. Even so, I would have expected that this drop in the ProcSpeed figure would not have had any significant impact on the PerfBucket value, and certainly not an increase!At the end of the day, I know it doesn't matter one jot as I find some of the initial in-sim settings are far too optimistic and I change them anyway.Thoughts, anyone?MikeASRock 939Dual-SATA2 (AM2CPU Board), AMD Athlon 64X2 6400+ (BE,3200MHz,Windsor), Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 Pro, 2GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 PC2-6400 4-4-4-12(2T) (Dual Channel), NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB (DDR3) (Forceware 197.45 WHQL), SB Audigy2 ZS Platinum (Drivers version 6.00.0001.1371), Antec NeoHE 650W PSU, Windows XP Home Edition (SP3), DirectX 9.0c

[tf51d 284]

Hi,Two things happened in the past couple of days:1. On running FSX I was presented with the screen inviting me to activate the product! What!!!!FSX has been on my rig since day one, I've never needed to reinstall it and this is the first time this has happened.Anyway, reactivation proceeded without a hitch and I moved on with barely a grumble... LOL.2. Having recently experienced the joy of using Bojote's (*******') UsePools=0 tweak which has all but eliminated the stutters on my setup, I thought I would give his other tweaks a try. Does make you wonder why the BufferPools PoolSize variable was ever used - I assume it was introduced with SP2 to meet the changing demands of evolving hardware and the consequent effect on performance of FSX.I backed up my existing FSX.cfg prior to deleting it and FSX created the new file. I made the few necessary adjustments from within the running sim to meet the capabilities of my humble, but still quite capable, hardware and then exited the sim to view the content of the newly created FSX.cfg before adding Bojote's tweaks for dual core machines. That's when I noticed something very strange:(Note: Hardware has not changed - same CPU, same GPU, same DDR2 memory and same HDs. The only thing that has changed recently are the graphics drivers. I moved from Forceware 195.62 to 197.45 which seem to be doing a good job.)FSX.cfg prior to rebuild of file:ProcSpeed=6111PerfBucket=5FSX.cfg after rebuild of file:ProcSpeed=5984PerfBucket=7To me, this doesn't make any sense since I had always understood that the PerfBucket value determined the initial settings within the sim following the hardware detection routines. I note the ProcSpeed value has dropped a little despite CPU-Z advising me that the core speed of my Athlon 64 X2 6400+ remains unchanged at 3200.MHz with minor upward variations of + .1 - .5MHz. Even so, I would have expected that this drop in the ProcSpeed figure would not have had any significant impact on the PerfBucket value, and certainly not an increase!At the end of the day, I know it doesn't matter one jot as I find some of the initial in-sim settings are far too optimistic and I change them anyway.Thoughts, anyone?MikeASRock 939Dual-SATA2 (AM2CPU Board), AMD Athlon 64X2 6400+ (BE,3200MHz,Windsor), Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 Pro, 2GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 PC2-6400 4-4-4-12(2T) (Dual Channel), NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB (DDR3) (Forceware 197.45 WHQL), SB Audigy2 ZS Platinum (Drivers version 6.00.0001.1371), Antec NeoHE 650W PSU, Windows XP Home Edition (SP3), DirectX 9.0c

Most likely some background task (ASA/ASE maybe?) was eating some CPU cycles at the time, which reduced the calculated number. I wouldn't sweat it, like as you say it doesn't matter unless you keep default settings which most don't!

[ericd19320 0]

Now I'm confused. I thought his tweaks were for quads only. Is there something I missed?Eric

[Cruachan 705]

Most likely some background task (ASA/ASE maybe?) was eating some CPU cycles at the time, which reduced the calculated number. I wouldn't sweat it, like as you say it doesn't matter unless you keep default settings which most don't!

Hi Tom,Nope, nothing else was running and NOD32 usually updates as soon as I boot up. I only do manual scans.Still doesn't explain the unexpected change to the PerfBucket value.Heck, perhaps my system has developed pretensions of grandeur!Mike

[Cruachan 705]

Now I'm confused. I thought his tweaks were for quads only. Is there something I missed?Eric

Hi Eric,http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=283061Post #2 down the page.Mike

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

I've had this happen before also, not the activation thing, but the ProcSpeed value change after a rebuild of the cfg.Normally after rebuiling my FSX.cfg mine says:ProcSpeed=11109PerfBucket=7but a few times after rebuiilding it has said:ProcSpeed=10788PerfBucket=7Like you I wasn't sure why it dropped since I hadn't changed the clock on my CPU, but I didn't worry about it. I just let it rebuild again and it was the same as the first setting. Like someone else said maybe it was just an extra process running in the background that was taking up extra CPU cycles.

[bojote 20]

ProcSpeed=11109PerfBucket=7

Also, no need to 'rebuild' the entire file. just removing ProcSpeed will calculate it again over and over :)I suggest you remove all your USB devices (for testing of course) and try again and see if procspeed improves.

[Cruachan 705]

Also, no need to 'rebuild' the entire file. just removing ProcSpeed will calculate it again over and over :)I suggest you remove all your USB devices (for testing of course) and try again and see if procspeed improves.

Hi *******,Thanks for all your hard work and, in particular, that UsePools=0 tweak. I had all but abandoned FSX before making this discovery. I am amazed at the difference this has made to the sim's performance behaviour. It's still early days for me and I need to test in lots of other situations, but at Friday Harbor I can now skim smoothly over the landscape at max knots in the Extra 300 and the texture update and clarity is very good indeed. However, as we all know, it's all too easy to get carried away when new discoveries like this are shared with the community. I am not expecting it to prove to be the universal panacea for my installation, but it has certainly succeeded in drawing me back to this frustrating simulator.In fact, I am more interested in the change to the PerfBucket value than that of the ProcSpeed. I presume they are interdependent and, if this is indeed the case, then why has a drop in the ProcSpeed value resulted in an increase in the PerfBucket value? Normally to achieve a value of '7' I would have expected to see a ProcSpeed value far in excess of around the 6000 mark.Kind regards,Mike

[ericd19320 0]

Cool I will give this a try. I stopped reading when I saw quad core. Figured whats the point I would end up spending moneythanks again

Hi Eric,http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=283061Post #2 down the page.Mike

[Cruachan 705]

Uh! My confusion deepens :(fsx.CFG created 29/04ProcSpeed=6111PerfBucket=5fsx.CFG created 11/05ProcSpeed=6156PerfBucket=7fsx.CFG created 11/05ProcSpeed=6175PerfBucket=7N.B. No hardware/software changes between each of the aboveNow, before anyone jumps in to tell me that agonising over this is totally pointless, I do know :) I'm hoping someone will relieve my misery (too OTT?) by telling me what actually determines the value for PerfBucket when each new fsx.CFG file is created? Also, what could explain the jump from 5 to 7? Just doesn't seem to make any sense, yet a value of "7" seems to be the norm right now on my setup. Also, I note that it has implications for the initial slider setup of the sim - far too ambitious and unrealistic. Mike ;)