I'm still starting out flights with great fps, which steadily drops as time goes on. What could be causing this?

Thanks,
boeing247

I'm not sure what your system is, but you can see my set-up below.

Here are a few screen captures of my FSX.

This on final RW 31R at KJFK in the CS 737. I get just about the same in the 727 and 707. Even when I fly in the Orbx NA Blue the rates are always above mid 40's. Only place I get slow FPS are in KSEA and even then it stays around mid 20's.

Weather selected GRAY & RAINY.

You can see three AI planes, one landing and two waiting to takeoff. The FPS is around 50.

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/1738/737fps.jpg

As for settings...

Aircraft - Ultra High, High Res Cockpit, Cast shadows - checked, and show landing lights - checked.
Weather - Detailed clouds, density max
Traffic - Planes 50% Ground 15% Ships 0%

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/6729/737fpsgraphics.jpg

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/3853/737fpsscenery.jpg

I used the Bojote's tweak and it seemed to help.

Hope this helps,
Lou

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Sorry, it's not that I'm just getting bad frame rates, it's that I start out with reasonable frame rates, which then drop steadily--I want to know why they start good and go downhill. In addition, you're getting frame rates around 45, I get around 20, which is because of my mediocre graphics card, which is dragging the rest of the system down with it. You can see my specs at the bottom of my signature banner (under the planes).

Ok lets try some possibles.

Virus checker, have you excluded the FSX folders from being scanned by your virus checker? If it's loading up something (an airport addon) it might be scanning it as it loads up, as with all new scenery?

Overheating graphics card or CPU under load? - Check for dust build up in the fans and heatsink.

Ummmmm are you flying the same routes when it happens or any route?

When was the first time you noticed this and what have you installed since? Tricky one to think of I know.

Have you updated your graphics drivers, reinstalled drivers like DirectX recently, if not do.

Are you running FSX Acceleration? I am and had problems with FS Water Config, until I put the disc in and did a repair, it seemed to do a lot of repairing and my system is now fine FSWC is perfect.

Perhaps if you have the disc space Copy your entire FSX folder (everything) install to a backup folder and put the FSX disc and acceleration disc if you have it in and run repair. If it works good, delete the backup. If it messes up (which really it shouldn't) delete and move your backup across.

Other than that I can't think of anything else at the moment.



Ps. I have a very similar system to your's but have an Ati 5870 1GB HD card and I get higher fps from the start. Could you do some screenshots of your settings like Lous has above.

These are mine (I'm also using REX+OD for weather, UT2 for air traffic and FSWC for water).
http://www.mercia.biz/fsx/settings/1graphics.jpg
http://www.mercia.biz/fsx/settings/2aircraft.jpg
http://www.mercia.biz/fsx/settings/3scenery.jpg
http://www.mercia.biz/fsx/settings/4weather.jpg
http://www.mercia.biz/fsx/settings/5traffic.jpg

All card settings to "use application settings".

The only thing that I think should be changed on mine is the "unlimited" FPS target frame rate, I think I used to have that set to lower (recommended) but might have accidentally changed it to unlimited. In fact seeing it I have just changed it to 35 and reposted the image above as I believe it frees up FSX for other things I think, plus 35 is a good rate the eye won't pick up anything faster anyway, only changes and if you set it lower than you think it can go there shouldn't be any noticeable slow ups.

And then remembering to rest the following lines in the FSX.cfg after making any in game display setting change or scenery change :)

[GRAPHICS]
TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=4096 (defaults to 1024 when settings changed in game)

[TERRAIN]
LOD RADIUS=4.5000000 (default) change up to 7.50000
(gets reset to 4.5 when scenery is added or removed)

Quote:

I start out with reasonable frame rates, which then drop steadily

And does this happen with the AI on and also completely off?

And does this happen with the AI on and also completely off?

I suspect AI could be the problem, so I'll have to try that when I have time.

Oh, where can I download the latest DirectX driver?

The only thing that I think should be changed on mine is the "unlimited" FPS target frame rate, I think I used to have that set to lower (recommended) but might have accidentally changed it to unlimited. In fact seeing it I have just changed it to 35 and reposted the image above as I believe it frees up FSX for other things I think, plus 35 is a good rate the eye won't pick up anything faster anyway, only changes and if you set it lower than you think it can go there shouldn't be any noticeable slow ups.

Actually, I'm using an external FPS limiter with FPS set to 20.

Here's DirectX. http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=8109
Smartass note. It's not a driver.

Hey, I've just clicked your blog and must say that it's good work and interesting to read.  :)

Thanks! Glad to hear you like the blog--I was worried it might be a little bland.

One more time --- you're in the wrong forum for hardware and settings advice! Start reading the AVSIM Hardware forum.

The all time guru for os and hardware setup is Nick Needham. Here is his setup guide for XP (see link for Win7 guide):

http://www.simforums.com/forums/topic29041.html

Do you use woAI? I have UT2, a friend got it for me, but now I want world of AI, because UT2 has low amounts of AI.   And also I have good frames, and it's a 2GB of RAM computer!  I don't know you're problem though.....

One more time --- you're in the wrong forum for hardware and settings advice! Start reading the AVSIM Hardware forum.
I've posted in the Avsim hardware forum, but it can't hurt to ask here, too. I've gotten some good advice.

Do you use woAI? I have UT2, a friend got it for me, but now I want world of AI, because UT2 has low amounts of AI.   And also I have good frames, and it's a 2GB of RAM computer!  I don't know you're problem though.....
For whatever reason, WoAI did not work well on my computer--I think it was the FS9 .bgl files screwing with my system.  :-/

I would reccomend the UT2 to anyone. The traffic isn't THAT high, but is still acceptable. really good buy.

StephenL wrote on Sep 9^th, 2011 at 6:54pm:

I would reccomend the UT2 to anyone. The traffic isn't THAT high, but is still acceptable. really good buy.

I'd recommend it too. Best fps to density ratio as far as I can tell and you can get really current flight plans there or set up your own with the free tools.
Also, you have a 30 day test period since the money back policy is in place.

For the free traffic, I can recommend the Orbx package if you're looking for local carriers at Australia and also some dense GA setup. That thing also is a tip if you need some nice models for your online VIP database.

I asked about AI Traffic on the avsim forums. The generally response was that UT2 was the best.

just a side note..

Have you checked for heat issues as the i7 will throttle down if it gets to hot. As you have a pre built PC the cooling might not be that great.

And does this happen with the AI on and also completely off?
Yep. Just tested it. After my FPS had dropped from 20 to 8, I turned off AI, and it proceeded to drop to 7.  :-/

Have you checked for heat issues as the i7 will throttle down if it gets to hot. As you have a pre built PC the cooling might not be that great.
I took your advice on this and downloaded a hardware performance monitor. You can see the graph at the bottom. The four jagged lines are my four processor cores, and the yellowish-orangeish smoother line is my GPU Core. You can see the normal temperatures at the start of the graph. Oh, and that first little dip is when I paused FSX, and the second is right after I exited FSX.

---

Ok, so the testing continues. Keep the AI off for the moment and reduce the overall texture size of FSX by going to options, graphics and setting global texture resolution to one or two notches lower.
This will really harm your optics, but since we're just testing stuff, it may be ok.

Regarding the traffic, please check again if the 0% slider setting actually did set all AI to off. You can see that in the Views > new view menu where no other aircraft should be available then. So the menu for air traffic shouldn't be there since there is no other traffic.

I'm thinking about getting a CPU cooler. Would this help? (At least until I get the new graphics card.)

CPU coolers don't raise fps, they lower temperatures.  :D So for the fps problem the answer will be no.

Frankly, me thinks that any other investment besides a new grpahics card is, in the case of the fps, just wasted money. A rather cheap GTX460 1GB and your system may run FSX well. No cooler or other AI addon (and money) needed.
By the way, are you sure about your i7 2400 CPU? I'd say it's an i5.
Since this version (without the 'K' at the end) can't be overclocked at all, you don't run the risk of too high temperatures and therefore don't need a special cooler, with that CPU.
I would only change it if the current one is too loud, but make sure the noise is really coming from the CPU cooler, not the PSU or the graphics card.

Your temps from above aren't stellar but way out of range to cause any throttling effect on the CPU's own protection circuits. If you had steady core temps of around 95C the situation would be different.
So there isn't a problem if you leave the current cooler where it is and save some money for the new card.

According to Intel, the 2400 is an i5 and not an i7. Only the 2600 is an i7. :(

So boeing247 is lying about his CPU.  :o Why would he do that?  :(
(just kidding)
We can accept you regardless of your CPU, really.  :'(

CPU coolers don't raise fps, they lower temperatures.   So for the fps problem the answer will be no.
According to gandy, the "i7 will throttle down if it gets hot", so if it's cooler, I would presume I'd get higher frame rates.

Secondly, I had the -2400 wrong, not i7. I have an i7-2600. And here's a screenshot from my device manager if you don't believe me.  ;)

---

Ah, that info is a lot better. So you have to edit the signature text and you're good.  :P

Regarding the throttling, gandy is right, but the throttling is supposed to just protect the CPU of thermal damage in the case of either no CPU cooling or a faulty one (blocked fan). For this to happen, a certain trigger core temp has to be reached. If this throttling would set in, you would notice the whole system to become very unresponsive since the cutback value on that protection is huge.
Remember what it's intended for, to safe the life of the CPU at an already hot state (just close to around 95C).
The CPU will lower its clock frequency and most important the power draw by very large margins (Voltage goes down, components go to 'sleep'), since that's the main source of the heating going on in the core.

The Sandy Bridge CPUs also have another protection regarding their Turbo Mode, which is focused on the overall energy consumption of the CPU. Getting above a certain limit will trigger the Turbo Mode to cut back on the raised core clocks, which means that it, in the worst case, just reverts back to default clock speeds.

In conclusion, you won't see any throttling setting in at the temps around e. g. 70C. The thermal protection thingy may be experienced around 95C core temp and the Turbo Mode cutback is only partially dependent on the temps since it watches the Amps in the first place.
Those Amps slightly go up with a higher core temp, but not in too severe ranges. So having e. g. 60C or 65C doesn't make a huge difference for the Turbo Mode.

As said somewhere before (I think on the GPU topic), expect a silicon based electronic device (CPU) to be very happy with temps around 60C. This, in this silicon regime, isn't viewed as 'hot' but more as 'normal'.
I'm always referring to load scenarios here since all the 'idle' stuff will give you way lower temps, because the main focus in that idle state is to consume the lowest energy amount possible. With no energy going into the CPU, it will remain rather cold, just a few degrees above ambient.
Since another aim is to reduce noise in that state, some models also trigger a cutback on the CPU fan (like Notebooks do), which then raises the temps a bit, but also offers a silent or even a completely fan-free experience.

At Desktops, the fan off mode is rare though, but they normally reduce the rpm to keep a certain airflow active. If you would block the fan with your fingers and wait for those mentioned 95C, you would see how the thermal throttling behaves.
Not recommended, but nowadays not even close to be as dangerous as in the old times, where a broken fan and no temp monitoring lead to burning hot silicon.

If you were up for overclocking your CPU (which isn't possible on the models without 'K'), a bigger cooler would give you some headroom and would therefore make more sense. With your CPU model, it's rendered to be useless, unless you would be annoyed by the noise of the current thing.

A good point. Like you said, silicon being a semiconductor, it should run well at moderately high temperatures.

So, moral of the story is get a new graphics card?

Boeing,

We are talking about the same pc now as I have and should run FSX well.

You only have an ATI 6450 while I have the ATI 6870. When i'm on a payware airport like ELLX from another company i get around 30 frames with a nice real world weather theme and alot of clouds with a very wide view.

When I take of to cruise alt between FL300 and FL350 my FPS is around 80-100 (depending on the aircraft) When I fly the 707 i have lower FPS then when on 727. Did you try another aircraft for your flights see if that improves the FPS?

Also, what programs do you have running in the background? Are you playing with IE or FF during flights?

Also, look in your config panel and your Power Options. Make sure it is on high performance.

Also, make sure all your drivers are up to date. You can download a very handy tool on the AMD site to automatize checking if you have up to date video drivers and will update when they are not updated.

Also run the automatic updates for Windows.

Last but not least, do you run FSX with SP2?  

E.

When I take of to cruise alt between FL300 and FL350 my FPS is around 80-100 (depending on the aircraft) When I fly the 707 i have lower FPS then when on 727. Did you try another aircraft for your flights see if that improves the FPS?
I've tried everything from freeware GA to the CS 767-300.

Also, what programs do you have running in the background? Are you playing with IE or FF during flights?
Before I start FSX, I close all programs, close unnecessary notification items, and run disk cleaner to delete around 200MB of hard disk space (not much, but why not?).

Also, look in your config panel and your Power Options. Make sure it is on high performance.
It is.

Also, make sure all your drivers are up to date. You can download a very handy tool on the AMD site to automatize checking if you have up to date video drivers and will update when they are not updated.
I do this a lot--it helps.

Also run the automatic updates for Windows.
Don't do this much, I'll try running that.

Last but not least, do you run FSX with SP2?  
I have Acceleration.

It seems that the issue is my graphics card, so I'll probably order a new if not today, soon. Would you recommend the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 TI?

Also, the NVIDIA 560 TI and the AMD 6870 require 500 watts of power. It looks like my computer (and I would think this is the same for yours) only supplies 460 watts. Do I need to buy a new power supply?  :-/

Oh, and sorry for all the questions, but I haven't done much hardware upgrading except RAM. Why are there so many different types and prices for the same video card (besides the variation in memory--512md or 1gb)? Are some better than others?

I don't know if you should choose NVIDIA. When i check the Dell website for our model and I build up the configuration I created on their site, i can upgrade the videocard without getting any warning of insufficient power supply.

when you do the same on Alienware (Dell site) you will get this warning to upgrade your supply.

In the Netherlands the Dell website shows both cards listed available for your machine (and ofc mine) so it's either way what your feeling say. They say that Nvidia is good for FSX, but in general ATI shows good results lately in overall business.

What i do recommend is if you buy either one of the cards, order it at Dell because then you will know for sure it will work. Also out of warranty perspective it probably is better.

Since you're already familiar with the AMD setup the AMD card may be a good idea.
That's a nice performer in all regimes and shouldn't come with a downside. For FSX the Shader 3.0 is recommended though.
With Edwin running the same card and system, he may also help you on some settings then.

Different prices may arise through the package details like bundled games and stuff like cables. Some manufacturers also offer a different cooler setup, sometimes better or at least quieter than the default. Take a card with at least 1GB (are there smaller 6870?) and you're good to go.

Awesome. The only reason I was considering NVIDIA was some people were saying that you get higher frame rates, but if AMD is fine, I'd rather go with that. Thanks!  :)

Well I'm using Nvida stuff since some (chip) generations for FSX and I think that older AMD cards (which were ATI) may have lost some fps over Nvidia, but a modern 6870 is a fine card and should not lead to any problems or fps downsides if I remember the forum tenor correctly.
Just make sure to use the Shader 3.0, it really helps the AMD card with the clouds.

You already know the driver menus, you know the tools. Slight overclocking is included in the driver itself and you can also adjust the fan there. Also, when playing some other games, your machine is in a different class with the 6870, so you can play the latest titles in full detail there.