More Frame Rates..... a puzzling problem

[JBaymore]

Andrew,

The GeForce 2 MX / MX400 card is PCI.  And THAT may be the whole real issue here.  When I bought the machine I specified that I wanted the separate 64 meg card.... not the integrated video.......... but forgot to specify that I wanted AGP.  Oh well.  Is the GeForce 2 64 Meg even available in AGP?

I might be headed for a 128 Meg video card soon  :P.  Or maybe I can "lean" a bit and get the AGP one and trade back the PCI one.......since the machine is only about 1 month old.


Selby,

"Xform and lighting" has been checked all along.  Oh and I have had my "visibility" slider set at 100 miles all along.   I tried the frame rate "locked" method when I read that letting the program go unlimited can cause other resource hogging problems.  But for the sake of this testing I now have now set it at unlimited to see what rates are maxing out at.

I went through your "laundry list"  ;) of stuff to improve Win XP performance.  

-I was already on NTFS on the hard drives....so that was already there.

-I disabled "last file access stamping".  That bought about a .5 framerate increase.  Hard to tell it was so slight.

-"Windows Indexing" was already set to off.

-"File system cache" was already set up to priority.  I tried changing that BACK... and saw almost no difference in framerate..... maybe .5 FPS.

-Cleaned the registry with my McAfee program.  Not too much to change.

-Used REGEDIT to change the "CPU Priority".  That seemed to buy about 1 FPS.

So unfortunately....... not the big changes (5-7 FPS) I was hoping for  :'(.  All together it might have inmproved the framerate about 2 FPS.

---------------------------
Other interesting info I have found........

If I turn on "anti aliasing" on the GeForce card (instead of the FS2002 option boxes) I can absolutely KILL my framerate.  Have to keep it off.

I also played with my disk cache size....... let Windows manage it and also specify it myself....... with no appreciable improvement either way.  It was set for 768 Meg as a minimum and I tried up to 1.5 Gig as a max.  Windows sets it at 767 Meg.

---------------------------

The fastest speed I have been testing for is out at Chatham in Ontario, Canada sitting on the ground at the active and looking down the runway, ready for takeoff, daytime, in the default C172, with 2D cockpit, is about 39-40 FPS.  Can anyone else please go there with your own machine and tell me what you get for framerates under those same set of conditions and what your machine, ram, and video card are?  Thanks.  (If you have a lot of AI installed around there.... won't be a good comparison.)

Sitting on the active at KBOS (Boston) in the same aircraft and time of day is still only getting me about 10 FPS (2 D cockpit) after all of these modifications.  But I have a lot of added AI and have added AFCAD gates....so a comparison to others results is not all that "oranges to oranges".  Truly, that 10 FPS is a bit up from the about 7.5 before I started all this stuff.

Sitting on the dafault at KSLC (Salt Lake City) with pretty much default AI I get 10 FPS in 2D and 7.5 in 3D looking straight down the runway.

Unfortunately my current "favorite" aircraft is a beautiful A-10 Thunderbolt ..... that drops the framerates in Boston down to about 7 FPS even after all this work!!!!!!  Not good for flying.

SO........ still working on this.  More suggestions?

best,

....................john

[Selbio]

JBaymore,

If you decide to take your computer back, get another pc with an AGP graphics card installed( If I were you I'd take that pc back). A friend of mine had a pc with an integrated video card and he decided to installed an NVidia Gf4 mx 420 PCI and performance dropped all because of that integrated video card.

I'm sure that if you had the same configuration except the motherboard had an agp graphics card instead of integrated and it would change everything. Remember what I said ,
I had a P4 1.6 GHZ 384 ddr pc2100 ram 32mb gf 2mx 200 windows XP home edition and fs 2002 ran smooth.

Have you ever thought about building your own computer? If I did it, you can too!!

[JBaymore]

Selby,

The motherboard has an AGP card slot.  I just didn't specify correctly my intentions when I asked them to disable the integrated graphics and put in a 64 Meg video card.  He said something like "Is a GeForce 2 an OK card"...and I just said "yes".  Wasn't thinking.

So I am hoping that I can get them to take the PCI card out....credit me for it and put in the AGP card.  It is a local "clone shop" that has been around for 25 years here.  They are good folks.

I would HOPE the mere presence of the integrated graphics setup on the mother board is NOT gotring to affect either the PCI card or the AGP card when the motherboard graphics is disabled!!!!!!!

I have built computers before.  My first build was at the component level.  Had a Sinclair ZX-81 kit.  I am a ham radio operator too...... so I'm a minor league amatuer soldering iron jockey  :).   Used to program in machine language for the Z80 processor chip too.  But technology is changing so fast that if you are not right in there keeping up with it ..... you get left behind fast.  I used to be very computer literate.... now I am getting left in the dust.  

A lot of the issue with this new machine is time  ;).

SO... thanks again for all the help.

best,

.....................john

PS:  I tried flying for the first time in Europe and some of Asia and tried out a few airports there with the framerate thingy showing.  Seemed to get pretty good frame rates flying out of Innsbruck toward Munich  (25-30 consistently).  Strange.  In the backwoods of Nepal I got some bursts of 60- 70 FPS.  One big difference is that I have installed NO AI traffic anywhere in Europe.  (I have in a few US and Japanese airports.)

[RIC_BARKER]

J, FS2002 can be difficult to benchmark your results with. If you're interested in improving your hardware performance, go to http://www.futuremark.com and download 3DMark200SE. This will give you a score based on your overall 3D performance, whcih you can then compare to thousands of other users with similar spec PC's, to see if there are any large discrepancies. It can be useful for tracking down any problems in your setup.

Ric B.

[wildman]

Sorry to say, but that is a pretty weak-ass VGA card to be running with an otherwise excellent system (even if it is a Pentium). If frame rate improvement is your goal, I think it's time for a video card upgrade...G3, G4, or ATI,
which I have no personal experience with, but they're
whupping up on NVidia at the moment. I have two systems , one with a G3, and one with a G4, with the slider set to 30 fps, and neither of them break a sweat with everything set to high (XP 1800+ and 2500+
Barton Core). You can get a G4 4200 for under $100.00 now, so pull out the VISA and enjoy better fps.

[jlvandem]

Hey JBaymore I think your problem is the video card also. A PCI slot just doesn't have the power of an AGP slot. In last Sunday's Best Buy ad I saw a GeForce FX 4200 with 128MB for only $99 after Best Buy and Manufacturer rebates. This card is NVIDIA's latest chipset and while the 4200 isn't the fastest of the new line it would definately blow your GeForce 2 away. If anything at least get a GF 3 AGP. A new card would definately help performance.

Justin

[JBaymore]

Shelby, Ric, Wildman, Justin et al........

SO.... the continuing saga of this framerate mess for me.

First of all I was WRONG about the GeForce 64 meg card I had.  It WAS an AGPcard.....not a PCI one.  There was no integrated video on the motherboard...... it was that there was an integrated SOUND system on the MB and I had them install the Soundblaster card instead.  Can't believe that I got that confused in my mind  :o.  Sorry.  SO that makes the low framerates issue even more of a puzzle...... it is NOT just that it was a PCI card.

So I decided today to just bite the bullet and just get myself a much better video card.  So I picked up a Asylum 5600 256 Meg card that runs the Nvidea drivers.  Not the top of the line card but still a pretty substantial video card.  

I THOUGHT that would make all the troubles go away in one easy step.  WRONG!  It created more and they are worse.  Now I can't run the simulator at all   .

I followed the mfgr's instructions and installed the card and installed the new drivers.  Booted up Flight SIm and went to my boonies "benchmark" airport of Chatham in Ontario and sitting on the runway I got a 60 to 70 FPS rate.  WOW!  Up from about 35-40.  THAT is what I wanted  :).  Figured I had this thing licked.

I then went to KBOS to check that one out and I got only about 15FPS.  Weird.  No where NEAR the same improvement....... maybe about 5 FPS.  Not what I wanted....but still getting better.

So I then tried taking off and doing a little flying around.  Stuff looked really good....very smooth animation.  Much improved.  That is until the crash to a black screen happened!!!!!!!  :'( .  The machine rebooted automatically to Win XP and then the "Your computer just recovered from a serious error" message popped up and wanted to send the email error report to M$.  I let it do that and then the internet "Crash Report" function came on and told me that it was driver related but the exact cause was not available.

Making a L.....O.....N.....G evenings story short..... I have uninstalled and reinstalled the drivers and Direct X 9 just about every way that I know how and still get the crash to a black screen and an XP reboot.  Sometimes it happens when I fly for a while....sometimes it happens when I use the hat switch to change views a couple of times....or sometimes just once....and for a while it was happening as soon as the Sim went to the actual view of the cockpit as the game loaded up and shifted from the "loading" screen to the simulation.  

My last step here this evening is to uninstall MSFS2002 and reinstall it.  What a ROYAL pain in the butt.

I have a LOT of addons that I have installed in bits and pieces into the simulator.  Lots of scenery tidbits here and there.  So this will represent a giant step BACKWARDS!!!!!!!!

All of the Asylum typical troubleshooting suggestions are pretty much already done...... latest BIOS from the board mfgr., latest Intel chipset drivers, latest video drivers, latest sound card drivers, and so on.  The LAST recommendation they have is to reformat the hard drive and reinstall absoulutely EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!  THAT I really don't want to get into.

This board may be going back tomorrow.  And HOPEFULLY I can go back to the old 64 Meg GeFrce 2 without continuing problems.

I'm pretty disgusted and disheartened  :-[.

Any suggestions appreciated.

best,

.................john

[Selbio]

John,

Don't uninstall fs2k2 yet.

You mentioned somewhere down the line something about an integrated sound card right?

What kind is it?

I have found that if you turn the sound acceleration down a notch will make a difference sometimes. It has for me especially when you have onboard sound.

If you don't know how to do this, go to Start

[JBaymore]

Selby,

Thanks.  So you are a night owl too.  

However...... the integrated sound card is and has been disabled all along.  I KNEW I didn't want it....thay are notorious for problems.  I am using a Soundblaster Live card that in my major video and sound editing software and other such intensive applications works just fine.

I just tried running FS without 3D acceleration and I couldn't make it crash the same way efven though I was flipping the hat switch all over the palce and such in dense scenery areas........ so this has something to do with the 3D acceleration.  So I am leaning toward looking at the Direct X situation again.  Maybe it is a corrupt file I'm installing or something.

With this video card I shouldn't have to compromise by setting things back from the high end of the settings just to get it to work.  I SHOULD work with just about everything maxed out.....if the GeForce 2 worked reasonable well with stuff just about maxed but a little low framerates.  This was not a cheap card..... about $250 bucks.

SO trhanks for that thought.  It is late and I will be headed to bed....so no uninstalling FS tonight.  Maybe someone will have a "magic bullet" for me overnight  ;).

best,

....................john

[Selbio]

John,
As far as the PC crashing goes hmmm....

[JBaymore]

Selby,

I already knew about that "M$ update fix" for XP that caused the problems and had removed it some time ago.  But thanks.

Well..... I just ran the full complement of aLL the dxdiag tests and checked all the reports and EVERYTING passed with flying colors.  Not an error or warning in sight.  SO it is NOT the hardware acceleration as I thought.  The one thing that didn't meet the "test" was that one of the the NVidea driver files does not have the "Microsoft Seal Of Approval".  But that is pretty common.

The one other thng that I found (the test program didn't) that might be the issue is that the 5600 Video card and the 82801DB/DBM USB UniversalHost Controller show as sharing IRQ 16!!!!!!  But there are no conflicts showing in DEvice Manager or anywhere else and both say "Oeprating Normally".  However.... my Wingman Extreme Force Feedback joystick is a USB device.  SO I now suspecting THAT is the problem.

SO now I cannot remember HOW to change the IRQ assignment for the video card.  I thought it was done through Device Manager.... but the option is not available to do that when I go to the video card properties.  And there is no option that I can find in the BIOS setup to change it.  Any thoughts?

best,

.....................john

[Selbio]

[quote]
The one other thng that I found (the test program didn't) that might be the issue is that the 5600 Video card and the 82801DB/DBM USB UniversalHost Controller show as sharing IRQ 16!!!!!!

[JBaymore]

Selby + all,

So the search continues  :-[.

With the joystick out it still crashes.

I spent a lot of time on the phone today with the Asylum support folks and my comupter mfgr.'s tech folks.  Pretty much to no avail so far.  They're both stumped.

All diagnostic "tests" work OK.  I have also tried the card running Punch Professional Home Design in 3D walkthru and flyaround modes....and it seems to work fine even whrn I really run around the views and try to overload it.  I have tested the card in running Janes F-15 flight sim with all effects on the highest settings and it seems to work fine.  TRULY though, neither of those programs put the drain on resources that MSFS 2002 does.  So I can't do an "oranges to oranges" type test.  But so far it seems that the only real "crashes" I get are with MSFS2002.

One Asylum guy did say that they have found some systems that that card cannot be set up to work with.  So that is bad news....and a warning for anyone thinking of buying one  :o.

The one oddity that neither the Asylum tech guy or the White Mountain Computer tech lady can explain is why the video card is currently using IRQ16.  It SHOULD automap to 11.  The card is designed for use on IRQ 11.  The ASUS system board says that 11 is for PCI Steering....and the WMC tech said the card should just go to that.  But it isn't.  And IRQ 11 is currently free and is not excluded in the BIOS setup.  And there is no way to change the IRQ setting in either the BIOS or from Win XP !!!!!!!

White Mountain Computer was the ones who installed my original GeForce 2 64 Meg card in the first place.  It TOO was auto mapped by the system to IRQ 16.

As I mentioned before the USB controller shares IRQ 16 with the video card.  The ASUS motherboard manual says that any AGP card must support IRQ sharing.  The Asylum guy says that is not good and won't work with the video card.  But the same guy in just about the same breath says that they have their cards running on ASUS boards with no problems.

The 64 Meg card runs fine...as in no crashes (except for the framerate issue....which actually may be related....my guessing here) sharing IRQ 16.

Anyone know how to reassign an IRQ on a AGP slot when the option in Win XP Device Manager is completely greyed out?  You can't use the "change settings" button and the autoassign checkbox is checked and greyed out too.  If I could move the video card to IRQ 11 (which is currently unused) that likely will fix this.

Current likely plan of attack..........

I am going to play with the partcular USB item that is sharing IRQ 16 by disabling it and seeing if the sim crashes.  If so, I'll take the slide scanner device off the system and see if that fixes it.  Then I'll try to figure out how to reinstall the slide scanner so that it doesn't assign to IRQ 16.

I may take out ALL the PCI cards in the machine (4 of them..... network, sound, Pinnacle video editing, and modem...... and then uninstall the video card and reinstall it.  See if when it is alone it "finds" IRQ 11. (Since it is currently free....why it is not finding it now I don't know.)

After that....... I think MSFS2002 gets uninstalled.

After that....... the $250 card goes back to Comp USA.

I'll be darned if I am going to completely reformat my entire C drive and reinstall Windows.  With all my software setups....that would be a HUGE job.

Any thoughts from anyone are STILL appreciated.

This is getting in the way of my JOB!!!!!!!!  :'(

best,

.......................john

[JBaymore]

So I think I have hit the end of the road.

Uninstalled the Sim....... and it crashed again instantly after the clean reinstall.

Talked to Asylum tech support again and got a third tech person.  She told me that this is a "Microsoft problem" not thier problem!!!!!!!  Seemed like she knew all about it.  Seems that THEIR "new" video cards do not work with Win XP and Direct X 9 and an "old program" (her words!) like MSFS2002 correctly and they are waiting for M$ to get back to them on it.  She said that FS 2002 was "old technology" and that is why it wouldn't work on the "new" 5600 card.  She snidely said "..... it worked on our demos didn't it?"

By the way.... on bootup the system says that the card has 256 meg of ram..... and the device manager says tha same....... but Direct X diagnostics sometimes shows it with variable amounts when you run the test....... including only 16 Meg or 32 meg.  Caught that little detail near the end of all this testing.

Smells like BS to me and aggressively pointing the finger at M$ seems to be getting things a little backward.  

So here is a pretty new high end video card that just doesn't seem to work with a program that is a "2002" version on the latest version of Direct X on the latest version of Windows.  What';s up with that?  ???

Seems to me this is actually a Asylum problem with their cards and drivers.

So basically what she told me is that this won't be fixed
by Asylum....it will have to be fixed by Microsoft.  In other words....I'm just out of luck for now.  Wait.

So the card is going back and Asylum lost a sale.  I hope others read this and are warned off Asylum video card products if you are running XP and D X 9 and Flight Simulator.

I'll keep you posted with what happens with the NEXT video card  ::)

best,

.....................john

[JBaymore]

More info on the video card problem...as it is developing.....film at 11   .

Well..... I picked up a new PNY Technologies GeForce 5600  256Meg video card in trade for the Asylum card.  Uninstalled the old GeForce 64 meg card (which still works OK with Direct X 9) and installed the new one.

Same exact deal.  Crash city.  Can't run the simulation at all.  Got the same error on the actual video card memory size in dxdiag too.

So apparently it is the NVidia drivers in combination with Direct X 9 and MSFS 2002 that will simply just not work together!!!!!  So ANY manufacturer's card that uses the NVidia Detonator drivers apparently will not work with FS 2002.

I am going to try to figure out how to uninstall Direct X 9 and install Direct X 8.1 or so and see if THAT makes it possible to use the better video card for the Simulation.

The next step is to go to a card that does not use NVidia drivers at all.....maybe like an ATI or something.  But the choices for ATI are somewhat limited..... a 128 Meg card that is in the $100 range or a card that is in the $400 and up range.

By the way....... using OTHER software than MSFS2002...... the video display for the Asylum 5600 card is much better than the display from the "equivalent" PNY 5600 card that I have just tested.  So that is an interesting piece of information....since they are supposedly a similar card.  And THIS card barely can run one of the NVidia "test demos" that the other card had me use....... it is like stop motion....not live video.  So THAT is a message.

I cannot believe how difficult this "simple task" is  turning out to be  :P.

So...... looks like tomorrow ANOTHER darn video card gets tested.

I might get some actual work done this week  ;).

best,

...................john