Daniel Vail 1036914 Posted August 12, 2008 at 06:21 PM Posted August 12, 2008 at 06:21 PM Currently I have 894mb of RAM. I ordered 2GB for my E-Machine. At JFK with AI traffic Active sky etc I get 11fps. If I take all that stuff away I can get anywhere from 25-40 fps. So my question is with 2gb of RAM will I see that 11fps go up with all my AI traffic and addons? (I need to have AI traffic either way) Thanks I put this question in the Pilot Software section a few hours ago without knowing there was a hardware section. (im new to this) So please don't yell at me saying I'm spamming. Thanks I used about 70-80% of my RAM when playing w/ fs9 And I run Active Sky 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnathon Neilsen 955672 Posted August 13, 2008 at 10:01 PM Posted August 13, 2008 at 10:01 PM Hi Daniel. You should definately see some improvement in FPS. However I thought i was the processor/graphics/video card that handled majority of the work. RAM is there so you can run other programs alongside FS. (I think, welocme to correct.) Hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Sculley-Beaman Posted August 13, 2008 at 11:22 PM Posted August 13, 2008 at 11:22 PM Like Johnathon mentioned, RAM only does so much. If you were working with 512, I'd tell you to go get a gig or so of ram, but such is obviously not the case. I suggest looking into a processor or video card upgrade. Mind posting your PC specs? that'll help limit the speculation and will also allow us to give much better advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Vail 1036914 Posted August 14, 2008 at 01:38 AM Author Posted August 14, 2008 at 01:38 AM Like Johnathon mentioned, RAM only does so much. If you were working with 512, I'd tell you to go get a gig or so of ram, but such is obviously not the case. I suggest looking into a processor or video card upgrade. Mind posting your PC specs? that'll help limit the speculation and will also allow us to give much better advice. Pentium ® D CPU 2.66GHz 2.67 GHz 896 MB of RAM ATI Radeon Xpress Video Card Hard-Drive 200 GB Computer specs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnathon Neilsen 955672 Posted August 14, 2008 at 10:24 AM Posted August 14, 2008 at 10:24 AM Like Johnathon mentioned, RAM only does so much. If you were working with 512, I'd tell you to go get a gig or so of ram, but such is obviously not the case. I suggest looking into a processor or video card upgrade. Mind posting your PC specs? that'll help limit the speculation and will also allow us to give much better advice. Pentium ® D CPU 2.66GHz 2.67 GHz 896 MB of RAM ATI Radeon Xpress Video Card Hard-Drive 200 GB Computer specs I didnt know it was possibel to have 896mb of ram, but either way, I'd recommend atleast another 1GB. You should be runnning fine after that. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Sculley-Beaman Posted August 14, 2008 at 02:21 PM Posted August 14, 2008 at 02:21 PM Ya, that's available RAM Johnathon. Like John said, pop another gig or so in there and you should be good. If no luck, then I'd say its time to give your video card the axe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miika Asunta 961956 Posted August 17, 2008 at 08:34 PM Posted August 17, 2008 at 08:34 PM Adding RAM can make your computer slower. By default Windows creates a page file (virtual memory) equal to the size of your physical RAM, and unfortunately, despite of the available free RAM, it actively uses the page file. I increased from 1GB to 3GB and all I have seen is a serious performance drop due to increased hard drive access. Running without or with small page file helps a lot, but I haven't found a suitable setting to run dozens of programs (Photoshop included) at the same time. 3.2 GHz PIV, 800 MHz FSB. Win Professional XP SP2. Miika Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry James 901346 Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:07 PM Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:07 PM Adding RAM can make your computer slower. By default Windows creates a page file (virtual memory) equal to the size of your physical RAM, and unfortunately, despite of the available free RAM, it actively uses the page file. I increased from 1GB to 3GB and all I have seen is a serious performance drop due to increased hard drive access. Running without or with small page file helps a lot, but I haven't found a suitable setting to run dozens of programs (Photoshop included) at the same time. 3.2 GHz PIV, 800 MHz FSB. Win Professional XP SP2. Miika If you lose performance by adding ram, I'd suggest that you defrag your drive and defrag your page file. You can defrag the page file by first defragging your system’s drive (or the drive allocated for the page file). Then set your page file to zero. Reboot the system to flush the buffer. Then set the page file to auto or whatever your preference. I find using 1.5 times the amount of available ram to be ideal. Now your system will create a new page file that should be unfragmented. A fragmented page file can cause lost of performance. However, having a page file matching the machines memory or having additional memory will not diminish performance, unless you increase the memory to more than the system can process. I don’t think you’d reach that amount under less than 4 gigs. -- L. James -- L. D. James [email protected] www.apollo3.com/~ljames sticky: Not a regular post, but a special thread/message stuck to the top with special meaning… containing important forum information. For FSInn/VATSIM issues, please test the FSInn Installation sticky and linked FAQ. It really works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Kolin Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:20 PM Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:20 PM A fragmented page file can cause lost of performance. Larry, there's only one rare edge condition where this statement is true - and in that situation your performance will be so awful even with a contiguous page file that you won't notice the difference. Luke ... I spawn hundreds of children a day. They are daemons because they are easier to kill. The first four remain stubbornly alive despite my (and their) best efforts. ... Normal in my household makes you a member of a visible minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry James 901346 Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:30 PM Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:30 PM A fragmented page file can cause lost of performance. Larry, there's only one rare edge condition where this statement is true - and in that situation your performance will be so awful even with a contiguous page file that you won't notice the difference. Luke Hi, Luke. This has always been one of the list of items to check for optimizing my systems. I don’t know how much this individual component improved my performance, but when doing the whole list, the high performance demand of Premiere Pro’s video editing environment was always drastically improved. This is one of the components that is shared with the video editing community to enhancement performance. The performance enhancement is referenced on Microsoft’s TechNet site (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897426.aspx ). Look at the first paragraph. It actually helps me. Though you say it won’t help much, at least you didn’t say it will hurt. -- L. James -- L. D. James [email protected] www.apollo3.com/~ljames sticky: Not a regular post, but a special thread/message stuck to the top with special meaning… containing important forum information. For FSInn/VATSIM issues, please test the FSInn Installation sticky and linked FAQ. It really works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Kolin Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:46 PM Posted August 17, 2008 at 09:46 PM the high performance demand of Premiere Pro’s video editing environment was always drastically improved. This is one of the components that is shared with the video editing community to enhancement performance. Sure, but we're not editing video, we're running Flight Simulator. If we're paging in and out large memory chunks to the tune of 50 to 500MB at a time, then yes, perhaps a sequential page file might help to some non-zero amount. But in the typical MSFS environment, if you're writing 128K chunks of data to the pagefile and it's in a half-dozen fragments, I doubt you could even detect the difference via a benchmark. Microsoft has a number of really smart people who write their virtual memory manager. They know what they're doing, as do the folks who write the Linux VMM. Generally, leaving the page file alone will yield optimum results. Cheers! Luke ... I spawn hundreds of children a day. They are daemons because they are easier to kill. The first four remain stubbornly alive despite my (and their) best efforts. ... Normal in my household makes you a member of a visible minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry James 901346 Posted August 17, 2008 at 10:13 PM Posted August 17, 2008 at 10:13 PM the high performance demand of Premiere Pro’s video editing environment was always drastically improved. This is one of the components that is shared with the video editing community to enhancement performance. Sure, but we're not editing video, we're running Flight Simulator. If we're paging in and out large memory chunks to the tune of 50 to 500MB at a time, then yes, perhaps a sequential page file might help to some non-zero amount. But in the typical MSFS environment, if you're writing 128K chunks of data to the pagefile and it's in a half-dozen fragments, I doubt you could even detect the difference via a benchmark. Microsoft has a number of really smart people who write their virtual memory manager. They know what they're doing, as do the folks who write the Linux VMM. Generally, leaving the page file alone will yield optimum results. Cheers! Luke The information for optimizing performance shared in the video editing community come mainly from the gaming community. The video editing community was looking for performance. The gaming community had spent lot of time writing the tips, the best of which we encircled in our video editing community. It’s my experience that whatever enhancement I do for FSX has also benefited Premiere Pro and vice-versa. I have lots of the system's performance tips committed to memory. I'll look for some of the list to share with people here who are having performance problems. Leaving it along might not always be the best. It can get fragmented when set to auto by increasing and decreasing based on adding or removing RAM. If this user had bought and added RAM (which would have increased his performance) and increased the size of the paging file, depending on how fragmented his drive happens to be, it might not have found continuous space, and thereby become fragmented. It makes sense that the system can read continuous space more efficiently than fragmented space. The link I gave discussed a tool for defragmenting this space. I mentioned a way to do it without a utility. Of course the developers of Microsoft are smart. But they are continuously suggesting ways of optimizing their environment. If it were all automatic because of their smartness, we wouldn’t have to be having these discussions in the first please, we’d just leave everything up to the smart OS developer who did it best in the first please. I clean out my system periodically, and find noticeable performance enhancement most of the time. I also find that many of my customers who leave their system the way it was shipped, have very poor performing machines. I find some attention for performance demanding applications to be ideal. -- L. James -- L. D. James [email protected] www.apollo3.com/~ljames sticky: Not a regular post, but a special thread/message stuck to the top with special meaning… containing important forum information. For FSInn/VATSIM issues, please test the FSInn Installation sticky and linked FAQ. It really works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erhan Atesoglu 1050499 Posted August 18, 2008 at 08:24 AM Posted August 18, 2008 at 08:24 AM Larry: Probably why AVC came out with the Nvidia GPU based transcoder On my setup the transcoder would be running parellel on 256x1.625ghz processors a lot better than any Intel chip I'll tell you that much. That's one thing that's solved, there are still many more optimization that can be made in both audio and video with the new GPUs! Avid/Digidesign must be p.o.'d because very soon all their gear will be obsolete http://www.pond64.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts