Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sonjamichelle]

I agree with the fps slider issue, it doesn't make sense that unlimited makes things better. I've been running unlimited for the past week or so and honestly, I don't see much of a difference. I do know that it makes a major difference on the network side.  Would be nice to see a definitive answer from some authority on the slider issue. Immean, like you said, most folks cant tell the diffrence between 20 and 30. I believe the human eye really can't dicern much above 30 if at all.

[SpectroPro]

TCP 47624 is what FS2002 uses when it's looking for the session (similar to how FS2004 uses 6073), so you probably had an FS2002 user in there somewhere.

This would be acceptable except that I ban all 2002 clients.  So this is actually NOT accurate and didn't happen.  Not only that, but everyone that was there was on 2004.  

As for the FPS slider...  I'm surprised to hear that Computer Pilot is suggesting it be set to unlimited.  My understanding of how it worked on the graphics side was that if you limited it to a lower number, it would allow the game engine to use the extra CPU cycles for other calculations besides just graphics.  Most people can't tell a big difference in graphics performance above about 20 or 30 fps anyway, so why have the PC spend all that time producing up to 100 fps (I've seen this on a 3 GHz machine) when most of the fps are wasted?

Both are actually accurate.  I spent over a year pushing the LIMIT your fps slider to 1 or 2 below your normal average fps that you get.  This allows for the cycles to go to other things.  And the number is 22 fps.  The human eye can NOT discern the difference of anything above 22 fpt.  This is simply a fact and we don't need people saying they can tell.  You can't.  Sorry.  I really love people that swear they can.  Think what you want, science and eye doctors say you are wrong.

As for the other side, from what CP stated in their mag (looking through them to post the exact page and issue, will do ASAP) you should set the slider up to the max setting.  NOTE, this simply removed the limit from your graphics card.  Graphics cards run their own computations and thus do NOT affect the raw processing power of your cpu.  That's why you have a cpu and a gpu.  

Here is some info from an article on setting your sim up:

The slider sets two values in your 2002.cfg file:

UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=xx (where xx is the value you set your slider to.)

This is located in the (Display) section of your 2002.cfg file and does exactly what it says. It locks your max frame rate to that value and then assigns additional resources to other tasks (such as smoothing guage motion, pre-loading scenery, etc.)

LOD_TARGET_FPS=xx (where xx is roughly 70% (rounded)of the value of the slider).

This is located in the (GRAPHICS) portion of the 2002.cfg file. This gives a "minimum" setting for Frame Rate.

If you maintain within this 30 percent bracket, the sim will pump out all the detail you have defined in the rest of your sliders. If you drift below the minimum, then it will start dropping detail in an attempt to get above the minimum. The first to go is texture detail, which explains the "muddy" or fuzzy textures people complain about. Some settings do not
seem to be affected. Autogen, for example does not seem to ever get turned off, where some people have reported loss of AI traffic, and loss of building detail (High Res Airports such as KORD).

Microsoft put this slider in the sim, to maintain the smoothness that we all love. Stuttering not only is aresult of RAW frame rate, but also the CHANGE of frame rate from one slice of time to another. This is most evident in turns. When you pass from a low density screen to a high density screen (such as going past New York City skyline), your FPS drops suddenly. If you were pushing 60 FPS and you drop to 20, the drop in frame rate is more noticeable than if you had been at 20 all the time.

To maintain proper operation of the slider, First determine your "comfort zone". Set the slider accordingly. Then tailor your other settings so that your sim can maintain that at all times in all (or most) conditions.

Some of you may want to override the slider instead. To override the slider, you need to do TWO things.
Setting the slider to unlimited merely removes the "roof" from the slider, It does not do ANYTHING to
the LOD_TARGET_FPS value. Thus if you previously had your slider set to 30FPS, then your minimum is still
LOD_TARGET_FPS is still set to 21.

To maximize your range, first set the slider to 10FPS (lowest setting), this will set LOD_TARGET_FPS to 7.
Exit and restart simulator to make sure the LOD_TARGET_FPS value is written and saved to the FS2002.cfg file. When restarting, then set the slider to unlimited. This will remove the limiter from your video card, while maintaining the lowest setting for LOD_TARGET_FPS so that detail is maintained.

(Another solution would be to set to unlimited, and then manually editing the FS2002.cfg)

Hope this clears up the mystique of the slider.

NOTE:  it's the same for 2004.

So, that said, I will get that info up soon as I find the page and issue again.  I have a ton to read through.  

Now, for the part that will probably make some people made...but I just call them like I see them.

Seems that you Russell, and please don't take this the wrong way, but you will cause everyone does..hehe, don't want to admit that something in your program is NOT working properly.  But apparently, there are things happening, and it is a new fupah, so NOT your fault, within FS and your program that don't like each other.  Since MANY people seem to be having this problem currently, it apparently IS a problem.  I do NOT run 2002 games, have it turned off, and have stated such several times on here.  So, (and for the record, turning it off was YOUR recommendation long time ago) I get upset when you keep referencing it and making comments that it must be being used.  I said it isn't, and that's what I meant.  

Also, there is NO reason what so ever, unless the program (fshost) has some issue going on, that we should be forced to connect our clients to it in certain orders.  MUST be aux programs (radar, etc..) THEN flight sim, THEN FSnav.  Ports must all be different for each client.  Very odd and should again NOT be necessary.  I run other servers and have 100's of clients that connect to them all using the exact same port, and I use the exact same port with NO problems at all.  Yet FSHOst HAS a problem.  As I have been running servers for many many years, I can tell you, it IS a problem.

Again, may not be your fault, but again, it may be.  I don't know, but please don't get so deffensive when we mention that there IS a problem.  

Ok, that said...we will continue to feed you all the data we find on various servers so that you can figure out why this problem exists and how to fix it.  

Now you can yell at me and kick me.....I can take it.  

[sonjamichelle]

I'd tend to blame directx before FSHost or FSNAv since there have been no changes to their code in some time. HOWEVER FS has had at least one update. Direct X has had at least 1 or 2 major updates and now 3 minor updates to the last version itself. And let's not forget that SP2 has been released and the fact that there are numerous updates and fixes for windows on a pretty steady basis.  And as has been proven time and time again, MS is not always forthcoming with what they have done, or could have done, or what could be broken. There is something going on, and with enough eyes on it, it will be located and a solution will be found, until the next problem arises.

[SpectroPro]

I agree Sonja, but again, you can't ask them to quit updating.  The problem is that (again, I hope this isn't taken the wrong way) programmers don't keep up.  I know it is free.  I know it is a ton of work.  But FSUIPC is a perfect example.  He upgrades it to work with all the new things that MS does.  

This doesn't mean you get to blame the upgrades.  You have to look then at the programs like FSHost and others that do NOT upgrade.  It's a fine line that pollitically correct people walk, especially when on the site of the program in question.  (hehe)  I don't walk that line....I smash it.  Simple fact is that if MS changes their something, then the programs using it must also upgrade.  MOST of these problems occured, or seem to have occured, with the release of SP2 and fs9.1 as well as upgraded DX,etc....  

[Russell Gilbert]

This would be acceptable except that I ban all 2002 clients.  So this is actually NOT accurate and didn't happen.  Not only that, but everyone that was there was on 2004.  

Well, everyone that connected to the session was on 2004, anyway.  But are you absolutely sure nobody tried to connect with 2002?  As I said, TCP 47624 is used by FS2002 to find the session (when you click Search).  Once it joins the session, it switches to a port in the 2300-2400 range.  But anyway, I was just guessing that it might have happened, since that port is used by programs using the DirectPlay 7 method, and FS2002 was the most likely program that might've been using it. I obviously wasn't there when you were doing your testing, so I don't know what settings you used, or who tried to connect.

Both are actually accurate.  I spent over a year pushing the LIMIT your fps slider to 1 or 2 below your normal average fps that you get.  This allows for the cycles to go to other things.  And the number is 22 fps.  The human eye can NOT discern the difference of anything above 22 fpt.  This is simply a fact and we don't need people saying they can tell.  You can't.  Sorry.  I really love people that swear they can.  Think what you want, science and eye doctors say you are wrong.

You may be interested in this page that discusses that topic a bit more:

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

As for the other side, from what CP stated in their mag (looking through them to post the exact page and issue, will do ASAP) you should set the slider up to the max setting.  NOTE, this simply removed the limit from your graphics card.  Graphics cards run their own computations and thus do NOT affect the raw processing power of your cpu.  That's why you have a cpu and a gpu.  

I'm not sure that's completely accurate -- certainly the cpu is involved somewhat, since the game has to send all that data to the graphics card, and do other things related to processing each frame of video.  The gpu certainly helps with the raw computations, but I believe the reason MS put the slider in there in the first place was as they've said -- to redirect those extra cpu cycles towards other aspects of the game, besides just the graphics.

And since we're primarily focused on multiplayer issues here, the real point is how it affects the bandwidth required for a session.  All you have to do is trace the data being sent from FS to see that it's wasting a tremendous amount of bandwidth when the fps is so high.

Now, for the part that will probably make some people made...but I just call them like I see them.

Seems that you Russell, and please don't take this the wrong way, but you will cause everyone does..hehe, don't want to admit that something in your program is NOT working properly.  But apparently, there are things happening, and it is a new fupah, so NOT your fault, within FS and your program that don't like each other.  Since MANY people seem to be having this problem currently, it apparently IS a problem.  I do NOT run 2002 games, have it turned off, and have stated such several times on here.  So, (and for the record, turning it off was YOUR recommendation long time ago) I get upset when you keep referencing it and making comments that it must be being used.  I said it isn't, and that's what I meant.  

It sounds to me like you're the one that's mad here, if anyone is.  As for my not wanting to admit that something's wrong in my program... I'm not sure I even want to respond to that.  But I'll just say that you're welcome to talk to any of my beta testers and ask them about their experience of reporting bugs that they found, and how I responded to them.

Also, there is NO reason what so ever, unless the program (fshost) has some issue going on, that we should be forced to connect our clients to it in certain orders.  MUST be aux programs (radar, etc..) THEN flight sim, THEN FSnav.  Ports must all be different for each client.  Very odd and should again NOT be necessary.  I run other servers and have 100's of clients that connect to them all using the exact same port, and I use the exact same port with NO problems at all.  Yet FSHOst HAS a problem.  As I have been running servers for many many years, I can tell you, it IS a problem.

I've never said that they should be connected in a particular order.

And it's been my experience that they don't have to be.  But if you're seeing that, then I can only suggest that it's related to how each individual program deals with DirectPlay, and the ports it uses.  For example, FSNav uses 23432, which most people don't have open on their routers.  When this happens, it gets no response, and switches over to 6073 and 2302-2400.  So you could just as easily be using port 1000 or 44000, and the same ports will end up being used.  Some routers have a problem with this, and in that case, some people have found that opening port 23432 can help because the entire session will be on one port.  Also, some routers open ports automatically, based on which traffic they see going outwards first.  This is why you don't have to forward TCP 80 for a web browser, because if the browser makes the initial outgoing connection, the router automatically opens the port for incoming traffic as well.  So if a flightsim app was initiating a connection on a particular port, the router might open that port for incoming data, and then other apps that were connected after that might be using ports that were already open.  But that's just the general idea -- there's certainly nothing in FSHost that requires that all radar programs be connected before flight sim, etc.

Again, may not be your fault, but again, it may be.  I don't know, but please don't get so deffensive when we mention that there IS a problem.  

I don't remember saying anything defensive -- I thought I was just stating the facts as I know them.  And I never said there wasn't a problem, either.

But as I've always said here, I believe the problems you're describing are in DirectPlay, which happens to be used by FS, FSHost, FSNav, and all the other programs that connect directly to a multiplayer session.  None of these programs have any control over all of those port issues, other than to select which port (23456, 23432, etc.) is the preferred port if the program wants to connect on a single port without falling back to a random one.  It's DirectPlay that handles all of the actual data transfer at the port level, and programs like dplaysvr and dpnsvr are the ones on your system that are deciding which ports to use.

Now you can yell at me and kick me.....I can take it.  

No yelling necessary, but some of your latest posts have come a bit close to crossing the line.  So far you've called someone an idiot, and no-doubt offended every FSHost user from one particular country.  I'll be editing those posts after I finish with this one (the first time I've ever done that), and I'd appreciate it if you changed your tone a bit on these forums.

Russell

[SpectroPro]

Never claimed you said things must be done in a certain order.  But, if you read the posts on your server here, others have said they had to use exact order, and we also found that they must be done in exact orders or people can't connect.

Also, I never called ANYONE an idiot.  When somone posted that they were told that they must do this and that to run your program.  I simply stated that those people are idiots.  Which, if they claim you must do all that was stated in the post, sorry, but they are idiots.  I luckily live in a country where I don't have to be PC.    If you wish to ban me for this, fine.  Shows that it is other people that have no tollerance. I simply state the facts.  Oh, and where did I offend anyone from a country?  I mentioned that someone shouldn't go to France.  I lived there, and just, again, stating a fact.  They shouldn't go there.  If that is offensive, then the entire world should be blown up for the things they say about Americans.

On the vision thing, that is an interesting site.    My ex-brother in law is an optometrist.  I use his info and data for my remarks on that issue.  We have talked about this issue several times because of the games issue and magazines making big issues on frame rates of games.  

I will definately check out the bw with the frame rates set at various levels.  That should be an interesting test.  I had not thought of doing that..  But it makes sense.  Will collect data on that myself on a couple machines and let you know what I find on this end.

Please, feel free to join us on our Saturday flight.  Will be about 1 am Zulu (sunday) or 8pm eastern US time, Saturday  Would be great to have you see what happens for yourself on our server.  We should have 8-10 people with multiple things connecting that night.  hmmm...  I hope.