FSX .CFG Texture_Max_Load = 1024

[Guest n1g]

AllI fiddled with this entry for just a few minutes and decided to post. I have dumbed down my autogen, runways and taxiways to 50% using Matts' batch files and I was just curious if someone would mind trying this on a system using the default textures. I tried this first at 256k and although frames did not seem to go up, the blurring was limited and smoothness was better. Only one catch at this setting was the VC blurred in many areas most noticeably around gauges. So I bumped up the value to 512. VC textures clear again and scenery blurr was minimized. It seems that it may dumb down the textures automatically based on this value but not sure. The name in itself may be misleading and I really can only speculate. If someone wants to try this or someone knows exactly what its purpose is please post. I know what it did with a 256 value and it wasnt pretty.ThanksBob

[Guest Athlonic]

Hi,I think this value is linked with the global scenery size texture slider.I might be wrong.

[Guest n1g]

Hmmm. Yea maybe. Just dont know. It did affect the vc quality. wondering if it affects anything else? I am almost tempted to add back in the default textures to replace the ones I reduced and then do some testing. Turkey is in the oven so I have some time.Bob

[Guest Athlonic]

SureIt will affect all textures using their mipmaps. Same as reducing textures sizes with Matt's tweaks.Playing at high resolution (1680x1050) with anything less than 1024 on this setting the VC looks ugly.So the tweaks are a good solution to reduce some textures and keep this setting high for the VC textures.Also with my rig, I didn't notice any fps improvement by reducing this value. (4200+ X2, 1Gb RAM and 7800GTX)

[Guest baksteen33]

IMHO 'this' is one of the most powerful FSX sliders/settings. ;-) Some numbers from my humble lab: @ 1024, FSX easily sends well over 300MB to the GPU. If you have a 512MB card, no worries. @ 512x, this number is reduced by ~ 100+MB, @ 256x less again. So, it's a great slider if you don't have a 512MB card and/or 2GBs of system-RAM. Many people might have 2GB system- but only a 256MB GPU. Or a 512MB card but only 1GB of RAM. 'Max personal acceptable' I can get with a 256MB card and 2GBs of RAM: 512x textures. I'ld suggest to punch 'MemStatus 2.5' into your search engine of choice and have a look at your personal numbers. It's a great tool to finetune FSX within certain limits. Pls note MemStatus only measures the primary display (VGA reading). Hope this adds to thoughts, kind regards Jaap

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Jaap,Very useful info - thanks!As I believe someone else posted, this value in FSX.cfg is affected by the Global Texture Resolution(GTR) slider:If set to Very High then Texture_Max_Load = 1024If set to High then Texture_Max_Load = 512I have a 256MB card and 2GBs of RAM and I had the GTR slider at 'Very High'. On reading your post, I've now backed it off to a setting of 'High'.Regards,Mike

[Guest allcott]

If only there was a way to retain this setting AND a very high setting for the VC?Allcott

[Guest Athlonic]

Thanks Jaap for the info !Allcott, agree with you...I was thinking about "killing" the mipmaps into the cockpit's textures files to see if FSX will keep using them as a single 1024 texture.But I'm not very experienced with textures tweaking, maybe a person who actually is (Matt ?) could have a look into this ?Next week I will have those 3Gb RAM to offer my computer a breath.Hopefully it will help a bit with stutters.Best regards. ;)

[sightseer 895]

I agree. that would be very nice. The two things that have helped me the most are keeping 'global max texture' on high(or lower) and also adding 'TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS = 0' (I left trees at 4500)to FSX.cfg. I don't mind losing the buildings. Its the trees that I liketo have a lot of. I also keep water effects off. I have better terrain,sufficient resolution, more trees and more clouds (than FS9 ).It would be nice if there was a seperate resolution control for thevirtual cockpit textures. maybe there is and I have yet to see it.

[Guest n1g]

Me again. Glad to hear someone is investigating this. I hope it goes somewhere.With a 512 value I am seeing with my old eyes, no difference in VC quality but a signifigant improvement in the reduction of stutters. I do run a high end rig though so not sure if this has an impact. I tried something yesterday just out of desperation. I reduced, using Matts 50% batch files everything but ground textures. With 2 7800gtx's in SLI (AA mode), I saw absolutely no difference in frames, nor smootheness when I put the stock textures back in. Reducing all of those textures did nothing but reduce the quality! I thought for sure I would see a difference. The amount of memory saved should be signifigant, but absolutely no change for me. I am only using a few of the cfg tweaks currently and I don't use the default.xml file.RegardsBob

[Mace 1,938]

My experience on Global Max Texture Size is that anything less than Very High, and the VC's look terrible. So I've been keeping it on the highest setting. (Strangely,?) I do not notice a performance difference between Very High and High on my system.I am using all stock size textures. The resizing thing didn't do anything for me unfortunately.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2530 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[NM5K 1]

>My experience on Global Max Texture Size is that anything>less than Very High, and the VC's look terrible. So I've been>keeping it on the highest setting. Yep, I don't like the blurry VC on the lesser values ..Mine stays full blast all the time. Ditto for fs9 when I was running it..>>(Strangely,?) I do not notice a performance difference between>Very High and High on my system.I don't either really. >>I am using all stock size textures. The resizing thing didn't>do anything for me unfortunately.Me neither. I installed a pack of reduced building textures a couple of days ago, and danged if I can tell too muchdifference. I tried playing with that max texture load cfg a couple orthree weeks ago, but it didn't do much for me, so I set it back to default. It was probably the fuzzy VC...:/ I can't handle that.MK

[Guest d.lahrman]

I was just getting ready to post a question asking why my VC panels were blurry when I came across this thread. Thanks to you all for the suggestions on where to look. I changed mine to 512 and I can now find my light switches without changing to the 2D panels.Dan