some little problems with LOFC2 in Win7

[caponi]

Hi vPilots,

 

i have migrated from WinXP to Win7 ...

 

Win7 looks very nice :thumbup:

and all things about LockonFC2 and BlackShark works fine ...

at this moment :music_whistling: ... i think i have to few memory :cry:

 

but i have some little problems with FC2 in Win7:

if i click the FLY button the launcher returns to the desktop and then the simulator starts to load the mission ... but the simulator.exe does nothing do for round about a half minute and longer :mad:. This behaviour is not available under XP and is not present for BS under XP and Win7 ... the BS start screen apears after 3-5 sec. after clicking the FLY-Button.

 

After playing the mission the simulator returns to launcher.exe, the debriefing screen appears but the control stay on Win7-Desktop. To get the control for the launcher i have to click into the debriefing screen. This is also not available under XP. And this (little) problem is also available for BS.

 

have someone some sugguestions ?

 

Cap

[PatriotCFS]

Looking at your signature, you are are running Windows 7 64 with only 2 Gb of RAM.

 

I would suggest adding more RAM and getting a more powerful Power Supply.

[caponi]

negative ... :book:

 

i have the wait time for loading only with FC2, BS works fine and quick ...

 

may be that the problem at mission end is a problem of less memory ...

 

i hope for more information for the behaviours with Win7 :helpsmilie:

 

Cap

PS: i have ordered 4Gb extended memory ( i hope that i could use 6Gb in future:))

[caponi]

could it be that i have problems with starforce?

 

i have to wait for start up a mission up to 30-45 sec.

could it be a timeout behaviour !?

 

so i suggest that starforce try to connect to internet?

 

it is really bad to wait so many time ...

and how i said: in BlackShark i doesn't have this anoying problem ...

[EtherealN]

Starforce only connects to the internet if it does not find activation data in the registry - or at least it should only do it in that case.

 

What you could do is press the start menu, and in the search field type in "Resource Monitor". Start that program. Now start the simulator in windowed mode. Expand the CPU section and find simulator.exe in the list, mark it. In the graphs of the right you'll then see the portion of CPU, Disc access, Network traffic and Memory traffic that the simulator.exe process is doing.

 

Have you verified that the FC2 files are not fragmented AND located close to each other? It might be as simple as the HDD in the case of DCS:BS having all files conveniently close to each other, allowing quick loading, but in the FC2 case having the files spread over the entire disk, causing huge seektimes on the disk and thus a long wait for you.

 

If the latter is the problem, my Defragmentation utility suggestion would be Ultimate Defrag (payware, but with 30-day full-function trial). It allows you to specify exactly where on the disk you want files, so you can ensure that the simulator is on the faster, outer part, of the platter.

 

Also on the possible issue of disk access: note that if you partitioned the drive to run two OSes on it, the second partition will be on the insides of the platters, making it a lot slower. Optimally you want your games and OS to be at the very outside edge (physically) of the platter. (Again, Ultimate Defrag allows visualization of this.)

[caponi]

thank you very much ...

 

BS and FC2 are new installations on the same partition, but i didn't a defragmentation ... i'll try it.

 

next, i will start simulator.exe with the resource monitor ...

i used the task manager only yesterday, but i couldn't see any missmanagment ...

 

cap

[EtherealN]

Yeah, one thing I've noticed with Win7 - at least on my machine - is that it really likes to fragment files.

[caponi]

i'll give a notice tomorrow :thumbup:

[caponi]

partitions defragmented ...

 

a little bit faster ....

 

but i compare the whole loading time of XP and Win7:

 

BS has the same loading times in Win7/XP

FC2 is round about 30 sec. slower under Win7 as under XP ...

 

i could not see any problems in the res. manager ...

 

i have no idea ...

so i will wait for my extended memory and hope the program will running better with more memory.

 

thx Cap

[caponi]

last statement:

 

i have extended my memory up to 6Gb, but the start delay with round about 30 sec. still exists :( only the (Leerlaufprozess / Systemwaitprocess?) uses the cpu ... i have no idea for this problem.

 

conclusion:

all DX9 applications ( FC2, BS, Il2-46 and iRacing) are running faster with XP.

 

so i will use Win7 only for Il2-Cod (DX10/11) and A-10C in future ...

 

thx and regards

Cap

[combatace]

last statement:

 

i have extended my memory up to 6Gb, but the start delay with round about 30 sec. still exists :( only the (Leerlaufprozess / Systemwaitprocess?) uses the cpu ... i have no idea for this problem.

 

conclusion:

all DX9 applications ( FC2, BS, Il2-46 and iRacing) are running faster with XP.

 

so i will use Win7 only for Il2-Cod (DX10/11) and A-10C in future ...

 

thx and regards

Cap

 

I have same specs as you and I have same loading time. Athlon is not as fast as corei7 or phenom so just take a chill pill.

[caponi]

you are right, but XP is faster than Win7

 

i have never said that my specs are fast, but the same PC has different

results in performance with different operating systems. the delay time of 30 sec for FC2 on Win7 is not present on XP !

 

the other application are only 2% - 5% slower ...

make no sense to discuss this ...

 

cap

[combatace]

you are right, but XP is faster than Win7

 

i have never said that my specs are fast, but the same PC has different

results in performance with different operating systems. the delay time of 30 sec for FC2 on Win7 is not present on XP !

 

the other application are only 2% - 5% slower ...

make no sense to discuss this ...

 

cap

 

Thats true because a plain Xp eats 700Mb RAM but a W7 eats more than 1GB of it plus some CPU in gadgets and aero style.

[EtherealN]

you are right, but XP is faster than Win7

 

For single-thread processes, yes.

XP is not made to support multi-processor systems, and as far as the OS is concerned a dual-core or quad-core system is multi-processor.

 

There's also many other things that make modern operating systems a lot better than Win7 even if they have a higher commit charge - specifically being made from the "ground up" to accomodate new technologies and instructions.

 

Put it in perspective: running Windows XP today is, time-wise, the same as running Windows 3.11 in 2001. It's 10 years old and designed for 10 years old hardware, and there's only so much that can be done with patching. But yes, for some applications Windows 3.11 is faster than Windows XP... :P

 

i have never said that my specs are fast, but the same PC has different

results in performance with different operating systems. the delay time of 30 sec for FC2 on Win7 is not present on XP !

 

Long loading times can be caused by a lot of things. Are you running a dual-boot on two partitoins on the same physical HDD? If so, was the Win7 partition created after the WinXP one? If so - it'll be on the inside half of the HDD, and this alone will make all disc access extremely slow. Reverse the partitioning and you'll reverse the loading time issue.

[asparagin]

I find it strange that caponi gets different loading times for FC2 and BS, although they use the same engine, can't explain it.

Regarding W7:

I would still keep it (and did when I had to make the choice), 30 sec is not the world.

I have have also the X2 6400 black edition.

[EtherealN]

I find it strange that caponi gets different loading times for FC2 and BS, although they use the same engine, can't explain it.

 

Different physical position on HDD can explain it. Fragmented folders can also - if one has most files very close to each other physically, seek times are low, if they are spread out, seek times will be very high.

[asparagin]

Not really sure: is the long waiting time before simulator.exe starts or after?- I'll check to see how long it takes for me.

 

I get: 20 sec to full screen loading (where the loading bar is shown) and from there another 40 sec until in cockpit (for a average mission).

Edited April 29, 2011 by asparagin

[caponi]

Long loading times can be caused by a lot of things. Are you running a dual-boot on two partitoins on the same physical HDD? If so, was the Win7 partition created after the WinXP one? If so - it'll be on the inside half of the HDD, and this alone will make all disc access extremely slow. Reverse the partitioning and you'll reverse the loading time issue.

 

Win7 and XP have different partitions

BS and FC2 are on the same defragmented partition ...

both are operating with the same os ...

both are fresh installed

okay, BS is newer, FC2 ... i don't know

 

why i have the loading delay only on FC2?

there is something to wait for a resource or other things on FC2 and this behaviour is not present for BS on both os and not present for FC2 on XP.

 

the problem is, i could see in the process exploerer (from sysinternals)

that (FC2) simulator.exe has only 5% cpu time ...

and after this 30 sec the simulator.exe runs like a race car ...

 

something is braking out this application ... and i don't know what ...

i have reinstalled FC2 on a fresh defragmented partition ... no result

i have closed Avira and Win7 Aero and a lot of other things ...

i can't find the problem and i take the chill pill :music_whistling:

 

if i have bought A-10C and Il2-CoD i'll return to Win7 ...

 

this is not a discussion which OS is better, or whether my PC is slow or fast ...

there is a problem and i don't like it ...

i live with this and the world goes on :thumbup:

 

may be that i could solve this problem at any time ...

then i will give a feedback ...

 

Cap

 

PS: the life is too short to wait for long loading times :doh:

[EtherealN]

Time bofore simulator.exe starts is most likely the same thing: it needs to read the exe and all requisite libraries before it can start the executable and load the game assets.

 

If only to eliminate the variable it would be interesting to know where on the drive they are, and if it's a partitioned drive and if so exactly how. Best tool is Ultimate Defrag (it has a good visual representation of the drive) or Defraggler (not as good representation, but workable).

[EtherealN]

BS and FC2 are on the same defragmented partition ...

 

This isn't the whole story though: files being defragmented does not always mean that things will load fast. Most defragmentation utilities (including the one included in windows) only defragment files. But games need to load more than one file, and if the various files it wants to load are spread out, the drive head will still have to move around a LOT.

 

I'm not saying it's necessarily this that is causing the issue, but I'd like to eliminate the variable, because:

 

the problem is, i could see in the process exploerer (from sysinternals)

that (FC2) simulator.exe has only 5% cpu time ...

and after this 30 sec the simulator.exe runs like a race car ...

 

...this specifically looks like the process is waiting to be fed data, which highlights the HDD as the most likely bottleneck.

 

PS: the life is too short to wait for long loading times :doh:

 

Which is the reason why I want the HDD question explored. ;)

Low processor utilization combined with long loading times indicates that the process is waiting for something. While loading, what it's waiting for is information - and that information is stored on the hard drive. Physical locations of files have a MAJOR impact on read speed and seek times, since on an HDD there are actual mechanical parts that have to move around for every single file and find them on nanometer precision.

[caponi]

Not really sure: is the long waiting time before simulator.exe starts or after?- I'll check to see how long it takes for me.

 

I get: 20 sec to full screen loading (where the loading bar is shown) and from there another 40 sec until in cockpit (for a average mission).

 

the simulator.exe started ... and wait

and after 36sec it runs with full power ...

i don't think that this is a fragmentation problem ... not 30 sec !!!

there is no change in loading memory available ... there is nothing ...

[caponi]

This isn't the whole story though: files being defragmented does not always mean that things will load fast. Most defragmentation utilities (including the one included in windows) only defragment files. But games need to load more than one file, and if the various files it wants to load are spread out, the drive head will still have to move around a LOT.

 

I'm not saying it's necessarily this that is causing the issue, but I'd like to eliminate the variable, because:

 

 

 

...this specifically looks like the process is waiting to be fed data, which highlights the HDD as the most likely bottleneck.

 

 

 

Which is the reason why I want the HDD question explored. ;)

Low processor utilization combined with long loading times indicates that the process is waiting for something. While loading, what it's waiting for is information - and that information is stored on the hard drive. Physical locations of files have a MAJOR impact on read speed and seek times, since on an HDD there are actual mechanical parts that have to move around for every single file and find them on nanometer precision.

 

okay , i understand ...

 

i will check this with your named defrag tool ....

 

otherwise both applications are freshed installs and BS has not this problem ...

 

i'l give feedback later :thumbup:

[EtherealN]

EDIT: You responded while I was typing, but I decided to keep the post anyway since it might contain useful information to you or other people. /EDIT

 

You are talking about fragmentation of individual files. I am talking about fragmentation of directories and physical location of said files. A file or directoty located on an outboard cylinder on the HDD will load faster (a LOT faster) than files located on inboard cylinders.

 

 

Note in this picture how the WD Caviar Black 1TB varies between 70MB/second to 130MB/second depending on physical location of the file being read. This is a difference that you will notice. (Say you need 2GB of data - on the outboard track you'd spend 15 seconds waiting, on the inboard track you'd spend 29 seconds waiting.)

 

 

Here's a schematic of an HDD and the files stored on it. Think of it like a regular music CD. When you switch song on a CD with your stereo, there is a moment of delay - this is the time that it takes the laser to physically move to the location of the song you selected. That causes a delay. If you just play the CD straight through, you will not notice a delay because it can just follow the "tracks" (in HDD terms: cylinders), but if you ask it to first play track 1 for 2 seconds, and then track 5 for 1 second, and then track 2 for half a second, and then track 9 for 2 seconds and so on - a LOT of that time will be spend just moving that laser. And here's the point about defragmentation: a normal defragmentation only defragments individual files. But the game needs to read many many hundreds of files. If file one is in "track" 1, and file 2 is in track 10, and file 3 is in track 2, and file 4 is in track 15 etcetera... Most of the time will be spent looking for the file - not actually reading the file. And this is for a completely defragmented system! Because normal defrag only defragments files, it doesn't group them based on their relationship with each other.

 

So what I am saying is: it is possible that one game happens to have the files nicely together, and the other has it's files all over the place. This will create a noticeable difference even if the disk is "defragmented". Because it's only the files that were defragmented, not the folders.

 

On my drive, I have asked my utility (Ultimate Defrag) to ensure that all files in C:\Games\DCS Warthog are in sequence. This means my driver head does not need to move much at all - it's like just listening to a song on the CD. This means I can feed the process data very fast.

 

When I allow the files to get physically spread out, I find myself waiting a long time to load. Again: still no files being fragmented.

 

This is what I'd like you to check, using defraggler or ultimate defrag or something like that where you can check the physical location of the files.

Edited April 29, 2011 by EtherealN

[asparagin]

 

On my drive, I have asked my utility (Ultimate Defrag) to ensure that all files in C:\Games\DCS Warthog are in sequence.

 

That's cool :thumbup: I'll have to check this software.

[caponi]

okay, i installed the 30 days freeware version ...

 

this is my partition E: (Games for Win7):

 

 

what have i to do ?

 

there are some consolidations available ...

 

with which option i have to defrag ?

 

and where could i see FC2 files ?

 

questions , questions and questions ...

this is internal know how ... which i have to learn :(

 

thx in advance

Cap

 

PS: sry i must leave .. birthday of a friend .. cu later

Edited April 29, 2011 by caponi