YAME64 suite
-
Hi Ice, what we write was the results of months of tests in our systems. Maybe for your configuration it’s better not to use hook. Use it the way it runs better, we give as many possibilities as we can, so one can fine tune with his own system.
Definitely not my case.
As I stated in earlier posts, I get a very nice fps boost, specially when displaying the TGP and/or WPN page.
But important thing is that now we have different options and everyone can try what works better on their rigs.
Indeed, that’s why I’m asking how you guys did your testing before coming to these conclusions? What TE did you run? What were the machine specs? What resolutions?
roccio, do you have any suggestions of things I could try to improve my fps using HOOK?
-
Indeed, that’s why I’m asking how you guys did your testing before coming to these conclusions? What TE did you run? What were the machine specs? What resolutions?
roccio, do you have any suggestions of things I could try to improve my fps using HOOK?
More then a 50 versions have been installed on my pc over the past 4 months. I’ve been flying almost daily in single player and 2x a week in custom TE’s with our sqn. So it has covered a lot of different scenario’s (small to large number of aircraft, 3 theaters, several AFBs within those theaters, bad weather, good weather, day, night, flights of 10 minutes to flights of 3 hours).
3 latest versions have also been running on 3 of my sqn mates on different computers (ranging from “regular” 1980x1200 setup to 40" 4K screens, to 3x 27" screens eyefinity, air cooled & water cooled, Windows 7 & Windows 10, Nvidia & AMD, several driver versions, hard disks & ssd)…
That’s only on my end. Then Roccio also did some testing and an IT guy from our sqn also.
FPS measured with both the BMS built FPS indicator (that blue square), with FRAPS, and with MSI Afterburner. As said in the manual, when averaging it all, a majority has a significant increase, but not everyone.As to increase FPS, some possible fixes (but no guarantees, I’m no expert):
- make sure RTTexport is set to 0 when using 3Dhook;
- make sure the YAME windows are not overlapping screens, not even 1px of a border onto another screen
- if you have more then 1 graphical card, use BMS on the heavy one, use YAME on the lowend (I use my R7970 for my 40" 4K BMS via display port & simple 27" via HMDI on my integrated card of my motherboard).
- try starting BMS in fullscreen instead of -windowed mode
-
More then a 50 versions have been installed on my pc over the past 4 months. I’ve been flying almost daily in single player and 2x a week in custom TE’s with our sqn. So it has covered a lot of different scenario’s (small to large number of aircraft, 3 theaters, several AFBs within those theaters, bad weather, good weather, day, night, flights of 10 minutes to flights of 3 hours).
3 latest versions have also been running on 3 of my sqn mates on different computers (ranging from “regular” 1980x1200 setup to 40" 4K screens, to 3x 27" screens eyefinity, air cooled & water cooled, Windows 7 & Windows 10, Nvidia & AMD, several driver versions, hard disks & ssd)…
That’s only on my end. Then Roccio also did some testing and an IT guy from our sqn also.
FPS measured with both the BMS built FPS indicator (that blue square), with FRAPS, and with MSI Afterburner. As said in the manual, when averaging it all, a majority has a significant increase, but not everyone.While that is impressive, unfortunately, it is not replicable. It’s like saying “I started a campaign in my computer, and the FPS I got when sitting on the ramp is XX”… okay, but what campaign? What PAK priorities? Where did you ramp start? What other flights were taking off at that time? Doing 25 flights in clear weather and 25 flights in bad weather then averaging the FPS isn’t really a good way to be testing stuff. The idea is to limit as many variables as possible so that the desired variable can be manipulated and can be compared against a “control” test.
As to increase FPS, some possible fixes (but no guarantees, I’m no expert):
- make sure RTTexport is set to 0 when using 3Dhook;
- make sure the YAME windows are not overlapping screens, not even 1px of a border onto another screen
- if you have more then 1 graphical card, use BMS on the heavy one, use YAME on the lowend (I use my R7970 for my 40" 4K BMS via display port & simple 27" via HMDI on my integrated card of my motherboard).
- try starting BMS in fullscreen instead of -windowed mode
- set g_bExportRTTTextures 0 DONE
- YAME is under the HELIOS screen. AFAIK, no YAME gauge overlaps another YAME gauge. I’ll do a YAME-only test run though and see if that’ll change the numbers
- I’ll see about moving my touchscreens to the on-board GPU. One of my screens is driven via USB to a “laptop dock,” the other is driven via HDMI but through my main GPU.
- BMS is started in fullscreen all the time (except when testing CDE)
-
While that is impressive, unfortunately, it is not replicable. It’s like saying “I started a campaign in my computer, and the FPS I got when sitting on the ramp is XX”… okay, but what campaign? What PAK priorities? Where did you ramp start? What other flights were taking off at that time? Doing 25 flights in clear weather and 25 flights in bad weather then averaging the FPS isn’t really a good way to be testing stuff. The idea is to limit as many variables as possible so that the desired variable can be manipulated and can be compared against a “control” test.
- set g_bExportRTTTextures 0 DONE
- YAME is under the HELIOS screen. AFAIK, no YAME gauge overlaps another YAME gauge. I’ll do a YAME-only test run though and see if that’ll change the numbers
- I’ll see about moving my touchscreens to the on-board GPU. One of my screens is driven via USB to a “laptop dock,” the other is driven via HDMI but through my main GPU.
- BMS is started in fullscreen all the time (except when testing CDE)
I Ice, are you running in networked configuration? If yes, try to lower the refresh rate at wich the server sends data to client. Try 10 fps and increase it by steps and tries.
-
While that is impressive, unfortunately, it is not replicable. It’s like saying “I started a campaign in my computer, and the FPS I got when sitting on the ramp is XX”… okay, but what campaign? What PAK priorities? Where did you ramp start? What other flights were taking off at that time? Doing 25 flights in clear weather and 25 flights in bad weather then averaging the FPS isn’t really a good way to be testing stuff. The idea is to limit as many variables as possible so that the desired variable can be manipulated and can be compared against a “control” test.
Ice, with all do respect, I don’t give a sh*t
I have studied Applied economics, I’m well aware of what a correct statistical test setup requires. I never said it’s scientifically proven, I never said it’s for everyone. I’m not planning on testing it that way and I couldn’t care less about the outcome. All I’m saying is that with all the testing we’ve done so far we have a vast set of flying hours in numerous conditions and the majority of it showed increase in FPS with 3D hook compared to rttextraction.
What you are asking above; do you really expect from me to log all hundreds of flights with all that data just so you can know when or when not an FPS increase is there? I didn’t log all that info and I don’t feel the need to. Since the release (posted on 4 fora) about 90% claims the same, that’s all I care about. As I said in the manual, not all will notice an increase, it was just an observation, based on enough variable setups to come to a significant conclusion.
If that doesn’t suffice for your needs, feel free to run tests on your end and let us know the results. I rather spent my time testing new features Roccio is making based on the list of request that were posted here, then stare at hundreds of datasets (I have enough of that at work already).- YAME is under the HELIOS screen. AFAIK, no YAME gauge overlaps another YAME gauge. I’ll do a YAME-only test run though and see if that’ll change the numbers
That’s not really what I mean. I mean when you have a Yame window for example, don’t have a piece on monitor 1 and a piece on monitor 2. If you use several monitors, use several yame windows instead.
-
I Ice, are you running in networked configuration? If yes, try to lower the refresh rate at wich the server sends data to client. Try 10 fps and increase it by steps and tries.
No, my tests were on one PC running everything.
Ice, with all do respect, I don’t give a sh*t
I have studied Applied economics, I’m well aware of what a correct statistical test setup requires. I never said it’s scientifically proven, I never said it’s for everyone. I’m not planning on testing it that way and I couldn’t care less about the outcome. All I’m saying is that with all the testing we’ve done so far we have a vast set of flying hours in numerous conditions and the majority of it showed increase in FPS with 3D hook compared to rttextraction.
What you are asking above; do you really expect from me to log all hundreds of flights with all that data just so you can know when or when not an FPS increase is there? I didn’t log all that info and I don’t feel the need to. Since the release (posted on 4 fora) about 90% claims the same, that’s all I care about. As I said in the manual, not all will notice an increase, it was just an observation, based on enough variable setups to come to a significant conclusion.
If that doesn’t suffice for your needs, feel free to run tests on your end and let us know the results. I rather spent my time testing new features Roccio is making based on the list of request that were posted here, then stare at hundreds of datasets (I have enough of that at work already).****, what’s with the attitude? All I did was query how the “tests” were made. No need for a pissing contest.
What you are asking above; do you really expect from me to log all hundreds of flights with all that data just so you can know when or when not an FPS increase is there? I didn’t log all that info and I don’t feel the need to. Since the release (posted on 4 fora) about 90% claims the same, that’s all I care about. As I said in the manual, not all will notice an increase, it was just an observation, based on enough variable setups to come to a significant conclusion.
See, that’s the problem right there. Someone will make a claim based on vague information. You claim a 20fps saving on the manual. Saving from where? Compared to what? What setup? What tests? It’s like claiming something will work and when asked “why doesn’t it work on my system,” the reply is “I don’t give a sh*t”….
I’m trying to run replicable tests and if you don’t care about it, at least try to support someone who does.
If that doesn’t suffice for your needs, feel free to run tests on your end and let us know the results. I rather spent my time testing new features Roccio is making based on the list of request that were posted here, then stare at hundreds of datasets (I have enough of that at work already).
I’m still testing to find out which one suits my needs and don’t worry, I’ll post my results. What, you thought I was asking how the tests were made just coz I thought it was going to be fun to poke at your work? Also, since some of us don’t spend time testing new features, then we can spend time testing other things on the YAME version already available.
F*ck me, I’m surprised at your attitude though.
That’s not really what I mean. I mean when you have a Yame window for example, don’t have a piece on monitor 1 and a piece on monitor 2. If you use several monitors, use several yame windows instead.
Right, thanks!
-
****, what’s with the attitude? All I did was query how the “tests” were made. No need for a pissing contest.
Well, to be honest… you asked a question, I answered it. Your reply afterwards contained attitude as well, so
See, that’s the problem right there. Someone will make a claim based on vague information. You claim a 20fps saving on the manual. Saving from where? Compared to what? What setup? What tests? It’s like claiming something will work and when asked “why doesn’t it work on my system,” the reply is “I don’t give a sh*t”……
If you want to be so strict on the details; reread what is in the manual: On some systems using the hook seems to be much smoother and saves up to 20 FPS, so try it for yourself.
So not on all systems; it seems like it, it’s not scientifically proven; and up to, not always 20.I gave you a first answer, you replied, I repeated myself. I have nothing more to add to this discussion. In mine, and several others, there was an FPS increase compared to using BMS extractions or Lightnigns MFDE. That’s all I need to know and can say. Nothing more, nothing less.
I never said I don’t give a shit of it doesn’t work on your system, don’t put words in my mouth. I said I don’t care about the details and the benchmark data and rather spent my time on feature requests & testing.
I think both Roccio and I have been trying to answer anyones question and with pretty fast respons time. On this public thread aswel as on dozens of PM’s and on other fora.I’m trying to run replicable tests and if you don’t care about it, at least try to support someone who does.
I’m still testing to find out which one suits my needs and don’t worry, I’ll post my results. What, you thought I was asking how the tests were made just coz I thought it was going to be fun to poke at your work? Also, since some of us don’t spend time testing new features, then we can spend time testing other things on the YAME version already available.
I said I don’t care about it, and as I also said, if you want to test, be my guest, everyone can only benefit from it. But again, you are asking me info I don’t have. I’ve said it above already, 5 months of several flights with several parameters, of which I didn’t log any of the specific details. So no, I can’t give you those, so don’t keep bringing it up again and claiming I have an attitude and don’t want to help you. If I could I would, but I can’t and I’ve explained why.
-
You two calm down now.
Ice, you need to agree that testing FPS is ALWAYS going to be different from one PC to another, from one config to another, from one user to another. The difference you initially mentionned (48 vs 46) is peanuts and you shouldn’t bother anyone but yourself with such nitpicking details. I indeed sense an attitude issue in your replies. So knowing the protocols they used for writing the manuals will not help you in any way to see if the information they wrote in their manual is a lie. And even if it is, it’s none of your problem, unless you have an hidden agenda??
FD, i agree and i understand your point of view. Let it be clear that when you go into such a venture as sharing your work to this community, you will expose yourself to these kind of issues. It’s frustrating but that’s the way it is. Nobody knows that until they actually start sharing. Knowing that diplomacy will need to be required when answering what the developer might sense as futile request.
For all, Do remember one BASIC thing:
The guy who share they work with you, for free, just because they feel it might be interesting for you to have it don’t OWN you anything.
You can request anything you like, but don’t expect them to do anything you request. REad back, they don’t own you anything. Ppl organise their work, their tests, their release as they see fit.
If you don’t agree with their protocol; that’s not their problem, live with it. Did I say they don’t own anything to you?So back on topic, i’d hate to close this post and ban a few ppl
-
Let me speak for the sim pilot “silent majority”, of whom I am sure there are hundreds, who are successfully using your YAME 64 contribution to the community and enjoying an enhanced Falcon experience thanks to your efforts. Every PC has a unique set of hardware/software, which inevitably leads to isolated problems.
-
I’m using YAME on two PC’s - Primary runs BMS and YAME server and secondary runs YAME client with three display screens (one for CP and two for MFD’s). I have successfully set up my CP display and they work beautifully! But now I’m having a problem getting any of the textured items to display. To keep things simple for the moment, I’m just using my primary display on the client (which is successfully running the CP displays). I am trying to get either the DED or one of the MFD’s to display at the top of the display but all I see is a black box representing the DED or MFD. I have tried both shared memory textures and Direct3D hook methods but without success. I always start BMS from within YAME server and I did confirm the d3d9.dll file is in bin\x64 file. I would also assume that I do not have a port issue since flight data is being sent to the client for use by the CP instruments.
-
I’m using YAME on two PC’s - Primary runs BMS and YAME server and secondary runs YAME client with three display screens (one for CP and two for MFD’s). I have successfully set up my CP display and they work beautifully! But now I’m having a problem getting any of the textured items to display. To keep things simple for the moment, I’m just using my primary display on the client (which is successfully running the CP displays). I am trying to get either the DED or one of the MFD’s to display at the top of the display but all I see is a black box representing the DED or MFD. I have tried both shared memory textures and Direct3D hook methods but without success. I always start BMS from within YAME server and I did confirm the d3d9.dll file is in bin\x64 file. I would also assume that I do not have a port issue since flight data is being sent to the client for use by the CP instruments.
Hi Ribbs,
I have the same issue when testing beta versions every once and a while, and I’ve seen several reports of others having similar problems. We’re scratching our head on this because we can’t pinpoint the exact cause up til now.
The next release will have updated logic on texture extraction (yes, also F-18 will be working for you Hornet-lovers) and updated libraries. We hope that might solve some problems.
With me after some rebooting it suddenly works. I’ve seen a couple (2 or 3 I think) here in BMS who report the same. Nothing changed and all of a sudden it does work. Really hard to figure out at the moment but it’s on the top of our bug list and remains there until a good solution has been found. For now keep hanging in there and trying with fingers crossed I would say. I hope we can provide a final fix soon. -
I’m using YAME on two PC’s - Primary runs BMS and YAME server and secondary runs YAME client with three display screens (one for CP and two for MFD’s). I have successfully set up my CP display and they work beautifully! But now I’m having a problem getting any of the textured items to display. To keep things simple for the moment, I’m just using my primary display on the client (which is successfully running the CP displays). I am trying to get either the DED or one of the MFD’s to display at the top of the display but all I see is a black box representing the DED or MFD. I have tried both shared memory textures and Direct3D hook methods but without success. I always start BMS from within YAME server and I did confirm the d3d9.dll file is in bin\x64 file. I would also assume that I do not have a port issue since flight data is being sent to the client for use by the CP instruments.
Check yame_d3d.cfg located in <falcon_bms>\Bin\x64
PORT: xxxxxxx
FPS: 30
MFD: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DEDRWR: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Check that the PORT value (I have put some x here) is the correct one (the one you set in YAME server tab).
If still not working, please send me your confg files and I will test.</falcon_bms>
-
-
Well, to be honest… you asked a question, I answered it. Your reply afterwards contained attitude as well, so
@Red:
I indeed sense an attitude issue in your replies.
Please, I would so love it if you could point out where my “attitude” was in my response. Personally, I do not see any nor did I write with any. I do not appreciate being accused of having an attitude where there is none so I think this is a “mis-read” of what is written… if that were the case, again, I’d love to see where such a thing can be “seen” or “sensed.”
If you want to be so strict on the details; reread what is in the manual: On some systems using the hook seems to be much smoother and saves up to 20 FPS, so try it for yourself.
So not on all systems; it seems like it, it’s not scientifically proven; and up to, not always 20.I understand this completely and that’s why I’m asking questions.
I never said I don’t give a shit of it doesn’t work on your system, don’t put words in my mouth.
I didn’t say you did.
I think both Roccio and I have been trying to answer anyones question and with pretty fast respons time. On this public thread aswel as on dozens of PM’s and on other fora.
I have never faulted this at all. In fact, what you two are doing is remarkable and do not think for one minute I do not appreciate this. However, there is nothing wrong with asking questions, right?
I said I don’t care about it, and as I also said, if you want to test, be my guest, everyone can only benefit from it. But again, you are asking me info I don’t have. I’ve said it above already, 5 months of several flights with several parameters, of which I didn’t log any of the specific details. So no, I can’t give you those, so don’t keep bringing it up again and claiming I have an attitude and don’t want to help you. If I could I would, but I can’t and I’ve explained why.
How am I supposed to know if you have the info I want or not, if I were not to ask the question?
@Red:
Ice, you need to agree that testing FPS is ALWAYS going to be different from one PC to another, from one config to another, from one user to another.
Where did I display ignorance of this fact?
@Red:
The difference you initially mentionned (48 vs 46) is peanuts and you shouldn’t bother anyone but yourself with such nitpicking details.
It may be, but so what? Also, I was testing whether HOOK works better or not on my system and I’m trying to find out why they can claim that “HOOK works better” but I’m not getting that result. “It’s different system to system,” sure, but I may also be missing a setting or something that will make it work for me, that’s why I’m testing and asking questions.
@Red:
So knowing the protocols they used for writing the manuals will not help you in any way to see if the information they wrote in their manual is a lie. And even if it is, it’s none of your problem, unless you have an hidden agenda??
I don’t know what you’re accusing me of, and I don’t like being accused of anything, really. Why am I asking of protocols? Why not? Why am I nitpicky? Why not? My “agenda,” if anything, is better, more structured ways of “testing FPS”.
Anyway, I hope I made my side clear there.
-
I’m using YAME on two PC’s - Primary runs BMS and YAME server and secondary runs YAME client with three display screens (one for CP and two for MFD’s). I have successfully set up my CP display and they work beautifully! But now I’m having a problem getting any of the textured items to display. To keep things simple for the moment, I’m just using my primary display on the client (which is successfully running the CP displays). I am trying to get either the DED or one of the MFD’s to display at the top of the display but all I see is a black box representing the DED or MFD. I have tried both shared memory textures and Direct3D hook methods but without success. I always start BMS from within YAME server and I did confirm the d3d9.dll file is in bin\x64 file. I would also assume that I do not have a port issue since flight data is being sent to the client for use by the CP instruments.
This is a weird issue and I think I’ve come across this in testing. What roccio suggested was to change port; we were Skyping at that time and he suspected Skype might be interfering with the program. Sure enough, I changed the ports and it worked!
-
Thanks Roccio. The yame_d3d.cfg port displays 53100. That is the hook port I set (by default). Which config files should I send? Should I send via PM or post here?
-
This is a weird issue and I think I’ve come across this in testing. What roccio suggested was to change port; we were Skyping at that time and he suspected Skype might be interfering with the program. Sure enough, I changed the ports and it worked!
Thanks Ice. I’ll try that too.
-
Thanks Roccio. The yame_d3d.cfg port displays 53100. That is the hook port I set (by default). Which config files should I send? Should I send via PM or post here?
You can send me your YAME64.xml and the layout you use in pm is better.
-
After about two weeks of use one fact and two request…
Fact: MFDE is uninstalled for BMS 4.33 (still using 5.7 for 4.32)
YAME 64 proves to be stable, consistent and as elementary as the HOTAS when flying.
The moving map…no words!Request 1: PFD display when it’s clear.
I guess it’s not active unless a fault happens and therefore it shows black with no textures or color.
Can you impose the PFD green screen and bezel on top of it?
Request 2: Map window…is it possible for it to remember its last state when re opening (eg for example map view aircraft heading)?Hope you managed to find the fix for the VVI and AOA gauges.
Well Done and thank you !!!
-
Thx for the kind words polaris!
Ded/pfd bezels are already includes for newt release.
Remembered moving map options I will add to the feature request list.
VVi/aoa we’ve included extra Logic so it will use smaller texture when gauge size is small, hope that will fix it.
Stay tuned