Dynamic Cache Size??

[O.Schmidt]

Question about: Dynamic Cache Size! What does the? Isn't 0 better or 100?

[thewood]

A quick might help...

 

 

[O.Schmidt]

Thanks

 

[Ssnake]

The answer which setting is better depends on your hardware. Graphics cards with a lot of dedicated VRAM memory should set the cache size to high values (like, 100%). This will load the entirety of the map into video memory where it's readily availabe for scene rendering if you teleport to a distant vehicle.

But if you don't have enough VRAM, setting the cach size too large will cost you (a lot) of frame rate, so it's better in those cases to keep it at an adequately low number (anywhere from 0...25%, maybe even 50% of a mid-range card with a medium amount of memory). The downside is that you may need to wait a second or two after teleporting to a distant location as the current terrain cach needs to be replaced with the surroundings of your new location.

 

All this only matters if you control multiple units in your scenario and tend to teleport around often. If you stay with the same vehicle for the whole duration of a scenario you wouldn't notice a difference.

[thewood]

Does increasing the cache slow the loading of the scenario in execution of editor modes?  Is the PC having to spend more time loading the map into cache, versus pulling it as needed from the HD.  I know in using MSFS2k, the impact of increasing map cache slows the loading of the flight.

[Ssnake]

The effect is there but doesn't become very prominent with map sizes 20x20km² which is the approximate cap for SB Pro PE. 100x100km², particularly if combined with a slow CPU with few cores, it's becoming a relevant factor. In those cases a smaller cache size can help with loading times, yes.