Skyrim Memory patch 3.0

[Nearox]

I can confirm that it works fine with SR:LE latest version. Installed it all on Wednesday and played for a couple of hours in and out no worries except low FPS occasionally.

 

:)

Gah... damn you :D

[Neovalen]

I'm going to chime in obviously but been playing uGrids 9 SR:LE + more for hours.

 

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

[Nearox]

I'm going to chime in obviously but been playing uGrids 9 SR:LE + more for hours.

 

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Damn you too :P

[Solongchu]

I dont know if this has been answered or I just missed it but I started my game with both the TESV.exe and the Skyrim(SKSE).exe and found that at 7 ugrids my uExterior Cell Buffer didnt change automatically from 32 to 64.

[keithinhanoi]

On the ENB forum thread, somebody has pointed out a new development:

 

SSME - Skyrim Startup Memory Editor which uses a new approach to injecting sheson's patches.

 

Basically it presents itself as one of the Direct3D 9 Extensions dynamic libraries (3dx9_42.dll) for Skyrim to load at launch, when the memory block allocation size patches are injected.

 

Great idea, because it doesn't require any modification of an SKSE library (which would keep with their wishes.)

 

However, he's running into snags, and it's not working for everybody yet. It would be really great if he'd share his source code for those in the know to take a look and help out.

 

EDIT: I and another user asked about source code, and it turns out the library was written in assembly.

 

Anyone here familiar with assembly language?

 

EDIT 2: I just learned that the author of SSME also created a quite comprehensive solution to crashes in Fallout NV - NVAC - New Vegas Anti Crash, available on Nexus FNV.

 

The number of endorsements for NVAC and a quick skim through the comments thread quickly proves to me that s/he really knows her/his stuff when it comes to assembly language.

[Noobsayer]

I'm a bit curious about the discrepancy between the SKSE ini changes in SR:LE and the original thread. Is it simply dependent on what version of the memory patch we're using?

 

 

IE, for SR:LE

 

[Memory]

Enable=1

MemBlock1=512

MemBlock2=256

but from the original thread/other sources

 

[NotPlacebo]

GiveFirstBornToSheson=1

MemBlock1=512

MemBlock2=256

[Aiyen]

Beat me too it (About SSME)... however yeah, his approach is at odds with just about all AV software, and since he does not share source then the approach is not really that great of an idea.

 

It is unfortunate with the current SKSE way to do stuff. However once more test data etc. is in then I guess it would be possible for the SKSE team to host both a file with and without the memory extension.

 

Edit: The =1 part can be whatever you want. Sheson was just being a good jest with his original define choice ;)

[Noobsayer]

Lol I kinda enjoy his choice. So you're saying either variable will work? Awesome.

[Neovalen]

My variable must be used with my DLL. Whoever compiles the dll can make their own INI choice.

 

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

[Noobsayer]

Ah, OK.

 

I have one more question then. I always browse stability guides (though with a cynical eye ;) ) and this one suggests there should be something in our SKSE log that verifies if the patch is working? Would/does yours give something? And if so, does the log need to be viewed while Skyrim is running?

 

EDIT: That may have come across a little rude, lol. I'm not doubting the quality of your patch so much as wanting to verify I've done it correctly :)

[Neovalen]

Yes there is an entry in the log. I believe I stated it in a previous post. I would link it but I'm on mobile.

 

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

[FCqt]

I got a CTD while doing my stability test. I ran and killed random enemies for a good 30+ min with speedmult 1000 then I fast-travelled to Windhelm and I got a CTD while running down the bridge outside of Windhelm.

 

I'm running full SR:LE build with several additional texture mods and uGrid 7.

 

There's no doubt that this is much more stable then before and in a normal playthrough it would be much harder to make it CTD however I wouldn't say it's 100% CTDProof. I got a total of 2 CTD's but for the first one I'll leave the doubt on my modding setup.

 

Here's my crashdump: https://pastebin.com/yudSnMwR

[Aiyen]

Nothing is 100% CTD proof... You can still overload the game with textures even if you have a 4Gb VRAM card and 32Gb RAM.

 

This just make the gap a bit more wide for what you can do without memory related issues. Also running about for 30 mins with speed mult 1k is quite good actually.

 

 

As for my own testings... I can only load up ugrids 7 or I get an ILS or CTD upon load. But well ugrids 7 seems to be running... other then the fact that I cant play at that setting due to average FPS drops down below 20.

 

Think I will just use this to make ugrids 5 a bit more stable with more high resolution textures.

[Solongchu]

Yes but FireFreak111 says if you use SSME that Chargen and Race Menu doesnt work with it at the moment.

I have run all the tests everyone has without crashing so I decided to try Halls of Dovahndor which even though I have a fairly high end computer always crashed and found I could finally use it with this.

[Noobsayer]

Yes there is an entry in the log. I believe I stated it in a previous post. I would link it but I'm on mobile.

 

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Hmm, no problem. I'd gone through the whole thread ... must've missed it. QQ. Time to go through again, lol.