FSX is out

well, I guess all you smart computer guys here at SPA will need to keep the rest of us informed as to the best routes to go with FS9 vs FSX.

I don't have FSX yet, and it may be a month or 2 before I get it...so please post the good and the bad news about it here.

KEN:> Let me know if you find a good deal on a NV 7900 512MB AGP.
I think I'll be stuck with my old system for awhile.
Thanks!

Well boys, I broke down and bought FSX yesterday. Installed it last night and did 3 or 4 very short flights.

My system:
Windows XP home SP2
2.8 mhz processer
1 gig ram
256 meg ati 9800 pro vid card
DirectX 9c

Would you like me to tell you that parked at Heathrow with real weather and traffic and all seetings maxed out I was getting 60-70 FPS ?

I bet you would.

Reality...I was on runway 12R at KMSP in cessna with mid settings and low on traffic. Took off and looked left...No terminal,,,Runways and tower, but to airport facility. Over the river, the water looked awful.(Low setting). Frame rates locked at 20...I was getting anywhere from 5 to 15 FPS depending on views.

After some adjusting, I was able to get 8 to 20 FPS and minimul stutters and able to see the terminal and with water looking better.

I will be tweeking for days before I settle on what I want. I know already that I will up the water slider when away from major cities and lower it when flying into a main airport or city.

This will be the 1st time I've kept the older verion of FS, but there's no way I'm deleting FS9. I will still use it a lot.

As I understand it when Windows XP came out people thought it was a real resource hog. Well,
from what I hear, Vista is going to be much worse.
Don't plan on running Vista unless you do some serious upgrades all around.

In a year, maybe less, and I don't know how I will afford it, I plan to simply get a new computer minus the monitor. Dual core fast processor, 2 g of ram, and 512 mg DirectX10 compliant vid card.

I think the above new system would be what you'll need to enjoy most of the new features. Still would not be able to max out the sliders even on this newer system..Maybe I'm pessimistic though.

Hope this helps anyone trying to decide what to do.

Steve L

To all those that have FSX try Defragmenting your hard drive even if it tells you it dosn't need doing, and see if your frame rates are better.

I beleve there is a new defrag programe comeing out shortley.

www.pcaviator.com/shop/viewAProduct.php?pid=505
its called 0&0 Defrag V8

Just copy and paste into your browser

Dave<br /><br /><!-- editby --><br /><br /><em>edited by: daveraine, Oct 18, 2006 - 02:56 PM</em><!-- end editby -->

Here are some articles on ways to speed up your PC:

www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/setup/...rup_restoreperf.mspx

www.windowsxpmagazine.co.uk/features/features/50_best_tips_ever

mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/OptimizeXP.html

law.wustl.edu/ComputerSupport/help/Instr...st%20performance.htm

I don't know if this will help anyone...ref FSX, but I found it in a forum.

Jerry


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 4:51 am Post subject: I need some help deciding on a new computer to run FSX!! Reply with quote
So as the topic says I need help deciding on a new computer to run FSX!

I would appriciate it ALOT if some people listed their specs of their PC, frames per second and possibly a screenshot durring game play of FSX.


Any Info Would Help...

-Subagoon Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Francois Dumas
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Nov 2002
Posts: 12438
Location: Europe

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:09 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Wouldn't we all....... Wink

You'll have to decide first and foremost if you want to run FSX to its full potential (if possible) or not.

The thing is, you see, that there will be an 'update' (or upgrade or patch) sometime early next year (don't pin me down on that timeframe) to allow for the newly promised DX10 graphics technology and associated new graphics cards to be used for FSX.

Todate DX10 does only exist on the designer's drawing board, and so do the cards needed to run it. Oh, yes, and you'll also probably need MS Vista as the operating system.

All that means a handsome investment in hardware for the majority of us simmers in some 6 - 8 months from now.

OR......

you could just run it on your current (heavy) XP system and be happy with tweaks and add-ons forthcoming.

There is a LOT of talk on what works and what doesn't all over the internet forums. Truth is that the full system (FSX) is only available for little over a week, so I take most reports with a pinch of salt... nah.. with truckloads of the stuff !

My FSX runs on a dual-core AMD 4400 with (only) 1 Gb of RAM and a 7800GTX 256 Mb graphics card, under Windows XP SP2 (!).... and performs reasonable, but with still a LOT of tweaking to do.

And no, I'm not going to write you a full report here; firstly I don't have the time for it, secondly it would not be sufficiently in-depth yet, and thirdly I'd rather save it for a paying publisher <grin>.

Hope this helps you getting your mind around it anyway...

Francois
_________________
Francois A. 'Navman' Dumas

Managing Editor
The simFlight Network
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


FSAddon.com Publishing
and
EuropeRides
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
jwenting



Joined: 02 Nov 2002
Posts: 3334
Location: halfway between ARTIP and PAM

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:11 am Post subject: Reply with quote
and never forget that "your mileage may varry, all tests performed by experienced professionals on a closed track" Laughing
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
ICQ Number
jwenting



Joined: 02 Nov 2002
Posts: 3334
Location: halfway between ARTIP and PAM

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:15 am Post subject: Reply with quote
That said, you can get decent performance from any modestly modern system that's reasonably high spec.
Think a solid midrange computer, heavy on RAM and with a decent videocard and if at all possible a separate soundcard (I did notice a performance increase after installing one, though how much it will do depends on everything else).

So look at a 3.6GHz Pentium Core Duo with 2GB RAM and a 256MB (or better) GF7600 or better videocard, add a Soundblaster F-Xi (or whatever they call it), and a 10.000 rmp S-ATA2 harddisk on a high performance motherboard, and you should be OK for decent performance.
Then next year you can exchange that videocard for a highend DX10 card without too many tears lost (as a GF7600 isn't that expensive).
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
ICQ Number
Regiment



Joined: 16 Oct 2006
Posts: 8


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:45 am Post subject: Reply with quote
The new Directx10 graphics cards should start appearing 1 month from now.

I have a x2 3800 with 1024ddr ram and 2 x7800gts in sli and can run at 1024x768 with everything just past half, autogen at sparse and cars and boats turned down to around 6%.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Francois Dumas
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Nov 2002
Posts: 12438
Location: Europe

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:46 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Regiment wrote:
The new Directx10 graphics cards should start appearing 1 month from now.



Yes, but seeing clearly is believing, especially in this 'hot air' case Wink
_________________
Francois A. 'Navman' Dumas

Managing Editor
The simFlight Network
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


FSAddon.com Publishing
and
EuropeRides
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Regiment



Joined: 16 Oct 2006
Posts: 8


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:49 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Francois Dumas wrote:
Regiment wrote:
The new Directx10 graphics cards should start appearing 1 month from now.



Yes, but seeing clearly is believing, especially in this 'hot air' case Wink


Lol, don't worry, they'll be out. Nvidia are due to release their 8800gts and gtx cards around the 8th November, what difference, if any, it'll make in fsx at the minute, don't know. A lot of the reports coming out are that it'll be faster than 2 7800gtxs in sli, but wait to see what the reviews say before deciding whether to buy one or not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Francois Dumas
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Nov 2002
Posts: 12438
Location: Europe

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 12:22 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I'll wait a few months more, even.... Wink
_________________
Francois A. 'Navman' Dumas

Managing Editor
The simFlight Network
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


FSAddon.com Publishing
and
EuropeRides
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Burkhard
Product Support


Joined: 05 Nov 2002
Posts: 4494


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 2:04 pm Post subject: Here is my deicing procedure Reply with quote
Here is my deicing procedure! It allows me to run FSX properly on a Dell Office system with a X600 128MP grafics adapter with 16fps smoothly. For me it is all about:

Video memory

While FS9 typically uses between 20 and 50 MB of video memory, FSX has been observed between 110 and 380 MB up to now. This is mainly due to texture formats, the pure number of different textures for the autogen, etc. Graphics adapters today have 128, 256 or 512MB typically - plus use system memory case they need more. If this happens as a peak, there is no problem with it, but if it happens constantly, the difference between the current usage and the on graphics card hardware has to be transferred over the system bus PER FRAME.
So let as assume you are proud of a high end graphics adapter with 256MB, but run FSX with settings to use 380 of them, and set the target frame rate to 25. Doing so you order 124 MB to be transferred per frame, or 3.1 GB per second over the system bus ( that can do 4.2 GB peak rate !). Obviously, that will not do well.
So, if you have a graphics adapter with less than 512 MB, ( some addons will be able to flood that too I'm sure ), I strongly recommend that you use the little utility MEM_STATUS from www.programmersheaven.com/download/5759/download.aspx
and monitor the usage of video memory.
On your FSX install, go to a typical situation you want to perfrom smooth, (That isn't over the middle of the ocean), put ALL sliders to the far left, switch all options (shadows, etc off), and vary the screen resolution. Next increase slowly those sliders that you consider important, like AI traffic density, global texture resolution, and you will see the video memory usage climbing. You will very fast get a feeling of what costs a lot, and what is cheap, depending on the actual driver you have, addons, etc.

Do so, increasing according to your importance list, until you reach on 128MB adapters: 128-140 MB.
on 256MB adapters: 240 MB

Doing so, you will find a setting where you get what your hardware can do, and if you avoid the memory hungry ones, it will be looking good, and running smooth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jwenting



Joined: 02 Nov 2002
Posts: 3334
Location: halfway between ARTIP and PAM

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 4:28 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
how do you get that thing to show vidram? It only shows main memory total load.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
ICQ Number
Burkhard
Product Support


Joined: 05 Nov 2002
Posts: 4494


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:47 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
No, it shows two bars. If it doesn't I cannot help, but assume that it either cannot handle the 4 GB card you have, or politely says you do not have any video memory?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JonP



Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 176


PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:55 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I tried that utility as I was very curious to see what results I would get.

My video card is a modest (but much-loved) 7300GT driving a small 15 inch LCD at 1024 x 768. On demo # 2 I was only getting something like 110 MB video memory usage at the most.

I had my FSX settings at 2 metre pixel terrain when I tried that. I then tried setting it at 1 metre. I expected doing so would increase the video memory, but surprisingly (to me at any rate) it made no difference at all.

Does anyone see their video memory usage change if they change the terrain texture resolution in FSX (with all other things remaining unchanged)?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
westv



Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 548
Location: Essex, UK

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:50 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Burkhard wrote:
No, it shows two bars. If it doesn't I cannot help, but assume that it either cannot handle the 4 GB card you have, or politely says you do not have any video memory?


Burkhard, the link you showed was for version 1.1 which only shows 1 bar on my system too.
Version 2.4 (which does show 2 bars on my system) can be found here

www.nuclearplayground.com/NuclearPlayground/MemStatus
_________________
Victor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ellrond



Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 11


PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 9:52 am Post subject: Reply with quote
How can you see the memusage while flying? if I switch from FSX Task to Memstat Task then it always shows Video Memory Usage 0.

How can i show this window when being in FSX task?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jwenting



Joined: 02 Nov 2002
Posts: 3334
Location: halfway between ARTIP and PAM

PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:25 am Post subject: Reply with quote
thanks Vic.

You'll need to run in windowed mode Ellrond, and preferably a multi-screen setup so you don't have the windows overlapping.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
ICQ Number
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic The simFlight Network Forum Index -> PC and Flightsim Technology Forum All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1



Jump to:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
The simFlight Network: International - France - Spain/Latam - Germany - Benelux - Italia - Israel - Poland - Portugal - Russia - India - Japan - simMarket - About simFlight
Terms & Conditions


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group

Wow, that's alot to sort through Jerry; jist is what a few of us have said; to get the MAXIMUM out of FSX will require some pretty heafty upgrades come 2nd to 3rd qtr next year; or when ever Vista is released. Sure it is working for some on semi-new to new systems; but to get the most, DX10/Vista/and the card built for both will be requried. I've found FSX Standard for sale in my area, but no delux yet. I'll probably get Delux, and a new vid card (x1900 or Nvid 7900GT) for now; and next year at this time start re-building .