fs9 is too heavy to flight

[DanSteph]

eazy is right on this, on some card with perhaps poor driver
the mini display seem to cause slowdown...
just find better driver or switch the mini display on only when you need it...

eazy wrote:
To stop you others from crying for me (or laughing at me), here's my new sys:
AMD64 3500+
1 GB
ATI X800 Pro
260 GB S-ATA
makes a difference

I don't want to laugh at you....I still have only a P4 1.7 Ghz TI4200...

(And I'll stick to it as I can see immediattely when there is performance
concern when programming)

Dan

[pagir]

DanSteph wrote:
I don't want to laugh at you....I still have only a P4 1.7 Ghz TI4200...

(And I'll stick to it as I can see immediattely when there is performance
concern when programming)

Dan

Ah... If every programmer could think like you...

Pagir

[Ryanamur]

pagir wrote:

DanSteph wrote:
I don't want to laugh at you....I still have only a P4 1.7 Ghz TI4200...

(And I'll stick to it as I can see immediattely when there is performance
concern when programming)

Dan

Ah... If every programmer could think like you...

Pagir

What, I though Dan test drove FsP on a

P4 3.8 Ghz Prescott (dual CPU)
2 GB DDR 3400 (1 Ghz bus speed)
NVidia 6800 512MB (1Ghz 2D, 1Ghz 3D)
SB 5.1
260 GB SATA HD with 16GB Buffer and a 10 GB swapfile

[DanSteph]

As I don't have time to play notice my "slow" computer is not a problem,
you need only power for game finally... And my computer is so well tuned
that I'm sure it run better than some later model bought in supermarket
(I run Fs2004 at 1280x1024 with a lot of sliders to the max and 22 FPS)

If I really want power I can use my wife's computer wich rock...

Dan

[pagir]

Ryanamur wrote:

pagir wrote:

DanSteph wrote:
I don't want to laugh at you....I still have only a P4 1.7 Ghz TI4200...

(And I'll stick to it as I can see immediattely when there is performance
concern when programming)

Dan

Ah... If every programmer could think like you...

Pagir

What, I though Dan test drove FsP on a

P4 3.8 Ghz Prescott (dual CPU)
2 GB DDR 3400 (1 Ghz bus speed)
NVidia 6800 512MB (1Ghz 2D, 1Ghz 3D)
SB 5.1
260 GB SATA HD with 16GB Buffer and a 10 GB swapfile

Oh! The specs of the main computer of Enterprise NCC-1701!!!

[Ryanamur]

DanSteph wrote:

(I run Fs2004 at 1280x1024 with a lot of sliders to the max and 22 FPS)

Dan

Yes, that's pretty good. Is that with traffic at 100%?

That's roughly what I get on my PC and I have a 256MB GeForce 6600

Phil

[DanSteph]

Ryanamur wrote:
Yes, that's pretty good. Is that with traffic at 100%?

Ah no I used a very good traffic program for fs98 and I don't like the traffic of Fs2004...
so 0% traffic...

Perhaps I should give it another try I know there are plenty of enhancment tool
but I must say that I hate to get FPS slow down on final...

Dan

[olseric]

Since everyone is talking about performance, I just wanted to add this:

Not all systems are the same...even if they are built the same. There are a number of factors that go into each individual setup and the
trick is to find the "bottlenecks" and eliminate them.

For example, my system is an Athlon XP 3200+, 1.5 GB RAM, ATI x800 PRO, (I think it's 250 GB, not in front of it right now) SATA HDD.

I originally had an ATI AIW 9700 on board. When I popped that out and put in the x800, I noticed a framerate increase of about 10 fps. I
also originally had an Athlon XP 3000+ (166 FSB) and when I put the 3200+ with the 200 FSB in, I only saw an increase of about 5 fps.
So, overall, I gained 15 fps, and when I finally cranked the scenery all the way up where I wanted it (everything is maxed with a few
exceptions), I'm about 5 ahead of where I started.

Right now, I know the bottleneck in my system is the processor. Unfortunately, it's only got a 200 MHz FSB and I can't do any better
without a new motherboard.

Bottom line is, there are a lot of factors, so saying this is definately it, or you're wrong is probably an incorrect statement.

[red_baron]

İ thing problem is my O/B sound card İ must attach new one.Because fsp use additional sound and it forces on my mainboard
thanks every pilot and atc

[jaws1948]

I think my system has a few people beat. I'm still running a Dell P4 1.3 with 640 mB RAM and a Ti4200. A bit of a dinosaur. Except for a
few stutters here and there, I get very acceptable performance with FS9 and FSP, framerates in the low 20's for the most part and overall
quite smooth. I think the secret is in scaling down some of the features like the traffic and the weather. Also, I try to stay away from add on
scenery as much as possible. When we first install FS9, it sets itself up with a certain percentage of traffic, clouds, etc. If we're honest
with ourselves, I'll bet not one of us leaves those settings alone. We all try to squeeze a little more traffic, and a little more 3D clouds.
Then we wonder why we get low framerates. So we play with drivers and assorted tweeks. When I finally gave in and scaled everything
back, that is when I got very acceptable performance. So all this rambling to andwer red_baron's original question. Very simply, easy
does it on the settings and the addons.

Mike

[SaVas]

Alsocheck to see how much space you have left on your HD.

I have a 200 gig HD 150 of which is partitioned for FS9 and I am pushing close to 90 gigs for the sim alone

[Jetflyer]

Yeah but my computers hardly "good" by todays standards, a P4 4Ghz, gig of RAM and a 9800 Pro not only all sliders maxed and AI traffic but frame rate
rarley is below 30FPS. It is very cheap to upgrade the P4 2.23GHz to a 3GHz CPU and 9800 Pro's are cheap now so what's the problem with a slight
upgrade here and there? It runs very respectably.

[Jetflyer]

Sorry that should say a P4 3 GHz