Just set up the new build with MSFT FSX, and what kind of performance is normal!?

O

OsageCowboy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 30, 2006
Messages
139
I just set up my new PC with the following config:

E6400 (no overclocking yet)
2 gigs RAM
8800 GTX
P5B-E

What types of framerates should I get from this? I was surprised to see that I could not run the game with max settings at 1360 x 768 (I am playing on an LCD tv). The game runs fine, and certainly would run well on lower settings, I was just expecting to be able to go max out with the new setup and FSX.

Is this game a particular FPS hog, or should I get 25+ FPS consistently with everything maxed? Thanks for the inputs.
 
That´s because the FS games don´t benefit of SLI at all. one 8800 GTX is 99 % as fast as 2 8800 GTX in FSX. Same with say 6600 GT...

It´s built around very old code so you can´t expect much from it.

30 fps with normal settings maybe but that is not sure...

Hard to say I know that my computer can´t hack it. 2,7 Gig Opteron and 7800 GT and 2 Gig of RAM.

If I turn everything to lowest settings I get 140 but if I run minimal it´s below 20...

FS9 looks better then FSX when turned to lowest so I will stick with that :p
 
FSX is a huge disappointment. I can run any of the newer games just fine, Oblivion, HL2, Quake 4, Prey, etc. but FSX runs like total shit and doesn't look nearly as good. The scenery is billboarded for christ sake :rolleyes:
 
yeah it's rather amazing how Lock On, a game that looks better and is more fun and is 4 years old, can run with all settings maxed, and this worse looking and less sophisticated game can't even sniff that.
 
Every FS is designed to scale to future hardware 2 or 3 years down the road. No, there is no computer that can run it at full blown settings all the way right now.
 
i bet when DX10 comes out they'll try to re-market it to hell and back. and with that patch will come the actual optimizations...
 
Yeah, in my rig, I was getting 25 FPS @ 1280x1024. With pretty much the lowest settings (or close to it). This was with the FSX demo.

What makes this so awful is that I can run a game like F.E.A.R. at that same resolution with the settings turned all the way up at 35 FPS.

It really did look quite awful. I have no idea what caused the performance to be so lackluster. BTW, the game actually does look pretty good if you turn the settings all the way up, albeit at 0.5 FPS.
 
I think that the performance from that game is inexplicably appalling. Hopefully they release a patch or something to help out.
 
look around on AVSIM (or just search). There are some effects and features that are major leaks; turn them off and the FPS jumps quickly. 25fps isn't unplayable... it's a flight sim, after all :D

Where are you getting 25? in a city, it would make sense.
 
benplaut said:
Where are you getting 25? in a city, it would make sense.
Click to expand...

25 was just the average, it was more like 35 FPS with nothing but the plane and water, and could get all the way down to 10 FPS in cities. And the game didn't look like something the PS2 couldn't handle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top