Simviation Forums

Hello,

My system is as follows:
Processor: Intel 2400 Mb (2,4Gb)
Ram         :512 Mb (if not more)
Graphics  :Radeon 9600 256Mb/400MHz

In FS2004: At Frankfurt Main Intl (with 100% traffic) I get 6 ... 7 FPS at the lowest but generally never more than 10 .
I have my scenry settings at medium high

Could there be something wrong with my setting in my my computer or are these FPS expected at busy airports.

When I look in the readings in task manager of Win XP it shows that processor is running at 100% a lot of the time while FS is running.

There are a lot of settings is the display section of options where it states that higher settings may decrease performance, a lot of them! BUT which of these settings make the most difference!

Hi Roberto. The fact is is that your PC is more than capable for playing FS. But, the 100% traffic and probably dense autogen will bring your frames down. Bring traffic down to 40% and medium or off autogen. Then post back with the performance.

Cheers,

Rob

Roberto,

Hate to say it.... but you are likely getting about the normal stuff for fs2004 with a machine of that spec.  I know that it seems wrong.... butr fs2004 is a real bear on overall system performance...and loads up ALL of it.

Ignore the "minimum specs" that Microsoft lists on the packaging and on their website .... they are a total joke.  The issue is sort of like Bill Clinton's question about defining "is"  ;).  Microsoft needs to define what they mean by "run" in those statements.

The "I've got low fps" question comes up constantly on this and other sim boards.  Check around in this forum and the hardware forum for past threads relating to performance and fps and such and you'll find a wealth of information already posted.

Most of it points to the fact that to really get the "promise" of fs2004....... you need a pretty top end machine.

One spec that you didn't list is the front side buss speed on your machine.  This to me seems important... with at least 800 MHz being the target, I think.  And most people seem to recommend 1 gig of FAST DDR ram.  

And the ATI 9600 is not all that great a card when it comes to fs2004.... see the Tom's Hardware specs listed in graphs in the "Hardware" forum.  (I had a 9600 for only about a month....before I dumped it due to poor performance for a 9800XT.... which itself is now looking a little "long in the tooth" after only about 3-4 months.)

best,

..................john

Actually...I've heard that FS2004 won't use more than 512MB...even if you do have 1GB in your machine (I have 1.2 GB)

Jordanj,

Even if that is true.... XP takes 128M just to load itself.  Not to mention a few essential background programs.

Where did you see that info?

best,

..........john

Google "FS9 Tweaks" and then do them.  The result is astounding.  I've got a slower system than you (by a tiny bit) and I regularly get over 30 fps.

It's not hard to get low fps (for most people)-the problem is how much you are willing to compromise.  Me, for example, I will never turn default fs traffic below 100%.  The density at airports even with the traffic on max is a joke.  Also, I refuse to put my autogen lower than very dense.  I just will not fly into LA and see a low density of houses, or fly into some backwater airport and not see a high density of trees.  So I am my own worst enemy becasue I'm not willing to compromise looks for performance, at least most of the time I'm not.  If you're willing to take certain settings (especially traffic and autogen) way down, performance will improve greatly.  ;D

[quote]

One spec that you didn't list is the front side buss speed on your machine.

Doubling the RAM might help.  

Another suggestion is to return all the display settings to default, and then be highly selective about which ones you jack up.  I've found that raising some of them doesn't make much difference at all to how the game looks, but hits the frame rate.

If all else fails, try reducing the cloud complexity.  Again, the appearance of the game is still pretty good, and it will certainly help the frame-rate; cloudy conditions seem to be the commonest cause of it dropping off.

Interesting. I've heard and seen about the same. It seems to suggest that the FSB speed is the bottleneck for this sim.

Matt,

I'm pretty convinced that this is a significant factor if you don't want to settle for turning stuff down or off or substituting "frame rate friendly" textures.  I'm with beefhole on the "I want to use what I THOUGHT I bought" approach.

It is the core "pipeline" for overall system information flow.  

best,

...............john