For the Non-Believers

[ozzy72]

So for those of you that were shocked at my attempt to run FSX on a slightly less than high-end PC you should take a look...

http://www.simviation.com/yabbuploads/2 ... 50-473.jpg

http://www.simviation.com/yabbuploads/2 ... 15-465.jpg

http://www.simviation.com/yabbuploads/2 ... 16-259.jpg

http://www.simviation.com/yabbuploads/2 ... -49-10.jpg

http://www.simviation.com/yabbuploads/2 ... 44-248.jpg

http://www.simviation.com/yabbuploads/2 ... -58-96.jpg

http://www.simviation.com/yabbuploads/2 ... 16-595.jpg

I'm sorry that I don't feel like spending the extra several hundred to thousands of dollars just so I can see the pedestrians eye colors...  Still doesn't mean I can't get a pretty rad sim experience...

This is one of my favorite flights to run, circling around LAX in a 747 at dawn.  I'd be interested to know what are some of your favorites?

[Corrupt Silence]

Glad to see that you are now enjoying your sim. There's no shame in using what you have, so long as you are flying 8-)

One of my favorite flights, mainly due to scenery and the fact that it is not that long of a hop is from KRNO (Reno, NV) my home town to KSFO (San Francisco, CA). The strips are long, the scenery is damn beautiful, and you get everything from mountain to coastline flying in.

[Wii]

Great! Specs? Try turning down traffic and turning up ground detail. I love FSX ground detail. I like to go online and check where severe weather is and go fly there. Very fun, scary and realistic.

[Mattace64]

2GHz, 2GB RAM, GeForce 8400GS Vid Card...

One thing I forgot to mention is that I really appreciate how FSX optimizes  the graphics...  It will allow you to turn everything up as high as you want, but the trade off will be the framerate.  So then you can go and back everything off until you get a reasonable framerate.  It's a balancing act that you can control.  

I've even noticed that different aircraft will require different graphics settings, I'm inclined to save different setting for specific airplanes.  

[gtirob01]

I too dont have the latest and greatest computer setup, but it does the job quite well. In fact, mine has less memory than yours, and the graphics card isnt as good. I just keep some of the scenery and traffic somewhat in the middle, and everything looks great that way!

[Wing Nut]

Two things to be aware of:

1.  Your pics are outside of forum specs.  They're to be no wider than 1024 pixels where your are 1280

and

2.  This should have been posted in the Freeware Screenshots forum.

Nice work on that.  You might try to do something about that anti-aliasing...

What is your machine?

[newberiffic]

Glad to see you are flying,

My rig is
single core 3.2 ghz pentium 4 circa 2002, 1 g ram,  geforce 5200 "standard PCI" not pci express

and I get solid 30 fps with fsx on single monitor and all the sliders on medium.

and 40+ with fs9 using 3 monitors and gpsout running a Garmin 396
all the sliders to the right.

You are absolutely right you don't need a 2K machine to run either one nicely.

[Isak922]

2GHz, 2GB RAM, GeForce 8400GS Vid Card...

One thing I forgot to mention is that I really appreciate how FSX optimizes  the graphics...  It will allow you to turn everything up as high as you want, but the trade off will be the framerate.  So then you can go and back everything off until you get a reasonable framerate.  It's a balancing act that you can control.  

I've even noticed that different aircraft will require different graphics settings, I'm inclined to save different setting for specific airplanes.  

2.2GHz, 2GB Ram; Nvidia 7600GS and I get one hell of a nice looking sim, and still a very fly-able 10fps! (Not ideal, but it's not choppy whatsoever!)

Only reason I reinstalled FS9 is because I was tired of my favorite addons not working

[Stubbedtoe18]

You sure you aren't following an FS98 AI model?

[Reno]

1.60GHz, 1.50GB RAM, single AMD Sempron (Not for long though) and a NVIDIA 6200GT. I usually get around 20 FPS on about 70% settings.