Just Got it !!!!

[RollerBall]

I think that after the official launch date, we must insist that the members of the FSX team who were blogging and promoting the game like crazy a few weeks ago should make an official statement about what hardware is relaistically necessary to run this software in the way it should be run. They must have tested it on a wide range so they must know.

This really isn't good enough. A very large number of people will be going out to buy it in the expectation that what they have seen is what they will get on their machines and they will be very disappointed and very out of pocket.

If you can't run FS9 on your rig with all sliders totally maxed and all features (land and water detail, ground shadows etc) turned on, you won't stand a cat's chance of running FSX in any sort of way at all that will show off what it claims to deliver. And I'm sorry, the screenies put up so far have proven that, many of which have key features turned off or down to low levels.

IMO MS owes that to the FS community who has supported them for so long and continues to show such an incredibly high level of goodwill. I wonder how long we will have to wait...

[Daube]

I think that after the official launch date, we must insist that the members of the FSX team who were blogging and promoting the game like crazy a few weeks ago should make an official statement about what hardware is relaistically necessary to run this software in the way it should be run. They must have tested it on a wide range so they must know.

This really isn't good enough. A very large number of people will be going out to buy it in the expectation that what they have seen is what they will get on their machines and they will be very disappointed and very out of pocket.

If you can't run FS9 on your rig with all sliders totally maxed and all features (land and water detail, ground shadows etc) turned on, you won't stand a cat's chance of running FSX in any sort of way at all that will show off what it claims to deliver. And I'm sorry, the screenies put up so far have proven that many of which have key features turned off or down to low levels.

IMO MS owes that to the FS community who has supported them for so long and continues to show such an incredibly high level of goodwill. I wonder how long we will have to wait...

Well I think the people out there is not stupid.
I mean, if my rig cannot run FS9 maxed out, and I see that FSX looks even better and much more detailled than FS9, then I will not expect to run it maxed out.

Else what ? FSX maxed out should run better than FS9 maxed out ?  ??? Who could seriously expect such a thing ?  ::)
There's more stuff displayed, so you need more ressources. That's all, and I don't think one must be an IT expert to understand that.

[RollerBall]

Of course. But you've missed the point a bit.

There are guys who have some pretty top end hardware on the forum who are running FS9 totally maxed with high FRs.

But just read some of the postings we are now getting. The same guys are having to cripple FSX to get similar FRs.

Now we all know that MS's claims for the hardware needed to run FS9 wre total fantasy and IMO they should not be allowed to get away with a similar trick with FSX.

All they need to do is get some of their staff bloggers who were so keen to talk to us a few weeks ago to tell us about the rigs that were used to test it and how it performed.

What could be simpler

[Gunny04]

FSX Loves ram, I put another gig in, and it ate it all (Well I put 2048 in and 512 for the video card, it still ate the remaining 1.6 gigs) And that was with the demo! I overclocked my 7300LE from 400/648 to 563/769 and I can run it fine at medium high settings, min frames 13.3 highest with unlimited is about 19.7 and its fairly smooth, but those ocasional stutters...... Cheers, Gunny

EDIT: AMD athlon 3800 64 bit Venice core, Socket 939 at 2.4Ghz, 6100K8MA-RS Foxconn Motherboard, 2 gigs (4X512MB) PC3200 Ram, 128MB Nvidia 7300LE PCI-E (Takes some system ram) 250 gig SATA Hard drive,300W PSU, This is my setup

[Daube]

[quote]

Of course. But you've missed the point a bit.

There are guys who have some pretty top end hardware on the forum who are running FS9 totally maxed with high FRs.

But just read some of the postings we are now getting. The same guys are having to cripple FSX to get similar FRs.

Now we all know that MS's claims for the hardware needed to run FS9 wre total fantasy and IMO they should not be allowed to get away with a similar trick with FSX.

All they need to do is get some of their staff bloggers who were so keen to talk to us a few weeks ago to tell us about the rigs that were used to test it and how it performed.

What could be simpler

[RollerBall]

Thanks Daube, glad you agree with that.

The fact that we are all members of a FS forum probably means that we are all genuinely interested in FS and we must all be excited about the release of a new version (even the crabby ones who say they'll never ever buy it not even in a million years  8) )

But I think we deserve to be told what hardware is realistically needed to run it. Turning all the 'goodies' off or down so it loooks just like its predecessors just isn't an option in my book.

If we decide to go out and buy it with the hope that it will either (a) run on our existing kit or (b) on some new kit that we intend to invest even more money in to get the kind of results that the developers have been demonstrating and talking to us about over the last weeks and months, it is only fair that in return we are given some proper advice by the developers (who are really the only ones who know, as they tested it themselves and also collated all the results from the beta testers) on the kit we are likely to need.

After all, a car manufacturer would never be able to get away with saying his model X will achieve average MPG of 25 if it will actually only do 10, or will have zero exhaust emissions when it really belts them out.

There's no difference in my book - but that's just my opinion.

Look, I want to be able to run FSX and I want to know realistically what kit I'll need to do it. I don't expect to have to pick this info up piecemeal from around the Internet and elsewhere when it's readily available in someone's desk drawer.

I think that's pretty reasonable, don't you?

[commoner]

...I was/am delighted with the results achieved on my modest
old Radeon 9200  with a gig of Ram......never had FS9 cranked right up but am running with the moving cars etc at a medium setting and getting a smooth 20fps ...

..This is with the DEMO and as you know the airports are only small low key ones and no cities with masses of buildings to slow things down...and no PAI.............what will happen then I dread to think but I would guess that's when I will wish I hadn't bought the full thing...........commoner.

[Felix/FFDS]

You may want to consider that some in the development team are as flummoxed as we are....

Some with great setups are getting less than expected performance, and some with lesser setups are just peachy....

http://blogs.technet.com/p-12c_pilot/default.aspx

I updated my video drivers (ATI Radeon 9000 64M memory) and FS-X doesn't run.  I rolled back and it does.

[Fly2e]

I still am using my FS9.
From what I have heard and seen, I will wait a while. My set up right now offers what FS9 is offering, of course it is loaded with Payware!  ;D

Roaming animals in the plains of Africa is something I don't need to see anyway!.
Updated water textures are cool but not worth a total rebuild until DX10 comes out. That is when I will plan on rebuilding my sim. By then the bugs and possible "patches" will be sorted..

The more I read about FSX, the more I see people having mixed feelings about the whole thing.
Can you say "CFS3"  ;)


I am not one of those who wants FSX just to say, "Hey I got it and it does not run right"!

I am a perfectionist when it comes to this hobby and like I said, I am not certain that FSX is perfect.


Dave

[RollerBall]

Sensible, unemotional comments from people whose opinions I value and appreciate. Thank you.

[Sniperman]

Well i can run everything on full with the beta, my secret? Turn down the water and you can max everything else. I was getting 35 fps with no water effect, and 20 with it on half. That should kinda show how bad it saps the system.

[Daube]

I think that some old video cards, because there are not able to handle some of the graphical effects (like bump-mapping, this kinf of things) may run faster than some newer video cards that are more powerfull, but overloaded by the new effetcs they have to compute.

See what I mean ? Older video cards produce less quality, but faster. Playing with the video quality setting of your card drivers (for example NVidia, this slider that let you choose 'performance' or 'quality' or 'Best quality' etC...) may have an important effect, since this slider simply disable some of the graphic functionnlities of your cards.

[Souichiro]

[quote]I still am using my FS9.
From what I have heard and seen, I will wait a while. My set up right now offers what FS9 is offering, of course it is loaded with Payware!

[commoner]

I think that some old video cards, because there are not able to handle some of the graphical effects (like bump-mapping, this kinf of things) may run faster than some newer video cards that are more powerfull, but overloaded by the new effetcs they have to compute.

See what I mean ? Older video cards produce less quality, but faster. Playing with the video quality setting of your card drivers (for example NVidia, this slider that let you choose 'performance' or 'quality' or 'Best quality' etC...) may have an important effect, since this slider simply disable some of the graphic functionnlities of your cards.

..........could be right there D.........we all have heard the old sayings  "there's many a good tune played on an old fiddle"  and "there's life in the old dog yet"...........commoner:P

[lost sailor]

I got it now, and also a computer that will run FS9 -- I doubt I have 20 hours logged in it and now it is time for FSX -- I get 10fps at best but it looks great so far -- reckon I'm sold on it. You get a trophy for your 1st landing??