Holy...

FSX including FSX Steam version.

Re: Holy...

Postby reider » Thu May 31, 2007 3:56 am

I sure wish you would tell me what you are doing.  I'm running dual core AMD 3800's with 2 gigs of ram and an ATI X1600 with 512 megs of ram and I STILL get in the low teens to single digits...  :P


I have the 3800 dual core too with 2 gig ddr2 memory and a Geforce 7600GT video card.  Running in 32 bit Vista, the FPS is brilliant.  I employed some of the older tweaks too plus the TreeX and cut down versions of the tree images too.  Flying over the mountains in Spain and into the islands is around 40 fps.  Humberside airport in the UK is about the same.  Manchester airport uk is about 20 fps up to about 35 depending on where in the airport I am, this is all with 35% traffic.  New York is about 15 fps, which is understandable, though Heathrow UK is slightly less.

Reider
Last edited by reider on Thu May 31, 2007 3:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
reider
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:47 pm

Re: Holy...

Postby an-225 » Thu May 31, 2007 5:09 am

Well, I did some testing, and I have found out what major factors (ie: autogen) cut FPS.

Tested on Nvidia 6800 GPU:

Light bloom: Cuts FPS in half. Went from 50 to 5 with it on. Resides unticked, for now.

Autogen: On Extremely Dense, no major cutbacks. Lost about 10 frames, totalling 20 FPS in rural areas, ocasionally dropping to 7. Now resides on Normal, which provides more autogen than FS9, and gives me more frames.

Water: On Max 2X, I lost one or two frames. It now resides on maximum.

Scenery View Distance: One or two frames lost, now set on maximum.

Thats all I have tested for now, I will continue to edit and post to show other figures.

By the way Krigl, I think you will love FSX too. I'm sure you will put the new features to good use and land some more screenies in the gallery. ;)
an-225
 

Re: Holy...

Postby alrot » Thu May 31, 2007 6:14 am

The 6800 is still a great card.

Nope, I have it, and it sucks:
- medium Anti-Aliasing
- crappy anistropic filtering
- bad general performance
- not enough memory

A "average" card today would be something like a 7900, or the equivalent on the ATI side.

A "good" card today is the 8800.

My 6800 really has to give its absolute maximum to run FSX, and it's just sufficient to run FS9, with some jerky FPS (less than 15) over the most detailled airports with a bit of AI in them...
The 6800 was stil a good card two years ago ;)


[smiley=happy.gif]I would never complaint about my 6200..it works well ,no big deal ,but its ok
Image

Venezuela
User avatar
alrot
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 8961
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 10:47 am

Re: Holy...

Postby ATI_7500 » Thu May 31, 2007 7:22 am

Even my old 9700Pro could kick an X1600's butt...:P
ATI_7500
 

Re: Holy...

Postby DizZa » Thu May 31, 2007 7:30 am

Even my old 9700Pro could kick an X1600's butt...:P

So could my Geforce 4.  ;)

[/sarcasm]
DizZa
 

Previous

Return to Flight Simulator X (FSX) and Steam

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 707 guests