Fly Away Simulation - Free Resources for FSX, FS2004 & X-Plane
Your #1 Source for Flight Simulators!
 RegisterRegister now!   SearchSearch   LoginLogin 

The Design of FSX ...

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
jetman35
First Officer
First Officer


Joined: Feb 18, 2004
Posts: 221
Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:25 am 
I have a question in reference to design of FSX. For the life of me I can't understand why fsx was design to be so heavy CPU dependent. All of these fps problems would be taken care of if the video card was the main player instead of the CPU. Maybe somebody out there can explain to me why this is.

It would seem to me that a good solution to this issue is to create a version of FSX that is design to be used on high end video cards ONLY. Maybe DX10 will take care of this issue? I have a 8800 gts 640 card and I know that it is fully capable of handing the large frame rates.

Anybody help me on this??? Maybe Phil Taylor can help me.

Jetman
Back to top
View users profile
trecool999
Trainee
Trainee


Joined: Jul 24, 2007
Posts: 3
Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:44 pm 
I guess 256mb is all it really needs. I can handle full GFX at about 15 fps. Except the water looks kinda crap and confuses me when flying low.

I think it was something to do with Microsoft expecting to have awesome PC's for cheap prices when they started making it a couple of years ago.
Back to top
View users profile
VegasFlyer
Chief Captain
Chief Captain


Joined: Jul 14, 2005
Posts: 2139
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:11 am 
jetman35 wrote:
I have a question in reference to design of FSX. For the life of me I can't understand why fsx was design to be so heavy CPU dependent. All of these fps problems would be taken care of if the video card was the main player instead of the CPU. Maybe somebody out there can explain to me why this is.

It would seem to me that a good solution to this issue is to create a version of FSX that is design to be used on high end video cards ONLY. Maybe DX10 will take care of this issue? I have a 8800 gts 640 card and I know that it is fully capable of handing the large frame rates.

Anybody help me on this??? Maybe Phil Taylor can help me.

Jetman


One of the reasons I ain't buyin FSX. FS9 is much more down to earth on the graphics and everything, plus tons of add-ons are available. Wink
Back to top
View users profile
Cheeks
Chief Captain
Chief Captain


Joined: Oct 09, 2004
Posts: 2508
Location: YSSY
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:36 am 
Once FSX starts becoming more of the standard fs and my computer is upgraded i'll start playing it Wink
Please direct your complaints to the moon, they might care there.
Back to top
View users profile
Post new topic   Reply to topic All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1
 You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Related Topics

Search

Search for aircraft, downloads, news and even the discussion forums all from here.

Unlimited Downloads

Unlimited access to thousands of FSX, FS2004 & X-Plane flight simulator downloads including aircraft, scenery and expansions for only $5 per month. Along with many other benefits and features.

Register now

Survey

Have you downloaded your copy of Microsoft Flight?

Yes, I really enjoy playing it!
No, I haven't downloaded it yet...
I'm going to stick with FSX
I haven't even moved to FSX, I'm sticking with FS2004
No, X-Plane all the way!
...Microsoft what?

Votes 92

Social

 
RSS Feed iPhone App

Hot Articles

© Fly Away Simulation
Providing downloads & resources for FSX, FS2004 & X-Plane for over 10 years.
Terms & Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Redirects

Customer Support