fs2002 or fs2004

I could be a wise guy and say that 2000 will run better then 02 or 04 (it will).
If you want the modern experience go with 04 your computer can handle it, turn down a few sliders a little until you get 27-30 fps tops.
With a nice machine like that you could add another 512mb, you'd see quite an improvement with texture rendering.
At the airport what your getting is very good considering all the scenery and other aircraft.
The cloud, scenery, traffic, sliders all use up power.
Sum up, the graphics aren't better in 02, just less of them so they render faster and the graphics aren't as good that's why it takes less of a computer to run it.
Me, I'm looking forward to 06 and a new machine because that will a better sim, they move forward not backward when they develop.
Good luck whichever way you decide.

hi radarman
i have fs2002 and built up a lot of software for it and now i have to start over again for fs2004,what with the price of addons and pc uprades you can end up spending a lot of money and then along comes fs2006 and you start all over again. looking back i should not have upgraded this time as there wasnt really a lot of new ideas for fs9 apart for the weather system most of the default planes are the same i should have kept expanding fs2002, maybe instead of a whole new version a upgrade on fs2002 which would have included the better weather and garmin gps would have been more welcome.i hope that fs2006 will be a better uprade than fs9 and despite my moaning i will probably buy it.

thanks jim

jimimac,
Many sims have a 4 year cycle where they change "engines". I don't think that FSX will be any different from the rest. They have to make major changes in it.
It'll come out after the new 64bit motherboards are in all new machines and just a year before "Longhorn" is due out.
With all that happening the sim should need quite a bit of horsepower to run it.

hi radarman
i was thinking about adding another 512pc3200ram as you suggested,my graphic card is a geforce4ti400 wuld it be better to upgrade the card to say a fx5700ultra or go for the memory upgrade.which one would i get the more performance from.also if i go for a card i would like to keep the nvidia chipset does it matter who the manufactuer of the card is.

thanks jimimac

The card would cost more and give you better fps which if you cap it you can use the extra "power" for the other parts, scenery, graphics etc.
The ram would give you faster performance not necessarily in the fps and sharpness of the graphics.
If I were in your place I would opt for the card (I did) and live with the memory that I have.
The better the card, the better the flying and the "eye candy" (sharp) but the distance graphics will still load at the same rate.

I don't know what you mean by the manufacturer, ATI or Nvidia ok, one of their "partners" well I would only stick with the original manufacturer.
Example: I would take an ATI over an ATI Sapphire (personal opinion).

i meant to say a asus fx5700ultra as long as it has the nvidia chip would that be a good card

😀 man is spot on about the memory and about the video card
Before you buy check out as many reviews on your choice of card/s 1st
And spend as much as you can afford

Its pays to buy the best you can in both graphics and memory

Here is a good start for your research ➡

http://www.tomshardware.com/

Good luck and let us know how you get on

i was in my local pc shop today and narrowed my search down to 2 cards the 1st card was from abit its a fx5900 price £150 the second card is from pny its a fx5700ultra again £150 the shop assistant sayed the abit was the better card but sayed he had never used fs9 before so doesnt know how it would run. which one do you think would be best for running fs9

thanks again

The Fx5900 is the higher spec card

I use a Gainward FX5900 GS and its the dogs danglies

I found this about the PNY ➡

And this for the Abit ➡

http://www.ukgamer.com/index.php4?action=article&id=174&page=1

Have a and lets have your thoughts( I have not read them all yet)

ok ive done the reviews and im going to go for the abit fx5900 i like the oes cooling which is quieter,also in the [h]ardocp review fs9 was used with everything maxed out and it ran smoothly, however aa was unable to be used as there was a bug in the driver but seen as this was a earlier review the updated driver should have fixed this bug.when the card was new the price was about £300 so i think at £150 it is a good buy.

thanks for your posts over the last couple of days and for pointing me in the right direction regarding reviews etc.

jimimac

😀 I have not seen fs9 used as a benchmark before

Looks good, I like the cooling solution. As I said I have a fx5900 and am over the moon with it,and I hope you will be

Dont forget to let us know how it is when you get it

Good luck and good flying

Oh and I have'nt said it for a while..........Happy landings 👍

i installed my new graphics card today the abit fx5900 the card installed ok had a bit trouble as it was quite close to my audio connection on the mb but finally i got the card in. loaded fs9 turned all the sliders up and set the aa to x8 aircraft was the pmdg 737, default airport 2d panel fps about 21 on the runway but improved as i moved away.a little bit of tweaking and its running great overall i think the framerates are about the same as i had with the geforceti4200 but the graphics are a good bit better. ttt you mentioned you have the same card can you post ur settings in fs9 and what fps are you getting.

happy flying jimimac

Here´s the specs. on my puter 😀
1.8 GB Intel p4
Main Hd is a Samsung 40Gb. for main programs
Nr.2 is a Seagate 120 Gb. used for fun & games,and diff. downloads.
1024 Mb. Ram (SD)
Asus 9560 td (Fx 5600) Graphic card with 256 Mb. ram

😀 Everything in scenery is at max
In weather (I remembered last night in answering a question)I am running the cloud fix d/load but other settings are
sight dist max
cloud draw 70 miles
3d clouds 70%
detailed clouds medium
Aircraft---all max
Hardware 1024x768x32
target frame rate 40
mip mapping x 4
hardware lights max
triliner filtering
global max texture massive

My system is an xp28
512 pc2700 mem
Gainward Golden Sample FX5900 ➡

Frame rates top about 75fps down to about 30fps at LAX with Traffic2004@100%
I have adjusted T2004 to 75% and average 45fps @ LAX

The GSFX5900 has a standard setting of core clock 390mhz /memory clock 700mhz
It came with a overclock program which ups it to 450mhz/780mhz and there is room for more (I have'nt)

I've had it 2 weeks now and,boy how did I manage before

OBTW I have finished Farcry