Which is most crucial for great graphics

Unfortuantly with 512mb of ram you are likely to struggle even with a top end card

Does your motherboard support pci express?

GoodisonBlue wrote:

Unfortuantly with 512mb of ram you are likely to struggle even with a top end card

Does your motherboard support pci express?

I'm not sure. It's about 3 or 4 years old now. What is PCI express?

The processor, RAM and video card all play a part in FPS, from what you've written, I would get a new computer. 😉

Sinebar, you could not run FSX on max with most $3000 PC's. There are people on here w/ 3Ghz PC's and 2GB of ram and dual video cards that barely run half the max of FSX graphics.

WAKE UP!!!!! NO WAY IN HELL ON THAT DINOSAUR PC OF YOURS!!! 😂 😂 😂

if most of the computer cannot run FSX at full res, would WideView help?
i.e. distribute the processing to other computers.

http://www.wideview.it/

Anonymous wrote:

if most of the computer cannot run FSX at full res, would WideView help?
i.e. distribute the processing to other computers.
http://www.wideview.it/

I don't think so, it distributes views but does not link the processors or RAM.

astrosteve wrote:

Sinebar, you could not run FSX on max with most $3000 PC's. There are people on here w/ 3Ghz PC's and 2GB of ram and dual video cards that barely run half the max of FSX graphics.

WAKE UP!!!!! NO WAY IN HELL ON THAT DINOSAUR PC OF YOURS!!! 😂 😂 😂

Well I read somewhere that FSX was designed for future PC technology that isn't available to the general public yet. I guess they were thinking ahead.

astrosteve wrote:

Sinebar, you could not run FSX on max with most $3000 PC's. There are people on here w/ 3Ghz PC's and 2GB of ram and dual video cards that barely run half the max of FSX graphics.

WAKE UP!!!!! NO WAY IN HELL ON THAT DINOSAUR PC OF YOURS!!! 😂 😂 😂

I'm running it on my HP Pavilion zd8000 right now and it does pretty well with settings on high. It's a 2.79 GHz P4 with a Radeon 600X 64meg graphics card and 2gig of ram. Not as powerfull as some on this forum though. If I could upgrade the graphics card things would be much better.

Try running it with everything on Ultra-High including 100% traffic for everything and all shadows. Include 16X AA and 16X anistropic filtering and get back to me.

Good Luck!!! 😂 😂 😂

astrosteve wrote:

Try running it with everything on Ultra-High including 100% traffic for everything and all shadows. Include 16X AA and 16X anistropic filtering and get back to me.

Good Luck!!! 😂 😂 😂

Oh I already tried that. High settings are about the limit.

Designed for future PC's? Ha! That's a good one. Maybe, OK, I'll bite. Then why sell it now? Why sell it with a BS low requirements unless one likes to be reminded of the 486 vs Pentium days paying Mech Warrior and chopped rates.

From choppy frames to changing the view options to restriction of planes, I'm sorry I bought the Deluxe Edition.

I have XP-SP2, 1GB DDR RAM, 256MB ATI Card, 120 GB hard drive with 50% free and OK, not a gamer machine, but 'above average' for the common user still running around with P4 1.4-2.4 and 512 RAM.

Deluxe says XP 256RAM, 1.GHz CPU, 15GB and 56 modem.

RIGHT!

I'm glad I still kept the FS9 on and bought the BEV program to improve the landscape.

Plus a few of my 2004 planes will not work in FSX, like the Fed-Ex MD-11 for instance.

AVOID FSX till...uh, well gee, the future? Maybe FSXI?

tomax7 wrote:

Designed for future PC's? Ha! That's a good one. Maybe, OK, I'll bite. Then why sell it now? Why sell it with a BS low requirements unless one likes to be reminded of the 486 vs Pentium days paying Mech Warrior and chopped rates.

From choppy frames to changing the view options to restriction of planes, I'm sorry I bought the Deluxe Edition.

I have XP-SP2, 1GB DDR RAM, 256MB ATI Card, 120 GB hard drive with 50% free and OK, not a gamer machine, but 'above average' for the common user still running around with P4 1.4-2.4 and 512 RAM.

Deluxe says XP 256RAM, 1.GHz CPU, 15GB and 56 modem.

RIGHT!

I'm glad I still kept the FS9 on and bought the BEV program to improve the landscape.

Plus a few of my 2004 planes will not work in FSX, like the Fed-Ex MD-11 for instance.

AVOID FSX till...uh, well gee, the future? Maybe FSXI?

It's a no win situation for Microsoft.

Release an average sim that offered little more over Fs2004 but ran nicely on older technology - they'd get hammered for that

Or release something cutting edge that made the most of the best technology available (even more so when dx10 comes out)

Maybe, they should have waited till DX10 and vista were ready but they'd still have got the same complaints

This is forever the problem with IT software, people want new stuff to run perfectly on older kit

If some people had had their way, we'd still be playing solitaire on windows 3.1 but hey at least it'd be fast 🙂

GoodisonBlue wrote:

tomax7 wrote:

Designed for future PC's? Ha! That's a good one. Maybe, OK, I'll bite. Then why sell it now? Why sell it with a BS low requirements unless one likes to be reminded of the 486 vs Pentium days paying Mech Warrior and chopped rates.

From choppy frames to changing the view options to restriction of planes, I'm sorry I bought the Deluxe Edition.

I have XP-SP2, 1GB DDR RAM, 256MB ATI Card, 120 GB hard drive with 50% free and OK, not a gamer machine, but 'above average' for the common user still running around with P4 1.4-2.4 and 512 RAM.

Deluxe says XP 256RAM, 1.GHz CPU, 15GB and 56 modem.

RIGHT!

I'm glad I still kept the FS9 on and bought the BEV program to improve the landscape.

Plus a few of my 2004 planes will not work in FSX, like the Fed-Ex MD-11 for instance.

AVOID FSX till...uh, well gee, the future? Maybe FSXI?

It's a no win situation for Microsoft.

Release an average sim that offered little more over Fs2004 but ran nicely on older technology - they'd get hammered for that

Or release something cutting edge that made the most of the best technology available (even more so when dx10 comes out)

Maybe, they should have waited till DX10 and vista were ready but they'd still have got the same complaints

This is forever the problem with IT software, people want new stuff to run perfectly on older kit

If some people had had their way, we'd still be playing solitaire on windows 3.1 but hey at least it'd be fast 🙂

👍 Hear hear!!