FPS fun

Lear45 Guest

Hi everyone,

I have a AMD 1.4ghZ athlon with 256MB RAM and a geForce 3. With everything turned down, I can get almost 60FPS in FS2004, with everything maxed out, I get about 14 in Virtual Cockpit or <7 in clouds.

Now, this is kind of expected. It would be nice to have good frame rates on this system, but I imagine that it is pretty impossible. Luckely I am about to buy a new computer. I kind of decided on a Pentium 4 3.2ghZ, because it delivers excellent performance, but the AMD64 and P4 "Extreme Edition" sound better all the time. 1GB DDR RAM, and a Sapphire 256MB ATI Radeon Pro. Now, as you can imagine, this all comes at a price. I.e 2,000 UK Pounds, 4600USD or, in native currency, $6000+ Australian Dollars. For this much money, I want to be able to run FS2004, on full graphics, all the sliders to the right, at 30FPS+. Is it possible with this system?

I am considering the GeForce FX5900 Ultra now too, but I still am on the ATI side a bit (it's about $650USD [~300 Pounds].

So, just to recap, the system I wanted to get is:

P4 3.2GHz
Sapphire ATI Radeon 9800XT
Some sort of Motherboard (i still havn't decided)
Audigy II

but, before I buy, I need to know if I can run FS2004 maxed out, with high frame rates...or will I need to go even faster???

Thanks in advance for the replies..


4 Responses

Lear45 Guest

Oh, and also...

My 10 MEGALIST OF ITEMS MISSING IN FS2004 (That should be included).
(but wern't).---------------------------------------------------------------------

10. No Wipers: wipers? c'mon can do better than this, how are we supposed to see out of old planes in rain or snow...that one is a no brainer.

9. Region Specific ATC voices: American ATC officer working at Abdhula Bin Mohammid Rasheem International Airport...

8. Force Feedback: was in the last one...uh..OH! I got it. Microsoft were so busy adding more "features" that they plain forgot! (well, they didn't, just turned it down too much. Ironically it is most noticiable on Sidewinders, HA!)

7. Good looking cities: What a beautiful city, with landmarks plopped drunkenly around! Okay, Okay, they have improved, but seriously Microsoft, can you put some real roads and stuff in, instead of a huge texture that looks like a pastel drawing dipped in a puddle? And mabye the buildings could line up with the know, just like the real thing.

6. What about cars to go on those roads...or even just some lights at night that move? Cars are a popular form of transport also, perhaps even more so than planes!

5. Some real hi res feature cities: Add some more...i.e Melbourne, Perth, Cape Town, Johannesburg, Nairobi, Berlin, Atlanta, Singapore, Shanghi, creative! And for God's sake, update the current ones. Doing Vagas scenic flights is no fun when you're looking at a mud-puddle ground with static light buildings and four polygon landmarks...i mean, what do you do in those 2 years you have to make these things...employ more people...please!!

4. A wider variety of aircraft: Okay, granted, these are pretty good, but some experimental aircraft from the 80's would be cool (i.e beechcraft starship etc)

3. Passenger cabin views: You did it in train simulator...why is it not here? You could have more fun watching the world go by in the passenger seat than flying the damn thing from time to never know, you might even get a better frame rate. (Who dosn't think it'd be cool?...I thought so)

2. Visual Damage: Okay, it's been like, 20 years now for FS. We've seen planes crash before, we know what it's like, we've even played combat flight simulator 3...guess what? WE CAN DEAL WITH IT! It even enhances the realism. Okay, so exploding buildings and damageable terrain is a little too much to ask for these days, but the planes should have visual detail..I can't stress that enough. Planes actually crash. They don't defy all known laws of physics and pass somehow into the world of quantam mechanics, thereby bouncing off solid ground and into the air. Likewise, in real-life, planes don't shoot into the ground like a Javilin and display the word "Crashed" in your periphiral vision.


DECENT FRAME RATES: Oh jeez, um, I didn't come prepared...I..I..havn't got a speech or anything..uh..well, i'd like to thank Microsoft programmers, who helped make this award possible...uh, they worked tirelessly around the clock to make sure I was as slow as computationally and humanly possible on virtually every machine except CRAY supercomputers. Uh, to Bill Gates, for funding the project, pouring in all the money for pizza and beer. And Parker Brothers who invented Monopoly, which gave the developers somthing to do instead of work. And finally to you, the voters, who made all this possible. Oh...I think i'm going to cry...*sniff*...

That was a reinactment of what FS2004 might say. If it could speak. Which it can't. But my point is's been long enough. Get it together Microsoft. Give us some more realism, decent graphics, more detail and all on something that gives good frame rates. Mabye it's time to use a new engine eh?

On a brigher note, congratulations on all the good enhancements, but you really should have delt with the above first.

What do you guys think? (answer my first post first though, please 😀)


Pro Member Chief Captain
tomthetank Chief Captain

Hello Lear45
I agree with you..............its good,its dam good...........but it could have been a whole lot better(maybe FS2006????)

I have a pretty darn good passenger view via B737 supplied with Airport 2002 ➡

I hoped that would take you direct to the page(It does'nt)Click FS add ons and seek out Airport 2002 vol 1

It kinda works in Fs9.... unable to load the FSNAT animation......but is so dam awkward to get it (you gotta walk down the plane) and every time I try to watch a landing with the flaps extending ................... I crash even on auto pilot

Ive only just got this so maybe Ill have to have a mess about with it.....if I have any joy Ill post it

Happy landings

John33 Guest

Hi lear45

I don't think you'll have any problem running FS2004 maxed out with the system you want to buy.

I have a P4 2.8
ATI Radeon 9800XT

and I run FS at full settings with 35-40FPS with no problem at all. Your system would be even better. Go for it.


Lear45 Guest

Thanks for the response, FS has come a long way, but I think the features mentioned above would add more realism. I will enjoy this game more when I get my new computer I think!

Thanks for the 737 link also, I was wondering if anyone had done the passenger view yet!

All times are GMT Page 1 of 1