Ray,Well I admit it's a little hard to believe and maybe far-fetched, but everyone that has problems has an Nvidia card.

Hi Greg,I wouldn't disagree with that statement :-) It would be nice to see some input from the developers on this subject. Come on guys!Cheers,

<< Just another theory, EVERYONE that I've seen have problems has an NVIDIA-based card, certainly some food for thought.>> HAHAHAHAHA!! Guys..I don

I forgot to tell you..there

OK, there goes my theory. :-) Maybe we all have Windows memory management setup the same way.

Thank you Joaquin for that very useful info. I'm more than certain the problem is related to the amount of physical memory installed. Anything less than 1Gb seems insufficient.Good night from England.

Did just a test with 2d only (EHAM -EDDF) run as silk no frame rate problems, but with VC same readings only better FPS due to the 1 gb but there is a increase over 312 mb only for the 700 pmdg :(Strange better with 2d worse with VC :-rollAndr

Hi there - I've noticed that on my system the VC doesn't seem to eat any more frames than the 2D model, and, in some cases, I get better frames in the VC than in the 2D, just liek some other folks here. But, like the others with this problem, I can only get 7-10 fps, except for very brief spikes where it rises to 20 or so (locked at 25). I have an older video card, but before the 737NG I was getting those 25fps, no matter the aircraft (PIC, etc.), with sliders maxed....Best regards,Mike2.4Ghz, 1Meg DDR RAM, 64K ATI graphics, Windows XP

It's strange something in the code isn't cleaning up or closing the used memory address, result a hit on memory more memory memory :-zhelpAndr

Hi,The very same problem here! (WinXP, PIV 2.5GB, 512 MB memory and Asus Geforce4 Ti 4600 with 128 MB). If I keep only with the 2-D panel I get 20-30 fps (locked at 30). Yet selecting another view, fps drops to 2 to 4!!This is now a very general problem that needs to be addressed when PMDG people get some time (and rest!!).Regards and enjoy this splendid [email protected]http://pwp.netcabo.pt/ega/

Just tried again with 44.03 WHQL and the 2D panel had fairly good FPS, around 20. But the VC was unbearable and outside view got me about 5 FPS.

Greg,I've resolved the frame rate problem on my system. I've posted the details in a new message. Hope it works for you!Cheers,

Strange.. My system: AMD XP2000+ 512Mb DDR RAM, Geforce 2 MX-400 64Mb DDR, Win XP pro, FS 2002 Pro. With those specs, and aspecially the graphic card, I have NO problems.. Get a steady 13fps, which is my target fps with the PMDG 737-NG.. Th VC model, after looking at the VC causes a drop to about 7-8fps, byt thats no as bad as some with GF4 128Mb cards, and 3gig CPU's expiriencing a drop to 1-2fps!

Bottom line: with Flightsimming you need a lot of base memory. I have a gig with a 2.8 P4 (533 mhz FSB) and a ATI Radeon 9700TX 128MB. The gig of memory is what makes a huge difference because FS2002 is heavily dependent on main memory. I have been getting smooth framerates with 100% traffic (MyTraffic) and at non-GMAX Simflyer airports such as KLAX or KIAD. Sliders are on full and I'm running 1600X1200 32 bit. It's around 8-10fps in the midst of these heavy use airports. It also seems to run better with the VC than the straight 2D cockpit where I tend to get a little more stuttering. Don't know the reason for this.If you look at the tests done on the Radeon 9700 cards you will see that they do better in high resolution situations and settings such as I have them (max all, trilinear filtering, etc.). There are technical reasons for this which you can access by doing a simple search on google.I'm very pleased with the framerates on this bird. Indeed, the PMDG product does far better than the PIC A320 in that respect although the latter, having no 2D cockpit does have a fully functional VC.