AMD 1.4 to XP 2000??

[Guest]

I am considering replacing my AMD Athlon 1.4 Ghz with the XP 2000 processor hoping to improve my fps in FS2002. However whilst going from a 1400 to a 2000 processor sounds good in reality the increase is from 1.4 Ghz to 1.67 Ghz therefore would I see much improvement in fps. I currently normally get 18-20 fps (locked at 20) except at complex addon airports when it drops to a jerky 6-8 fps.I have read many other posts about upgrading CPU and video cards and it would seem the processor is the way to improve fps but I would consider upgrading the video card instead (unfortunately not both at this time). My current system isAMD 1.4 Ghz512 Mb RAMGF2 GTS 32 MbThanksPhil

[Guest JonP01]

I wouldn't really bother upgrading the processor as the first priority in that system. The 1.4 Athlon still packs quite a punch. I feel getting a state of the art video card will bring a more noticeable improvement. The current Athlon XP processors really come into their own when used with fast DDR RAM. You don't state what RAM you are using, but if it is only SDRAM, then changing the CPU to an Athlon XP will bring very negligible results. For the record, I have run two indentical systems with FS2002, but one system was an Athlon XP 1800+, the other an Athlon XP 2000+. I was really hard pressed to notice any difference at all, unless I ran 3D Mark all day. That was a difference of 133 Mhz, and not really noticeable at all.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,929]

Hi Phil,JonP is right - the performance difference between the two processors isn't going to make much difference at all. I would have suggested you invest the money in a GeForce4 Ti4400 but that would mean your mobo would need to support AGPx4. If it can then go for it as the extra memory will make a big difference in texture redraws (different to frame rates - honest!). If you have a quality monitor that can support high resolutions and a refresh rate of 85Hz then it would ge a good investment.OTOH if your mobo doesn't support AGPx4 then stick with the current system until you can afford to change mobo, RAM, processor and card. Expensive but FS is very demanding of hardware unfortunately.Hope that helps,

[Guest]

Thanks for your replies.My MB is Epox-8K7A which does support 4x AGP and I have 512 Mb of PC2100 RAM. The alternative I was considering was replacing the GF2 GTS 32 Mb with a GF4 Ti4200 64 Mb or possibly 128Mb.CheersPhil

[Guest SIX]

Here is my "old" system specs:1800+OCsystem.com 512 PC2700 CAS 2.5 DDRIWILL 333-RXP Motherboard40 GB Maxtor HDDVisiontek Ti4600 128MB DDRHere is my new system:2200+1 GB Geil (www.geilusa.com) CAS 2 PC3200 (400 MHz)MSI KT400 MotherboardTwo 80 GB Westerndigital 8MB buffer harddrives in RAID 0I jumped from 12 FPS in Simfleyer Atlanta to 20. Almost double.In PSS 747-400 while dialing up the MDH the numbers would be inconsistant in speed, now they dial right up to 1000 before I can get my mouse off the control. It has made a big difference.However, I did some test BEFORE running RAID and new 8 MB buffer hard drives. This will level the playing field as you are only talking about the processor.12 FPS to 16 FPS at ATL. Not as dramatic, however it still was a noticible and nice difference.My recommendation is swap your CPU. At the prices, you CANNOT hurt your self. It will help, but what would help more is if you have really really good memory WITH that processor. Find out if that motherboard will support CAS 2, instead of CAS 2.5 memory. FS 2k2 is a memory sensitive HOG. If the memory is not just right, your not going to be happy with the performance. The video card is another key factor. I have a Ti4600, however I have seen FS2k2 on a 4400 and it ran just about the same.IT iS THE COMBINATION, people! You can have an Intel 2.8 GHz, but if you have crappy memory you will have a crappy experience. The perfect combination is the fastest processor you can find, I like the Athlon XP 2200+ (and they are cheap now) the best memory you can find, (www.ocsystem.com and look at the geil memory, really nice stuff) and then you must have a video card.But, even then you have a very LARGE bottle neck at your hard drives. The Western Digital 8 MB buffer drives are the sweatest deal on the market for the money. They cost a little more, but standard hard drives come with 2 MB buffers. These drives come with 8 MB!!! Everybody who has seen my machine and I concur, it is the fastest dang machine I have ever seen and it runs FS2k2 like a dream.All said to say this: you can't swap out one part and get a big jump.-----------Wilson HinesHEAVY LHC EditorUVI014FS GROUPFlt Planning DirectorAOL IM: dal276wh

[Ray Proudfoot 8,929]

Hi Phil,I wouldn't bother with a 64Mb card - you really won't see a great deal of difference. I have the Ti4600 (128Mb) and the move from a Matrox G400 32Mb card was astonishing. Bear in mind the GeForce4Ti supports dual displays so it's probably a good time to get a second monitor too.Cheers,

[Bill A 68]

I went from AMD 1.4 to the 2100XP and did not notice much improvment...however the XP chip seems more stable to me.Regards,Bill

[Guest]

I have a AMD 1600 XP and it does fine for me.I do not max everything out because no matter what type of system you have it will get a heavy load.I max out everything except for clouds (50), visability (70) and ATC (65).I have my FPS locked at 25 and us FSAA 2X @ 1152x864 .It runs very well.The only tweaks I use is antisotropic 4 which is now a included tweak in the 40.71 beta drivers.I do not even bother with a tweaker anymore :) With all this being said I think the best thing to do is get some more ram (DDR) make sure you have the lastest 4 n 1 drivers (4.43).I would also invest in a 128MB vid card.I have not been much of a ATI fan but there new Radeom 9500 is stunning in benchmarks.It blows the Ti 4600 in to the dirt which is REALLY still surprising me.I would almost have to see it to believe it for myself but every review I have read on it has stated the samething.If you are loyal Nvidia fan the TI4600 is of course still a great card to own by all means.Last I would make sure you have a 400 watt power supply because believe it or not the power supply can make a difference not in performance but in stablity.Upgrading from 1.4 ghz to 1.6 , you will see little if no difference.If you go up to a 1.8 ghz you will but I do not believe if it is enough to justify the money spent.The only way i would go from a 1.4 1.6 AMD is if I had a Tbird chip and wanted to move to a AMD XP chip which is much better even though the ghz are the same in this case .Good LuckRichard Dillon KPDKSr First Officer www.jetstarairlines.com"Bill Grabowski's"ERJ-145 panel Beta TeamMD-11 panel Beta TeamPAI beta tester ____________________________"Lets Roll" 9/11 Specs AMD 1600 XP MSI KT 266t pro2 512MB DDR 2100GF3 ti 200 64MB SBliveCh Products Yoke and Pedals(usb)Windows 2000 Serivce Pack 3

[briansommers 74]

well i just bought a chip upgrade for my system, this is what I currently haveathlon 1.33ggigabyte 7dx 266Mhz 761 agpset mobo512Megs of DDRGeforce 2 GTS 32Megs DDRi bought the new athlon 2400 (1.93Gig) i hope to see some improvements?? i plan latter on to add a geforce 4 ti4600 or 4800 graphics card.was this good or was i throwing my money away?thanksciao!Brian S

[Guest SIX]

Brain, I don't care what anybody says. I went from an Athlon 800 to 1800+ then to 2200+. I saw a difference in both upgrades. You will see a good gain from the 2400+, I believe that!Let us know.-----------Wilson HinesHEAVY LHC EditorUVI014FS GROUPFlt Planning DirectorAOL IM: dal276wh

[briansommers 74]

wow, great!, im really excited about it, will post about it - ill probably start a new thread something like 1.33Gig to 2400, look for it in the next 2 weeks, or so.i fly around LAX alot and want to use the simflyers scenery and i have fsgenesis us mesh pluss everything maxed out except clouds at 30 and vis max at 60 and get 7-12 depending where im at, i hope with this that i wont get lower than 12, ???ciao!Brian S

[Guest SIX]

You and I are much alike. I am purchasing, today, FSGenesis after much deliberation and research into the whole MESH technology. Also, I have all of the Simflyer scenery and I want the most that I can get out of my bird. The ONLY thing I have turned down on my system is ground scenery shadows and airplane shadows. That is it. The 1800+ did not satisfy my needs, so that is when I went for the 2200+ hoping the extra 400 would do the job. It does, but I still want more. This is a phenomina that we as "simers" and gamers can only relate too. But, the 2200 did make a noticible and worthy difference. The next machine I build will probably be a dual processor system. That will be very interesting. You really need software written for the duals for it to be 100% effective, however Win Xp is written for it. FS 2k2 is not, however I have seen in some bench marks where I still would see 40% or more increase in performance. Thanks for your comebacks,-----------Wilson HinesHEAVY LHC EditorUVI014FS GROUPFlt Planning DirectorAOL IM: dal276wh

[Guest]

Thank you all for your replies. The general concensus was that I should upgrade the graphics card so I have replaced my trusty old GF2 GTS card with a Leadtek Winfast GF4 Ti4200. This has actually given me an increase in frame rates of around 2-3 on the complex scenery and got rid of the stutters I was experiencing and as a bonus I can now increase the display options to improve the scenery display. Seems like the 1.4 processor was capable of more.

[Guest SIX]

I would still seriously consider a CPU upgrade, especially with the prices the way they are. ;)-----------Wilson HinesHEAVY LHC Editorwww.heavylhc.comUVI014FS GROUPFlt Planning DirectorAOL IM: dal276wh

[Guest]

I just went from Athlon 1GHz to P4 2.4(B)Ghz. Huge difference even on the same Geforce 3 card. Solid fps with AA on QC. I am extremely happy.Sean Trimm