Hello!I have a GF 4 Ti 4200 64MB video card which is alright, but doesn'treally cope with tight environments in my FS 2002.When I use addon planes plus AI traffic at larger airports the framerates drop considerably.Is it a good idea to get a better GF (a GF 4600 128 MB, for instance)or is there anything else to do to increase performance?I have tweaked my graphics setting (visibility range, mesh,etc.) so they are now about average.My system is an AMD Athlon XP2000+, 512 RAM 333mHz and a good mainboard.Grateful for tips...Hans HermanssonSweden

Hans,I use a GeForce4 Ti 4400 with 128 MB DDR. System PIV 1.8 GHz, 512 MB DDR. I downloaded a lot of AI from the ProjectAI.com, their planes are really frameratefriendly, but still my framerates at large airports are also dropping to 5-15 fps (Schiphol 2002 by Lago is my most crowded airport). On London Heathrow (standard scenery) it is a little better, doesn't drop below 10. The planes used make a lot of difference, earlier I used repaint of the stock aircraft for AI and that takes more off your framerates then the ProjectAI planes.I have most of the FS display settings maxed out. When I use a PIC767 plane to fly, framerates even suffer more.So, I think your card should be good enough (you use the most recent drivers I presume?), but AI tends to take a lot off the framerates, no matter the card. The difference between Ti 4200 and 4600 isn't that big after all.Paul

Hans - The Ti4600 will make very little, if any, difference. The only thing that will increase the performance in those circumstances is more CPU cycles. But, if it's any comfort, we all have the same problem to one degree or another :-( .TripNorthwood 2.2a at 2.72Ghz Abit TH7II-R512MB Samsung 40ns PC800Gainward GF4 Ti4200 300/57030.30's DX8.1 WinXP ProInwin case / Enermax 431W PSU3DMark2001SE = 12055http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=4088814

The basic point I see is this. If you plan to run with all sliders maxed and lots of addon scenery, very high-end planes and a bunch of commercial addons, you can pretty much expect low frames on any system regardless of CPU horsepower. FS just wasn't designed to run maxed out with all kinds of flashy addons full of eye-candy on any system. Period. Unless of course you are running something like a 2.4-2.53 Ghz P4 Northwood, 533 FSB and 512k of L2 and 512 MB 1066 Mhz RDRAM. It's possible that in that situation you might experience acceptable frames (anything above 15fps in my personal opinion). I've tested lots of configurations (both Intel and AMD) in the last 6 months in my search for the ultimate flightsim machine and none of the ones I've tested so far had the ability to produce acceptable frames in any of the above situations including Simflyers' sceneries. Especially addon sceneries coupled with PSS or Dreamfleet planes. Tim Kotula

Hi!And thanks for your reply.My configuration is the following:MSI KT3 Ultra mainboard, 512 DDR RAM at 333 mHzand an Athlon XP2000+ 1.73 mHz CPU.My O/S is Windows 98.Do you think another O/S could make any difference (Win 2000 Pro,Windows XP)?Happy for more tips and experience.Best regards from SwedenHans Hermansson

A change of the OS won't make much of a difference Hans. In my case, WinXP pro is actually a litte slower than Win98SE. Others have reported the opposite. But the differences are not great enough to merit much consideration. More CPU power is the only cure.TripNorthwood 2.2a at 2.72Ghz Abit TH7II-R512MB Samsung 40ns PC800Gainward GF4 Ti4200 300/57030.30's DX8.1 WinXP ProInwin case / Enermax 431W PSU3DMark2001SE = 12055http://service.madonion.com/compare?2k1=4088814