I'm curretly running fs9 w/ a p4 1.5 ghz 512mb sdram pc-133 w/ a geforce4 ti4200 128mb 8x agp. I get around 10 fps normaly and much higher when i am near water. when i am in the vicenity of complicated scenery, flying an aircraft w/ a complex sound, or w/ auto gen set to any thing above normal i get bad fps, like 6-7fps. would adding more ram to my sys increase my frame rates?

Normally I would say yes and it will still make a difference but that is super slow RAM to begin with so I can

Normally, I'd have to differ a bit , and say no. It may well make it a bit smoother, but it's fairly unlikely to have much if any impact on your frame rate. At 1.5 ghz, you are in the lower end of the "usable for 2004" CPU range. I'd start saving for an upgrade of your MB, chip. You can get in the 3.0 ghz range fairly cheaply these days. That would give you a huge improvement. Of course, if you upgrade the MB and chip, you might have to upgrade ram if what you have is unusable on the newer platform. "Usually DDR these days". And of course, a better fully DX9 vid card might be in order if what you have is weak. Actually, I'm not sure how your ti4200 rates in the overall scheme of things...I consider something like a "agp x 8" radeon 9800 pro as the best lower cost solution to good fs9 video. I'm not familiar with all the newer, better, cards, but they usually cost more than the 9800...:( And it's not exactly cheap at nearly $200...I'm tempted to buy a 256 bit 9800SE, cross my fingers, suck in a large amount of air, and see if "hope, pray, etc" the other 4 "normally locked" pixel pipelines are good...:) The SE is about 80 bucks cheaper, and usable as is if it didn't pan out. BUT!!! There is also a 128 bit SE version. AVOID! It's not as good, and can't be opened up to be a full 8 pix pipe "pro" like the 256 version SE can. The 256 SE is the deal of the week, if you get a good undamaged chipset.."no artifacts on any of the normally "locked" other 4 pipelines" :) I may spin the wheel and try one, when I soon buy a card. I'm kind of on a budget right now for buying puter toys...MK

Kingsais, not really too, smoothness yes. Which resolution are you using? All shadows off? Water 'Details' off helps too. On 'Ti' Geforces AFAIK, don't go further than 2xAA. Some use 2xAAQ. Do you use replacement clouds, or FS's 'Simple Clouds?' Perhaps move the traffic slider to the left. 'Default.xml' renamed? If you're at i.e 1024x res, I'ld recommend a 9600pro or XT for your config. Case you're a DIY-er and are anticipating to use 1280x in the somewhat near future, it may be worth while to get a 9800pro straight away? Be more specific about your hw and sw and you'll get more adequate tips. Oh, and welcome to the forum. Good luck and kind regards Jaap P

FWIW on default settings, I get about the same frame rates - any my machine SUCKS, or maybe it doesn't!It was a PIII 500 which I upgraded to a Celeron 1.2; 640 RAM; Diamond Viper 770 Ultra 32; Win98SE.Bought it back in 1998. So if I'm getting the same frame rates you are, or close, then I'd suggest you may have other issues.I've been trying to figure out how to get some more performance out of my old machine and getting tips around here, but I'd think you should be getting higher frame rates now.Andrew

I would recommend spending money on a faster processor.I'm flying a P4-2.8 with 512 Meg and a Ti4200-128 and am totally happy.