(MY APPOLOGIES THIS SHOULD BE IN THE HARDWARE SUBFORUM BUT I DONT KNOW HOW TO MOVE IT)Hi guys,I

Try the unlimited frame rate setting.

>(MY APPOLOGIES THIS SHOULD BE IN THE HARDWARE SUBFORUM BUT I>DONT KNOW HOW TO MOVE IT)>Don't worry, it will probably get moved>I

Just over sixty years ago, one would need a computer the size of a large office building to run programmes that would be laughable compared to what a pocket scientic calculator does today, the fact is, that it is amazing that one can run something like FSX on a portable device. Best and Warm RegardsAdrian Wainer

>Now, fair enough, 15fps with sliders maxed out I can

Ok guys, thanks for the answers. I thought it was clear that my frame rate slider is set to unlimited....Agreed a desktop tends to out perform a laptop but specs are specs. I understand that 25 fps or so is all we need for fluidity but im not getting any way near that, even at medium display settings and I really dont think I have a low end system here.I guess I expected to run FSX decently with my computer (im not implying 60fps), and so by your answers I understand that this sort of performance is to be expected from FSX.

Unfortunately, I don't think even the hard core uber powerful systems are getting 25FPS...at least not in busy areas....With a system like yours you're really gonna have to balance out your sliders...double time with Vista running....yikes...Don't do the min and max thing.... a couple of settings to start withAI planes and GA set to 50%, boats, cars etc set to about 15%Traffic eats frames tooAutogen off for testing, then bump up to normal or densesee where you go from there

The reviews suggest the 8600 is not much more than a DX10 enabled 7600. I understand the 8800 is being optimized for laptops, but not yet. That might just give it one last gasp against the G92 as a dual core "8950GTX"(?) desktop card. It (then) might finally be efficient enough to work as a single core in a laptop, maybe. But until we have an 8800 to pair up with a 2.2-4Ghz dualie, a 7600 running FSX at 15FPS (maxed-out) sounds about right, whatever they want to call it.

Please read up on the differnces between frame rate on television and frame rate in a video game.It has been well docuemted that in order to get the same effect as televison broadcasts a computer rendered image needs to run at around 60FPS before the eye cannot discern a difference.If you don't believe me, run FS9 locked at 24FPS and then run it at around 60 FPS. A good test is to sit at the side of the runway and watch an AI aircraft land or take off. If you can't tell the difference then you must be blind!!

What I have noticed after playing with settings a lot is that FSX is not making good use of multi core processors. With all the sliders at default sitting on 25R at LAX in the Level-D 767 I get about 10FPS with a Q6800 quad core processor. The thing is in that situation it is only usind one processor at 100% or 25% of all the processing power. If I load the default 172 I gain only 3 FPS. There is 75% more processing power available that it is not using. I have no idea how all this works but it seems like they could shift certain operations to the other processors.One odd thing is that about every 40 seconds it jumps to 75% then 100% for about 20 seconds with a loss of about 3 FPS and then goes back to normal. The usage graph on the three other processors all match eachother exactly. I haven't been able to find out what this is.

From what I have seen and read so far, multi-core only helps a little with FPS (5-10%) and the rest of the activity you see is associated with pre-emptive texture loading. That's as good as it is at this SP1 stage of FSX.Gary

Thats too bad. It seems like there is a lot of potential that is so far untapped. Lets hope it gets better with upcomming updates.

Colin,>>...but can anyone actually tell the difference between 30fps and, say, 60?<.jb[a href=http://exmixer.com/]Windows utility links/FS 2004[/a]Falcon Northwest Mach VIntel C2D Extreme X6800 @ 2.93 GHz4 GB Corsair Twin2Xx2048-8500C5 EPPBFG 8800GTX 768MB1 x Western Digital WD2500KS 250GB SATA II2 x Seagate ST3160811AS 160GB SATA II1 x Seagate ST3300620AS 300GB SATA IIIZalman CNPS7000BLED-ALCU coolerSilverstone 850W 'ZEUS' PS2 x Dell 2407WFPSB X-fi XtremeGamerSony DVD-ROMPlextor external PX-755UF DVD burnerXP Pro SP2

A quick look around the internet and you will see that the 8600 will actually perform worse in DirectX 9 applications (games) then the Go 7950GTX. It