Sign in to follow this  
Guest nealw

Conquest II or Cheyenne

Recommended Posts

I'm going to try and buy myself one airplane so I need to get it right the first time. I have a 1.5GHZ box with 128MB Nvidia board. 640MB of ram. I'm leaning towards the Cheyenne but Aerosoft/Digital Aviation recommend 2GHZ or better. I meet their other requirements. The only requirement listed by Flight One is the OS and I meet that. Any chance some of you have both or if some of you have these and lower end rigs like mine you could give me some advice? Thanks!Neal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Neal,both are great twins. However, considering your system specs, I have a feeling you would struggle (now thats a relative term ;-) with the DA Cheyenne. An absolutely wonderful airplane, nothing at all wrong with it. As a matter of fact, it's one of my favorite.I don't have the ConquestII so I can't speak to it. I did want to mention, as beautiful as the DA Cheyenne is, it will most likely tax your system, but then again it depends on what frames you expect and how fluent you like your sim overall.Hope this helps a bit,Petehttp://members.aol.com/pzsoulman/myhomepage/logo.gifGIGABYTE Light 3D Galaxy II Liquid CoolingENERMAX Galaxy EGA850EWL ATX 850W Power SupplyNVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX Intel MoboCore 2 Duo E6700 1066MHz FSB 4M shared L2 Cache LGA 775CORSAIR XMS2 2GB SDRAM DDR2 800GeForce 8800GTX 768MB 384-bit GDDR3 PCI ExpressSBlaster X-Fi XtremeMusic 7.12 x Western Digital Raptor 150GB 10000 RPM 16MB Cache SATA Raid01 Seagate Barracuda 320GB 7200RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/sWinXP Home SP2CH Yoke/Pedals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neal...If your looking for a twin turboprop you might consider the AFG King Air 300. It's freeware. Nice VC, sound, virtual cabin, and quite a few repaints here in the library. Now I'm not sure if your system will run it smooth but it's freeware so nothing to lose.Regards, Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I'm guessing I'd be unhappy with the performance from what you're saying. Thanks for your input. >Neal,>>both are great twins. However, considering your system specs,>I have a feeling you would struggle (now thats a relative term>;-) with the DA Cheyenne. An absolutely wonderful airplane,>nothing at all wrong with it. As a matter of fact, it's one of>my favorite.>>I don't have the ConquestII so I can't speak to it. I did want>to mention, as beautiful as the DA Cheyenne is, it will most>likely tax your system, but then again it depends on what>frames you expect and how fluent you like your sim overall.>>Hope this helps a bit,>Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I'll take a look. I really want something beyond my systems capability though. :) >Neal...If your looking for a twin turboprop you might>consider the AFG King Air 300. It's freeware. Nice VC,>sound, virtual cabin, and quite a few repaints here in the>library. Now I'm not sure if your system will run it smooth>but it's freeware so nothing to lose.>Regards, Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own the Conquest, the Cheyenne, and also the AW KingAir. My favorite is the DA Cheyenne, hands-down. I like both the well-developed FDE and also the complete systems modeling. The Conquest's FDE has a bug that allows it to climb at 700fpm continuously while the airspeed drops to stall with flaps extended. There's an easy fix if you look back in their forums. One note on the Cheyenne, especially given your system: it will drag your frames down considerably when switching views. The fix for this is to change all the really massive exterior texture files from huge 32 bit MB files to DXT files. Since I did that load times went from 3-4 sec to instantaneous (from a human perspective), and the frames went back to my locked value. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mike.Is documentation included that tells how to change the textures included with the Cheyenne?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheyenne for sure. It is a far more involved and realistic simulation. The Conquest was good, but it's one of the first addons for FS9 from Flight1, and its age is starting to show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I agree with other posters the Cheyenne hands down over the Conquest. Great systems modeling and a sound set that rivals the Majestic Dash8.Bruceb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Is documentation included that tells how to change the textures included with the Cheyenne?" No. this is something myself and others discovered on our own. You'll need a program which works with textures. I use a flight sim specific program that you can get from http://fly.to/mwgfx/. Very easy procedure: just open up the file and then resave it in the format you want. The program is designed for aircraft painters but I never use it for such being very artistically challenged. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to be honest to you. With your system you gonna regret the Cheyenne even with scaled down textures. You're not only running it in fair weather above the great flat and empty midwest are you? The Conquest is older and less complicated so it should run more smooth on your system. I also had good performance with FSD twins like the Seneca V and Chieftain and the awesome Cessna Skymaster 337Rob "Holland&Holland" de Vries http://kewlceo.com/forums/style_emoticons/...crazy_pilot.gif"To go up, pull the stick back. To go down, pull the stick back harder"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cheyenne is IMHO one of the best out there - I have flown nothing else since I got it - but one problem with it is that the cockpit side views are in fact the VC.So if you are flying from the 2D panel, every time you look out of the window, there will ba a long, long delay as the VC textures load.The VC is fully clickable, so the answer is to fly from the VC all the time, once they are in memory you are OK, but obviously then FPS becomes an issue. I have a 3.6 ghz Pentium 4 with 3gb of RAM and a Nvidia 7950GT with 512 MB. I can get 25 fps + average in clear weather from the Cheyenne VC but I wouldn't be too hopeful your system would do that satisfactorily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I think it probably would tax my system further than I'd be happy with. I was just given the Level D 767 and I'm pretty immersed in it right now. It works well on my system and is providing me with many enjoyable flights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... I never use the VC and my side views from the 2d cockpit load extremely fast since I changed the texture sizes. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would stick with freeware aircraft, there is so much good stuff out there with people like Milton Shupe. Then save your money for ugrading your computer. Throw a $50 saddle on a $10 horse and you still have a $10 horse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Level D 767 works fine for you the Cheyenne will as well. I have a medium spec system and it works just fine, not sure why people say otherwise. For 2D users you can disable the VC for better performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.I'm torn. I may buy it and just see how it does. I'd would use the VC which I can't use with the Level D more with the Cheyenne but like you said it'll have to be disabled if I get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this