Best Way to Boost FSX on a New System?

[Flaps30 3]

I waited over 2 years, (since the Avsim Convention in Virginia) and finally got a system I was told would let FSX show its stuff. I got a Gateway FX6800-01e system with 3 gig DDR3 ram, an Intel Core i7-920 2.6 ghz. processor, and an ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 mb video card. At first I thought I was home free with frames hitting the upper 3os to mid 20s and even the 40s at times, then I noticed the scenery was pretty dull. Sure enough, FSX configured most sliders on the low end or left side with several boxes unchecked for better performance. When I tried maxing them out, I was lucky to hit 15-20 fps and even got down to the singles with lots of chop over downtown Chicago. I settled on sliders at about half to 3/4 to the right but she still bogs down into the singles at times. My computer apparently can take a second video card to crossfire with the current card. I know little about this, but does anyone know it it makes a big enough difference in FS performance and is it worth it? Or is it better to add more memory for better perf and to get those frames smooth. I can't afford too much after getting a new system, so which choice is the better way to go?? Thanks. Regards, Tom

[bobbyjack 61]

Hardly anyone can max everything. Try turning AI traffic to below 50%. Turn down water a few notches. Most other things you can leave fairly high. SLI won't help FSX. To get much better, you're going to have to overclock. Also some folks have luck locking fps below thirty.Bob

[Guest rdg]

I waited over 2 years, (since the Avsim Convention in Virginia) and finally got a system I was told would let FSX show its stuff. I got a Gateway FX6800-01e system with 3 gig DDR3 ram, an Intel Core i7-920 2.6 ghz. processor, and an ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 mb video card. At first I thought I was home free with frames hitting the upper 3os to mid 20s and even the 40s at times, then I noticed the scenery was pretty dull. Sure enough, FSX configured most sliders on the low end or left side with several boxes unchecked for better performance. When I tried maxing them out, I was lucky to hit 15-20 fps and even got down to the singles with lots of chop over downtown Chicago. I settled on sliders at about half to 3/4 to the right but she still bogs down into the singles at times. My computer apparently can take a second video card to crossfire with the current card. I know little about this, but does anyone know it it makes a big enough difference in FS performance and is it worth it? Or is it better to add more memory for better perf and to get those frames smooth. I can't afford too much after getting a new system, so which choice is the better way to go?? Thanks. Regards, Tom

Hi Tom. I have a pretty good setup myself, and the first thing I did was follow Nicks recommendation. You can find them here -http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=239962&hl=xgraphicsThey really helped me. The actual link to the guide is imbedded in Nicks post which is the first post in the link above. I gave you this link first as there are some other posts below his that may be helpful.RegardsBob G

[Guest PlanePlanter]

I too think overclocking is somewhat the answer as well...also make sure that DDR3 is running in triple channel mode. My system is a homebuilt i7 920 OC'd to 3.4Ghz with 6 gigs of DDR3 in triple channel (Vista 64bit) and a XFX Geforce 285 video card. I'm locked at 25 fps and it holds pretty steadily with most sliders far to the right in most locations. I get 16-20fps in NewYork City. Also have GEX and UTX installed.

[Guest Alphahawk3]

I waited over 2 years, (since the Avsim Convention in Virginia) and finally got a system I was told would let FSX show its stuff. I got a Gateway FX6800-01e system with 3 gig DDR3 ram, an Intel Core i7-920 2.6 ghz. processor, and an ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 mb video card. At first I thought I was home free with frames hitting the upper 3os to mid 20s and even the 40s at times, then I noticed the scenery was pretty dull. Sure enough, FSX configured most sliders on the low end or left side with several boxes unchecked for better performance. When I tried maxing them out, I was lucky to hit 15-20 fps and even got down to the singles with lots of chop over downtown Chicago. I settled on sliders at about half to 3/4 to the right but she still bogs down into the singles at times. My computer apparently can take a second video card to crossfire with the current card. I know little about this, but does anyone know it it makes a big enough difference in FS performance and is it worth it? Or is it better to add more memory for better perf and to get those frames smooth. I can't afford too much after getting a new system, so which choice is the better way to go?? Thanks. Regards, Tom

From what I read about the M/B in your PC you cannot overclock...and the PC probably came with a load of trash ware...meaning a lot of useless software loaded on it and it is probably starting up when you boot up the PC. You need to get rid of all the stuff that is not needed....and you already have the link to Nicks tuning guide....which is very useful. Even without clocking you should be able to do better than what you are showing. I don't know about your video card as I don't know anything about ATI but I would suggest you having 6gig of ram.....all I have read shows no gain at all with dual video cards with FSX. Was communicating with a guy who had a custom built rig with an 940....clocked, and it was giving bad performance with FSX and everyone kept telling him to get rid of one of the video cards and when he did his FPS almost tripled. No posts I have seen has shown any improvement with a dual card setup. Eliminate the unnecessary startups from your PC...follow Nicks setup guide and you should see some improvement. Regards

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

From what I read about the M/B in your PC you cannot overclock...and the PC probably came with a load of trash ware...meaning a lot of useless software loaded on it and it is probably starting up when you boot up the PC. You need to get rid of all the stuff that is not needed....and you already have the link to Nicks tuning guide....which is very useful. Even without clocking you should be able to do better than what you are showing. I don't know about your video card as I don't know anything about ATI but I would suggest you having 6gig of ram.....all I have read shows no gain at all with dual video cards with FSX. Was communicating with a guy who had a custom built rig with an 940....clocked, and it was giving bad performance with FSX and everyone kept telling him to get rid of one of the video cards and when he did his FPS almost tripled. No posts I have seen has shown any improvement with a dual card setup. Eliminate the unnecessary startups from your PC...follow Nicks setup guide and you should see some improvement. Regards

I shudder every time I read that someone bought an HP, Dell, Gateway, etc., since they have so much proprietary hardware and a BIOS that usually can't be tweaked, then on top of it probably paid an arm an a leg for it. I fell into the same trap when I first got FS9 years ago. I bought a Dell P4 2.53ghz, only to find out later that I couldn't upgrade much else other than the RAM and video card, and when I wanted to upgrade the video card I couldn't even do that because the power supply couldn't be upgraded to one with more voltage.Tom, I have a system that is not too much better than yours but with the right setup you can probably get better performance. Use Nicks guide or if you want someone to set up your OS and FSX for you, contact FS-GS. I used FS-GS. The service took about 5 - 6 hours to complete and with the system in my sig I can run FSX with no problem with most everything maxed, minus bloom and lens flare, and it beats the heck out of FS9 in the ee candy department.Good luck.

[Guest jaskanFactor]

1- I find having LIGHT BLOOM on will cut my frame rate in half in an instant, trying turning it off to get more FPS2 - Also i recently discovered that as far as my system is concerned i get much better frames rates if i set frames to unlimited, I never knew running at higher frames actually means you see the the joystick control and feedback from plane is far more realistic, at higher frame rates.3 - I am one of those that use ultimate defrag to put FSX textures, scenary, autogen and related files on edge of disk, also improves FPS. I think the effect of this is more like, you get smoother performance at lower frames. The most telling effect is that, when i switch from simrate x16 or so down to lower simrate or normal, FSX reloads its texture files by far much more quickly, than before moving graphic files to edge of disc. I still think its worth putting textures on disk edge even if you have dedicated HDD for FSXa - Textures folderb - Scenary folderc - Autogen folderd - effects foldere - etcMOST IMPORTANT OF ALL, LIGHT BLOOM CUTS FRAMES IN HALF, too expensive for the pleasure of light bloom effect

[Peter Clemenko 0]

The biggest problems I have with FSX are lack of true multicore and 64 bit support (as in let a quad core really show it's stuff), along with lack of SLI and Crossfire support...

[Flaps30 3]

I waited over 2 years, (since the Avsim Convention in Virginia) and finally got a system I was told would let FSX show its stuff. I got a Gateway FX6800-01e system with 3 gig DDR3 ram, an Intel Core i7-920 2.6 ghz. processor, and an ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 mb video card. At first I thought I was home free with frames hitting the upper 3os to mid 20s and even the 40s at times, then I noticed the scenery was pretty dull. Sure enough, FSX configured most sliders on the low end or left side with several boxes unchecked for better performance. When I tried maxing them out, I was lucky to hit 15-20 fps and even got down to the singles with lots of chop over downtown Chicago. I settled on sliders at about half to 3/4 to the right but she still bogs down into the singles at times. My computer apparently can take a second video card to crossfire with the current card. I know little about this, but does anyone know it it makes a big enough difference in FS performance and is it worth it? Or is it better to add more memory for better perf and to get those frames smooth. I can't afford too much after getting a new system, so which choice is the better way to go?? Thanks. Regards, Tom

Thanks for all the advice guys. I really appreciate it. I have heard about MS-GS and will check it out along with Nick's advice. By the way, how do I overclock (do it myself?) and how do I enable Triple Channel Mode? I think I might have light bloom enabled, so I will check that out also. Updating the ram sounds a lot easier and more beneficial (and probably cheaper too) than doubleing the video card. Regards, Tom

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

Thanks for all the advice guys. I really appreciate it. I have heard about MS-GS and will check it out along with Nick's advice. By the way, how do I overclock (do it myself?) and how do I enable Triple Channel Mode? I think I might have light bloom enabled, so I will check that out also. Updating the ram sounds a lot easier and more beneficial (and probably cheaper too) than doubleing the video card. Regards, Tom

If your Gateway is like my old Dell overclocking will probably be out of the question as the BIOS will probably not have the options to change the FSB, multiplier, and voltages. Also you will probably need a CPU cooler if your going to get a decent clock going to avoid burning up your CPU. Another problem is that the case your Gateway came with may not have the room for a CPU cooler, plus the BIOS problem I mentioned above. A lot of us on here have systems that we either built ourselves or had built. In my case I went to a parts retailer in Dallas, picked out the components and for about $100 bucks had them build it. With the help of a few on this board I did the overclock myself. When you do what I did you can get a motherboard that has a BIOS that lets you change the variables that an overclock encompases like the FSB, multiplier, voltgages then you can do what you want to achieve your desired cpu speed. I got the system built in my sig last April for around $1800. You could probably built a sytem like mine or even better now for less since a lot of retailers are discounting product due to economic conditions. Even with my system being almost a year old I can run FSX with most everything maxed out, minus bloom and lense flare and maintain high FPS and no blurries. Perhaps you could return your Gateway if its within the return period, get your refund and build or have built a better system than you can OC. BTW, from what I have read and understand, under normal conditions with one monitor, two video cards wont help you so don't waste money on that.

[Guest sillyeagle]

A few things:That's an OEM system, so don't worry about overclocking, as you won't be able to being you wont find the needed options in an OEM BIOS. The fact you have 3GB of RAM tells you you're running in triple channel mode, so don't worry about that either. If you were in dual channel you would have an even amount, but an odd nubmer is triple channel. When choosing your settings make sure bloom is off, make sure water is no higher than Mid 2.x, make sure ground scenery shadows is off, set your cloud draw distance to 60mi, and turn off aircraft self shadows. As far as AI and traffic goes, I fly with all AI turned off given the performance hit is causes, so if you don't need it shut it down. When it comes to autogen I find the best balance of visuals and performance is to set your in-game slider to Very Dense, and add the following autogen tweak in your fsx.cfg:

[TERRAIN] TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=2000TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=1700

I would also recommend these cfg tweaks. Add bufferpools at the end of the file, the other one is already there, just boost it to 120, which seems to work well on i7 systems.

[DISPLAY]TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=120[BUFFERPOOLS]PoolSize=50000000

[Guest byoungblood]

The biggest problems I have with FSX are lack of true multicore and 64 bit support (as in let a quad core really show it's stuff), along with lack of SLI and Crossfire support...

If you run FSX in a 64 bit OS, it will see as much memory as you have installed, provided you are running SP2 or you have enabled the 2GB+ memory tweak. I'm not even sure if SLI was widely available when FSX was released. But both of those are the real reason why I lament that MS has scrapped FS. I'm sure true multi core CPU, multiple GPU, and true 64 bit support were probably on the agenda for the next version of FS.

[vgbaron 3,586]

Flaps30 - do yourself a favor - just follow Nick's guide TO THE LETTER and you will get some great results with your system as is. As has been said, you can't clock that canned system but there are a few things you can do that help.If you haven't already, Googler a program called PCDecrapifier ( yes, that's the name) - you can run it and it will assist you in removing most of the junk that comes on a new system.Follow Nicks guide.With all due respect to other posters, everyone has their favorite tweak that they say is a MUST have - but each system is different. For example, I do not use Bufferpools because after tweaking and geting the setup just right the BP setting caused issues. If your system is set right you don't need most of the "old" terrain tweaks. Autogen, light bloom, water and traffic are your main frame killers.With your system tweaked properly you should be able to get 20+ FPS with high sliders and smooth performance.Good luck!Vic

[Papy_Pegase 0]

I waited over 2 years, (since the Avsim Convention in Virginia) and finally got a system I was told would let FSX show its stuff. I got a Gateway FX6800-01e system with 3 gig DDR3 ram, an Intel Core i7-920 2.6 ghz. processor, and an ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 mb video card. At first I thought I was home free with frames hitting the upper 3os to mid 20s and even the 40s at times, then I noticed the scenery was pretty dull. Sure enough, FSX configured most sliders on the low end or left side with several boxes unchecked for better performance. When I tried maxing them out, I was lucky to hit 15-20 fps and even got down to the singles with lots of chop over downtown Chicago. I settled on sliders at about half to 3/4 to the right but she still bogs down into the singles at times. My computer apparently can take a second video card to crossfire with the current card. I know little about this, but does anyone know it it makes a big enough difference in FS performance and is it worth it? Or is it better to add more memory for better perf and to get those frames smooth. I can't afford too much after getting a new system, so which choice is the better way to go?? Thanks. Regards, Tom

hello Tom !It seems you forget to give your FSX config.Have you installed FSX-SP1 : SP1 gives you enhancement in FPS around 30 / 40%."A contrario" FSX-SP2 degrades your performance and introduces stuttering and smearing effects. Pierre N

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

hello Tom !It seems you forget to give your FSX config.Have you installed FSX-SP1 : SP1 gives you enhancement in FPS around 30 / 40%."A contrario" FSX-SP2 degrades your performance and introduces stuttering and smearing effects. Pierre N