"There is no such as stutters issue in Fs2004 with acceptable system."Chris--IMHO, you are simply not in a position to define an acceptable system, or I should say redefine it vs. what Microsoft says an acceptable system is in their product specs. Microsoft says nothing about 98SE being unaccaptable, as an example. You are using your experience, and anecdotal experience from others, to come to that conclusion--and it disagrees with mine. My 98SE is as pristine as they come, and I challenge anyone with credentials equal to mine to prove otherwise. It's been rock solid stable with FS2002 and FS2004, and if I compare notes, I'm in here with fewer issues than many of my XP "peers".To be quite frank, although I can live with the stutters given the new sim's features, I can't live with someone telling me "you have to buy this, this and this" to resolve an issue, given the exact same scenery detail, that didn't exist in FS2002. We're both on the testing team, and I'd be happy to discuss this offline. But I also feel I owe it to those who do use lower end systems--which is a large part of the market each release of MSFS tries to capture--to be honest about its strengths and weakenesses. Those who scale the sim back to scenery detail equal to FS2002 will see peak fps as high as what they're used to, but they will also see stutters which "seem" to be related to both the weather engine and texture processing. But if you set the fps lock at 15fps, sure you won't see them--and many of the users I've interfaced with have done that, and find it alright vs. eye candy. I don't--there's a huge difference between 15fps on final and 25fps.None of us do Microsoft any favors by not having an honest discussion of what we've seen. Telling users to "throw more system" at the problem isn't the solution. Telling users the value in the sim despite the problem is.When I was invited to join the test, I first balked, having a concern that having a lower end system--one I have to have for non MSFS reasons, simply wouldn't service the project. But then I felt I did have value--that I could inspire people to believe--those people with allowances, or mortgages, or medical issues--that they could enjoy the sim given what they have. And they can, but they will see some issues like what I've mentioned. No reason for anyone to come in here and give them an inferiority complex. 'Nuff said

"And these are default clouds setup which need alot of works, I can do better volumetric transition on clouds when you through the clouds."Yes, We all can't wait to see what wonders you can work! Even though I was first disappointed in some of the things(mostly related to weather), I can't wait till FS2k4 is running with wxRE v2.0 with Chris' new and improved SkyWorld(& clouds). It will certinaly help make up for those few shortcomings. Not to mention a newly built system by then should help a lot too! As I've been told from the 2k4 Readme file, FS2k4 removes any Overcast layer if it determines your computer can't handle it.

Argh, Double Post!

John,Thanks for being straight-forward about the stutters. I have a system similar to what Chris described (1.4ghz, only 256 mem) and now I know I should expect stutters and I'll have to cut back on the sliders based on what you and Chris have mentioned. Reading about issues like this before I buy the program will temper the impact of getting the sim with heightened expectations.I'd like to hear more gold copy owners talk about the sim's limitations. There has been so much posted about FS2004 and very little about what may cause the "average" user problems. I'm not asking for people with an agenda to "pile on" and bash the sim. I just want to hear clear, non-editorialized information on how the sim runs for users of all types of systems. Then I'll know whether going out and getting a new CPU, or more memory, or a new graphics board will be the solution rather than throwing more money into a hole and having the same problems. I guess there aren't enough testers on this forum and I'll just have to wait for the product release to get the widespread reviews.Anyway, your post to this topic was the first news from a tester that the sim has some limitations for "lower end" users. I appreciate your candor. ;)Bruce

Hi John, I am not here to tell anybody anything about acceptable for anybody. The acceptable things was considering for me with my preference performance.I saw all your kind of your problem you have been through since the start and I did not saw them with my system, it is my problem?, you have just upgraded your gfroce2 card, to a mid video card like mine gforce4 128 meg and you saw an improvement on various things that's you been complaning before your new card.I am sure if you upgrading your pIII800 t a mid system 2.53Ghz or higher 3.0GHZ 533fsb or 800fsb and motherborad, your post will be completly differents.About Win98 and Winxp, I have been trouble supports near 4 years at the past tons of people with win98, on ton's of things such as blue screen, lack of ressource, from any program opened or running at background, poor performance after 1 hours etc, rebooting, All these problem which I never saw never with Windows Xp compare to win98. And in my personnel home experience, which I do alot of 3d rendering, 16 track music, playing games, at the time when I having win98 require many rebooting system for have an accurare performance , which never happend with Windows XP with many day and days without any rebooting the OsYou will find more organized ressource system and performance with stable environment with Windows Xp than windows 98.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

I upgraded to a GeF 4 as I had no other choice--you know as well as I do that I lost my cooling fan in the GeF 2--and naturally I wanted the most compatible card with my current system. But I think you're missing the issue. Take two identical flights, identical scenery details, and FS2004 stutters. FS2002 doesn't. And to be sure, I even brought FS2004 to the point where scenery detail was far below that in FS2002--I excluded all the buildings, cleared the skies and even eliminated the airports, so that only ground textures were showing and nothing else. Still stutters. And this isn't to knock FS2004--it is to make the point that the issue has nothing to do with a cpu or O/S--other than the way new code interacts with it. A higher power cpu may mask the issue, but there's still an issue. Almost all the high end users lock their systems at 20-25 fps. Remove the lock and they won't see the stutters caused by fps dropping by a third on final, since their peak performance may be 40-50 fps. I can tell you if I lock fps to 15, then I don't see any stutters and I could post such baloney in the forums. The point being, I do "see" them because I'm setting up FS2004 with the expectation that it can at least meet FS2002's performance. FPS counters can lie--they don't tell the whole story.I'm also sorry I don't have the money I thought I could spend on the system you recommend. Over the weekend, I got hit with a $1500 car repair bill. I shouldn't have to give up my car to get rid of stutters. And I won't--I'll live with them and enjoy FS2004 for what it is, and also I can live with the self respect for not trying to gloss over every issue with FS2004 with "Get a better system."-John

One item I've not seen mentioned was windows vs. full screen mode. In FS2002, it actually ran faster in a windowed mode, and the screen was slightly brighter. In full screen mode, it slowed noticeably and the image was quite dark. Would you folks have a comment on that based on your experiences?Thanks,Glenn

GlennThe only time I've noticed a difference, is when my desktop is set at 16-bit color, and FS200x is set at 32-bit color. "Windowing" MSFS in that situation causes it to assume the color depth of the desktop. In FS2004, there's an improvement if the desktop is 16 bit and FS2004 is 32 bit, but not the other way around.The stutter issue I discuss happens even if fps are hovering in the 50's, as they did when I ran FS2004 with textures only, and clear skies. And it happens in windowed vs. full screen mode.Having raised the issue, here's the reasons I'd still get the sim:-Superior and realistic sky color and daytime cloud coloring.-Sky variation, based on date. No two days are the same.-Almost completely new textures. Not more complex, but more realistic.-Clouds that appear off in the distance...-Haze that settles in a valley. What I mean is you can set vis. to 3 miles at a weather station, and if you cap the vis. ceiling at 2000 ft and the surrounding peaks are 3000 ft, from above it takes on a very realistic appearance. Very much like the Great Smokies--if you've ever flown over them, you know what I mean.-Very good "average" fps performance. Usually in the mid-20's, save for the stutters I mention.-Taxiway signs everywhere-Detailed Sky Harbor--my home airport :)-New options to tweak copter flight models-Superior water reflections-Lots of fun aircraft-Very stable, rock solid performance on 98SE and XP-Legacy support for Landclass and photoreal scenery-More consistent (and configurable) A/P G/S tracking-Built in LOD tweaking. If you've used "hacked" driver sets to enjoy clear ground textures in FS2002, FS2004 supports adjustments to the LOD. Along with enabling anisotropy on the vid card side, it allows for textures that are clear beyond reality...-Thunderstorms that look as close to the real thing as I've ever seen. Lightning lights up parts of the cloud and ground, as an example.I'll stop here....fingers are sore from typing :)

Thank you very much for this John :-).Yes, I had my copy of FS2004 ordered a month ago :-hah! From the first images I knew this was going to be a winner. For me, the weather alone was enough to do it (I always fly with real weather, downloaded static (i.e. old from FSMeteo) or dynamic/live), but I'll be really interested to try out the weather themes (sorry, I'm an ex RW pilot of a lot of years - I like to make it really as real as it gets :-) ).I've decided to upgrade my hardware especially for this version. Going to a 3.0 800 Mhz H/T system with the ATI Radeon 9800 and 1 GB Kingston DDR RAM (am using an Intel built in sound board though, so not sure if I will need the SB Audigy or not at this point - comments?). However, after reading the posts from you and Chris, I will go on the assumption that I can expect stutters. As long as it isn't anything like what we were getting in FS2000 when you'd be sliding down final and all of a sudden you'd do a couple of double-takes which would throw your whole approach off, I won't sweat that too much. I agree, with all else you are getting, I can live with this (the ground textures look really superb!). One thing I've seen very little of, and that's being an ex-RW bush pilot, I'll be interested to see how seaplanes react on the water in terms of getting them moving, etc. Also, if you turn all the water detail and reflections off, if it will look something like ice in the winter (I used to replace the water textures with ice textures in 2002, but you still got that damn bobbing up and down on your skis :-) (if I got that in real life, I usually panicked, following which I'd reach for a life jacket :-) )).Anyway, I really appreciate yours and Chris' comments here (I realize they are somewhat divergent about some issues, but that's fine - no sweat on that :-) ). Two weeks to go! Thanks again John.Glenn

"Anyway, I really appreciate yours and Chris' comments here (I realize they are somewhat divergent about some issues, but that's fine - no sweat on that )."And Chris has shown insight of great value. One tip he recently gave improved my performance with AA about 20 pct. My insights are not all scientific either--some are driven by the heart. I know I could expect smoother performance with a higher end cpu, but even buying a new vid card was a stretch--and I only did that after receiving an email suggesting that had I let my fan issue go, fire or board damage could have been the result. Happened to someone who lost a fan on the same GEF/2 model that mine was.Chris also shared his pleasure with the 4200--one bit of advice which really finalized my decision to go with it. Having a BX board, and only a 250W power supply, my choices in modern cards had been limited to the Radeon 9200 or the GEF/4200-TI.... The 4200 is outstanding, stable, and was the best $90 ever spent. I'm glad I had the chance to grab one while I could....

Thank you for your honesty John, nice to see at least someone's being honest about the issues. :) I shouldn't have a problem with my system, it's a P4 2.56 with 1GB RAM and a GeForce 4 Ti 4600... I'll do a restore anyways as soon as I get 2004 to get the most performance out of it. I lock my FPS at 15, since I'm all for detail. :)Cheers,Daniel P.

Hi John, "Having a BX board, and "Your AGP use 2x AGP or the standard 4x?Did you have the exact models of the motherboard, I want to see the spec.What is your agp aperture in the BIOS ? I set mine to 64 megsI don't know about Win98 with fs2004, but maybe fs2004 was more designed to use with Windows Xp with the internal memory location on various things vs fs2004Your sound card is what ?In the Direct control panel, (directx.cpl) I always turn the sound accelerator slider to left, this can reduce the stuttersThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

Thanks Chris...You won't find any new info on the BX MB's--my model is the Iwill BD100+. They are so old, they don't even follow the AGP 2.0 spec, and max speed is AGP 2X. But it has never offered any application a problem.Believe me, if I hadn't tried all the common troubleshooting tips, I wouldn't have mentioned the issue--it wouldn't be fair and it would betray the trust placed in us as testers. And part of it is my profession--what I do every day I'm in the office--fix the unfixable when it comes to workstations and servers. Doesn't mean I have all the answers, but I do know when I've covered all the bases. I've covered them here.I know full well how one sim can run very well, and another can exploit some of the choke points of a system. I've played with the AGP apr., the sound accel. Items that haven't been an issue before, and having tried them anyway in this case, they have no effect here. This is not the type of "system messed up" stutter. It is reproducible, and others have noted it with other MB's, and faster systems. But you'd never see it unless you lock your fps at a level above where the stutter happens. If you run the sim at 15 fps, you'd never see it, because the stutter is masked by the low lock. I bet if I ran FS2002 at 40 fps, I'd see the same thing. I think FS2004 is just a sim that does more, as you say, that may just demand a higher cpu. Perhaps what it does isn't even obvious on the screen--we know as an example that the autopilot has been enhanced. Buildings are more complex even at the simplest levels--just look at the airport gas stations. All that takes cycles from the cpu. And I won't lose any more sleep over it--I deal with it enough in the daytime in my job...Thanks for the suggestions, but I think I'm trying to make a P3/800 act like a P4.... Won't happen...

well my friend has a similiar system to mine and he told me he gets stutters on turns, this was in the Cessna VC default plane.

Hi John, Did you try to wipe out your Hardisk and reinstall everything?, This was solved the stutters for one users that`s have this problem, probably because of old driver still reside somewhere that`s made problems/conflict or simply corrupted files or other things related to the Os.One thing I did and before to be sure for not having problem with the OS and old driver etc, is to install fs2004 with a fresh formated system environment, having a hard drive fragmentation after..Also the radius config things in the cfg and external tweaker program which I don`t use, may add this problems on specific area/time.If it was a real problems on this issue, you will notice millions of post and cry you know where.Ps: I lock my frame rate to 20 fps.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs