Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GoombungeeSniper

How do you use a flight simulator

Recommended Posts

Hello, I'm posting here because I am wondering what FS I should buy. I have a Sempron 3300 1 gig ram and about to upgrade vid card to best AGP I can get which is only $150.I was thinking I should maybe buy MS 2004 second hand due to the limits of my hardware. I think that multiplayer is something that I consider most important along with realistic airports ..well realistic everything.Do both x-plane and MSFS use multiplayer in much the same way ? Does one offer a better multiplayer experience over the other ?Does x-plane 9 require more computing power than MS2004 ?

Share this post


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

Hello, I'm posting here because I am wondering what FS I should buy. I have a Sempron 3300 1 gig ram and about to upgrade vid card to best AGP I can get which is only $150.I was thinking I should maybe buy MS 2004 second hand due to the limits of my hardware. I think that multiplayer is something that I consider most important along with realistic airports ..well realistic everything.Do both x-plane and MSFS use multiplayer in much the same way ? Does one offer a better multiplayer experience over the other ?Does x-plane 9 require more computing power than MS2004 ?
I don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That system is 5 year old technology, I would suspect neither one will perform well without some drastic scenery and feature compromises! You really need to think about upgrading your primary system if you really want to enjoy simming!! That being said FS2004 (If you can still get it) would probably be your best shot! I'm not sure how well X-Plane would perform on that system, but you would definitely have performance issues with FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,For around the $150 mark you should be able to get something like the ATI HD 4850 I have, which is more than capable of running X-Plane. Your bottlenecks are more likely to centre around your processor and main memory. My previous system was a 2.0 GHz core duo which I would guess would be broadly comparable to your Sempron given that X-Plane is mostly bound to a single processor, so it should be able to cope satisfactorily (though a memory boost would probably help - mine had 2Gb).When it comes to realistic airports the default scenery in X-Plane is severely lacking in that there are no buildings at all for the most part. However, the accuracy of runways etc. is generally pretty good. With MSFS you get buildings though the accuracy of them is debatable and the database of runways etc. tends to be a little out of date. Where MSFS scores heavily is in the commercial add-on department where there are a lot of third party add ons which overcome the limitations of the simulator out of the box. The problem there being the fact that they are commercial and it seems you're on a tight budget. When it comes to freeware add ons there seems to be little to choose between the two these days, though the vast majority of X-Plane add ons are in fact free to download including many conversions of MSFS scenery packs.Multiplayer I don't do much so I cant really comment.As to processor power, it depends. Both sims seem to be processor bound to a large extent. X-Plane uses more power to model flight characteristics than MSFS while MSFS seems to use more processor power for other tasks - in the end it would seem to be pretty much a toss up.As to realism in general - it's a purely subjective call. I think most would agree that X-Plane has the edge over mountains and MSFS has the edge over urban areas when it comes to scenery. When it comes to flight model it's up in the air (pun intended) - Both sims have their fans and both have strengths and weaknesses. My personal preference is for X-Plane but YMMV. One thing though, X-Plane is still being developed at a rate of knots while FS2004 is pretty much a dead duck when it comes to development which for me would make X-Plane the better choice.Either way, pick the one which you, personally, find the most fun and enjoy yourself - It's what it's all about :)Setanta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Does x-plane 9 require more computing power than MS2004 ?
Yes, significantly. With a Sempron and 1 GB RAM you can pretty much forget about running FSX and (probably even more so) X-Plane 9 at any decent settings, even with a powerful video card, since CPU and RAM would be your bottlenecks at any resolution.FS 2004 would probably run acceptably well on your system though, so it's your best bet.Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that I will stick to MS2004 if I can find a cpy, With regard to multiplayer I think there were/are at least two wys of going about it. With MS2002/2004 you could just select some type of 'Multiplayer' button or you could join a site like avsim.I think you have to file a flight plan when using avsim multiplayer servers. Also you have to obey commands from the 'Authorities'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that I will stick to MS2004 if I can find a cpy, With regard to multiplayer I think there were/are at least two wys of going about it. With MS2002/2004 you could just select some type of 'Multiplayer' button or you could join a site like avsim.I think you have to file a flight plan when using avsim multiplayer servers. Also you have to obey commands from the 'Authorities'.
Probably thinking VATSIM. Either that or nobody's told me about the AVSIM servers :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably thinking VATSIM. Either that or nobody's told me about the AVSIM servers :(
Yep ,I must be refering to VATSIM, actually I thought that VATSIM and AVSIM were competing sites for multiplayer. I am currently bidding on MS2004 at $15.50. I looked up requirments a nd I can easily run MS2004.I have used MS2004 in the past. I was surprised to find it had my home town airport in Toowomba. Well if it wasn't 2004 it was 2002. A town of 100,000 and a very small airport. Not sure what the rating as far as what class of plane can use it, my guess is anything much bigger than a twin engine cherokee(sorry bout spelling) would be pushing it. I remember trying to take off in a jumbo jet from that airport. I dont know if it is even possible because(embarrasing) I couldnt figure out how to start the plane engines let alone try a takeoff :(I jst thought it was outstanding that it had this little airport in it already with no need for addon. But, can you purchase an addon for Queensland Australia that would make the airport and town more realistic ?One more funny thing.... I was working for a fencing contractor, building miles of cattle fencing. My employer had a pilots license(Rob). I told him about my flight sim program MS2002 and we talked about planes etc during smoko breaks.(ie cup of tea time). I explained how I had been trying to fly a De Havilland(again sorry for spelling) and I could not even start it up and taxi on the runway. So anyway he came over to my house after work, and after I started up the sim he had no problem showing me how to start the engines and take off :)After that he was hooked. He bought his own copy of the simulator!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just FYI, the "minimum requirements" on the box for FS9 and FSX will just about run FS respectively with the most basic of settings and low screen resolution. I wouldn't use that recommendation as any indication...That all said, I am sure FS9 will run on your system enough for you for starters. If you get hooked, then you will jump onto the never ending system upgrade train :( All the best!Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites