Sign in to follow this  
Guest Offmysix

A breath of fresh air!

Recommended Posts

I went and did a flight in 2K2 tonight to remind myself what sharp antialiased textures look like with smooth frame rates. I am currently baffled as to why I cant run 2K4 smoothly for any length of time. I have sliders backed way off and not using AA at all and I still see stutter and pretty large frame rate fluctiation even with Chris's clouds and some other texture fixes. I have tried a lot of stuff and it seems something here is causing a huge bottleneck but I cant figure out what it is. What is bugging me is the fact that i cant even approach similar settings to 2K2 with fs9 as a lot of other folks are saying they can.It will run pretty well most of the time, but i get some cripling one to two second long stutters which can drop the frames from the mid to high twenties (locked 28) right down to almost single digits. It seems to happen on approach to even small airports a good bit. Anyway, im not gonna sweat it much, it looks great, but I smell a new video card in my future soon. GF4 4200 128mb card just cant cut the mustard in this sim. Oh Im running a p4@2.9ghz, 512mb ddr and WIN98se.Runs everything else flawlesslyand smooooooth!Hornit

Share this post


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

In a way I'm glad to read these sorts of posts. There could not be a bigger let down than installing the sim on Friday this week and being unexpectantly disappointed. At least there has been enough things - good and bad said about this sim - so that I'm not expecting any miracles. And this time, unlike the last 4 MS sims I've bought, I'm not upgrading any hardware for this one. If I can't get it to run as smoothly as FS2002, then I'll be staying with FS2002.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornit, I concur. After all the tweeks I've done including Chris' new cloud textures, I'm finally getting frames in the 20s with the exception of those 1-2 second pauses that seem to occur whenever I am turning (taxiing and flying). I'm at the point of looking at going from Win98Se to XP Home and adding 512 Mb of RAM or getting a new video card to replace my almost brand new MSI GeF4200Ti 128Mb card. I don't know if I can justify the cost of either/both (around $250/$450).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it is the Ti 4200.. I have one as well, and FS2004 definitely outperforms FS2k2 on my system..Have you turned down water effects and clouds for a fair comparison?Clouds definitely cut into performance.. try custom clouds, Cirrus (few) at 10-12,000 feet, 50 miles visibility.When I go back to FS2002, I find less attractive scenery and lower framerates..The only difference with your setup, is that I'm running WinXP..Before this system, I used the same Ti4200 on a Celeron 1000 with Win98SE and flew with 1024x768 to keep fps up.. With your power, you should be able to handle 1280x960, but try the lower resolution and see..My rig: P4-2.4 512 Meg PC2700, Ti4200-128 with 30.82 drivers.Framerate locked at 25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts exactly. I've even - for the first time in years - lost interest in downloading stuff for it. Roll on FS2006! Meanwhile, FS2002 DEFINITELY stays. All those add-ons, all those tweaks; I'll keep trying with FS2004, but by golly it's frustrating. Love the autogen, clouds, trees, colours ... but WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FLY.Mark "Dark Moment" Beaumonthttp://www.swiremariners.com/newlogo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that XP + 512 Mb more PC2100 SDRAM is my answer. Probably not my video card if I can just get the 30.82 drivers installed in place of my 43.45s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve-Go ahead and change to XP- It will be worth itHere I have the same Video card as you.I've got Dual Boot - WinME and XPpro,with a copy of FS2004 in each OS.FS2004 in XP consistently outperforms the WinME setup.In the XP setup I can run with pretty much everything maxed and still get20+ FPS in complex scenery situations and mostly run at 30(locked)- this is after 10 days of tweaking on both copies.The WinME setup is always 2 to 5 frames slower no matter what I do. For reference my system(not the fastest - but not too slow)--AMD Athlon 2000XP (@133/133)ECS K7S5A Mobo 3.1 :04/29/02 Rev BiosSiS 735 Chipset Rev 12 x 256mb DDR RAMGeforce4 Ti-4200-8x 128mb DDR AGP(not overclocked)AGP 1.16 WHQL . 4403 Detonator XP Drivers2 x Maxtor 40GB HDD (7200rpm)LG 8x4x32 BurnerLG 52xDirect X 9.0 final Windows ME/ Windows XP pro dual bootBIOS Settings- DRAM Timing Ultra. CAS Latency 3T,RAS ACtive 6T,RAS Precharge 3TL1 Cache Enabled.L2 Cache Enabled.Sys BIOS Cache Disabled.DRAM Drive Slew Rating - FastDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the answer to smooth performance with FS9 is having XP as your operating system and at least a 128MB video card.FS9 runs better and smoother for me than FS2002. No more "jumpy" a/c movement when in spot plane view. I'm getting 20+ fps even with dense 3D clouds and speaking of clouds, they are fantastic, FS2002 doesn't even come close. And next time you fly into LAX, check out the airport, it looks like the real thing in FS9.P4 2.0a512MB RAMXPNvidia FX 5600 Ultra w/128MB RAMBob K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd try that, but can't as FS2002 is gone! LOLJim I feel for ya, it baffles me that some, including myself, have great performance and even on an older system and others are having nightmares with it.The main reason I uninstalled FS2002 was the performance, in order to make it look good I had to install all the 3rd party addons and design my own scenery, YET this is what ruins the performance in the sim, catch 22. With the autogen slider cranked I am able to enjoy the enahanced scenery, objects, buildings, trees, etc, in FS9 without the need to add much at all and get better performance than I did with FS2002. I did a VA flight this morning in AK and I turned on the FPS counter for a second out of curiosity, it pegged 38 fps a few times, I can't remember the last time, if ever, I saw that in FS2002.I really hope you get this worked out!!Regards, Michaelhttp://mysite.verizon.net/res052cd/mybannercva1.jpgCalVirAir International VAwww.calvirair.comCougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviationwww.cgrmtnhelos.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread. I have XP as my main OS (which can be installed on any HD partition- mine's on D:), and still have Win98 on C:. I run 1G of PC-2100 with XP, using an ATI 8500Pro card and a 1.8G P4. I've tried removing one stick of RAM (Win98 doesn't like more than 512M), then re-booting into Win98, where I have another instance of FS9 installed. I see many more stutters in Win98, and I've tried booting into XP with only the 512M installed and it's still better than 98. It's strange that XP is actually slower (by 2fps for me), due to the processes running I guess- but the sim appears to be much more fluid- maybe the memory management? Bruce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm pretty sure something is not going ok with your system.You should be able to run FS2004 smoothly. My advice is tto try and install new drivers... I'd try the old 30.82 and maybe the newer 44.23, recommended by MS. If that fails, go to DXDiag and check if everything is ok there (pay special attention to AGP Texturing).That's all I can think of...But PLEASE, don't go rushing out for a new card before sorting this out...it seems to me that if you don't solve this now you'll have the same problem with the new card.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/30195.jpg___________________________________________________ Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It boggles the mind! For what it's worth I've got a lowly P4 1.4 with only 256 MB PC800 RAM using WindowsME and FS9 performs better for me than FS2002.Sure I've tweaked the sliders, but none are below half way and some are even maxed.Regards,Boone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave! You have a 2000XP and 512 RAM and a Ti-4200 and you've maxed your sliders and have 30 fps in FS9? Wow! I have the same setup but a 2400+ (I even have the same mobo) and I sit around 8-12 fps under cloudy skies with my sliders way back :(I'm gonna print out your sig there and check out your BIOS settings on my rig. You got any miracle tips?All the best,Greghttp://members.rogers.com/gmoffatt/images/ERJ_CRT.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, to be fair, this sim runs ok and I can display a lot of the goodies, even clouds just not a whole lot of them. Also I tried the 30.82's the 41.07, and 44.03, no discernable difference noted in any of them. 44.03 stays as it appears slightly more stable/smooth here. I use 2XFSAA now and 2X Aniso, running at 1280x1024(1024 and 1152 work slightly better but with some jaggies) The only thing I have a small problem with is the frame rate is all over the place. I can be flying along witha smooth, no very steady 29-30 (as long as Im not in dense scenery/AI) and it will do this hiccup thing and go down to 18-20 for about half a second. I only see this if I stare at the frame rate, but I can notice it fairly often while doing things close to the airport while hand flying. Its not a showstopper, but I truly dont believe its my system at this point. I think its the sim. If I set the frames up high at like unlimited say, then I see anywhere from the 20's right on up to the limits. My system WILL run good frames it just aint smooth. I also have noticed that it appears to me there is a different type of graphic engine, which is not real conducive to AA and there is a good bit more shimmer going on in similar situations. I have also noticed others with this complaint. It kind of reminds me of CFS2 and CFS3 in a lot of ways. I submit that most of this is happening to others if you pay attention carefully to the frame rate counter and not ooh and ahh so much at the graphics. For the record 2002 runs extremely smooth with TONS of add-ons etc here and frame rate locked around 30. I have ALL the good add-ons for it. I would like to know how to set up a dual boot with WIN XP here, I like 98 for a lot of things and would think trying XP is a good idea, but the thought of the backups is killing me!!!!! Any advice here would be appreciated! I have a 40 G hd with about 15G free and could find a lot more room at this point. Thanks.Hornit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JP---Have you tried letting Windows Update scan and update your system- If your DX9 is in need of the update it should do it for you.I never had any problem getting FS2004 onto WinME and it all runs just fine - just a little slower than the XP drive.For the record ,at the moment ME is still my primary OS and is on C drive,XP is on E drive ( the other half of the primary HDD-IDE 0) .The other(secondary HDD-- IDE 1) is split between Storage(D) and Backup(F).I keep a (fortnightly) updated compressed Drive Image backup of both C and E drives on F - in case my constant poking and tweaking cocks it all up irretrievably!(Been known to happen)I can be back up after a total disaster in no more than 30 minutes with everything just the way it was.Greg--No secrets.... this mobo(K7S5A) was a total pest when I first built the system a year ago ,very unstable,prone to lockups and freezes in FS2002- particularly in WinME.I found out that they are very sensitive to excess heat and low grade memory.A year later having spent a lot of time and not to much money adding lots of extra cooling to get the CPU temps down from the mid-high 50s to the low-mid 40s©under load, it's generally pretty stable in ME and very stable in XP.I've played around with the BIOS settings a lot and those that you see in my previous post seem to be the best compromise between speed and stability- haven't changed them in 6 months.Good flying allDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a GF4 4200 also. Except, I have the 64MB version. I get FPS in the mid to lower teens. My suggestion to anyone is to get a new vid card with more memory. The people with the 128MB cards are saying that they get fps in the 20's category. Their rigs are pretty much the same as mine except for the +/-2.0GHz processors. I have a 1500+XP with a decent mobo. Frames are 15 on average. Drivers don't seem to cut it for me. There is only so much that a card can do. And no matter how new the drivers are, I doubth that a GF2 can run FS2k4 at 20FPS. There have been a lot of new drivers since it's release, so a lot more frames have to be added with each one as nVidia claims. You get my point. (Don't take this too literaly please. :)) Drivers just provide a little more performance increase and more stability. They won't add 2FPS with every new release.So, for me, the next card I get, whenever that may be, I'll try to shoot for 256MB.Oh and Mark,"Love the autogen, clouds, trees, colours ... but WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO FLY." Thank You!Alex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your post...I had FS2K4 in my hand and put it back...There is absolutely nothing wrong with my FS2K2 set-up...clouds, wxRE,Ulimate Traffic, Simflyers scenery, FSUIPC, CH Products, GoFlight stuff, Project Magenta, FDS, PA Airbus,FSNAv,etc,etc,...my very realistic home cockpit is now being flown every night with no glitches, no stutters, no BSOD, at 22 constant FPS with everything maxxed and absolutely no headaches...the only thing that I "worry" about now is real time weather and thunderstorms at my destinations.So, forgive my rant but, from what I have been reading on the posts for the last two weeks, both pros and cons, I don't think that FS2K4 is really worth the hassle...at all...rock on 2002! I think I'll wait until 2006...maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also notice some stutter in FS9 - can't see a pattern yet since it happens randomly on my system - but we got to realize that we are using a 1st generation weather engine that is integrated to a 3D-engine that, I think, was introduced in FS2000. Microsoft has not updated their 3D engine for FS in a few years.By default I run all games/simulations at 1200x1600/32bit res, so that is one reason why I sometimes get 10 fps. Normally at this res I get 20-25 fps in FS2004. All sliders are MAXed except autogen and weather clouds. I do not have any 3rd party add-on in FS2004.My FS2002 is on an older P4 system, so I really can't compare the two.I wonder what is causing these stutters? I don't see my frame rate drop below 18 fps when FS stutters for about 1 sec. Still, I think FS2004 is a step forward in the right direction. I'm hoping that in FS2006, MS will introduce a new, highly optimized 3D engine that takes full advantage of video hardware support of vertex and pixel shaders, shadow volumes, 128-bit floating point precision, advanced specular lighting and reflection, advanced particle physics engine, etc, etc. Even if it means that all 3rd party add-ons (scenery and planes) will not work, I'll still consider buying FS2006. Cloud9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading that MSCOF is supposed to be written for DX9 - and since 9.0b has a "debug" cpl it may be causing problems. DX diagnostics says the debug cpl WILL run slower. If you have 9.0b) MS2k2 may not be affected. I have my suspicions about this.Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JPI'd be keenly interested in the performance of FS2004 on your new alienware computer if you are willing to share!ThanksLarry JonesFlorence, MT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornit:I agree somewhat with your post. Especially after reading a post here about copying the texture files from FS9 over the texture files in FS2k2 (but back up your FS2k2 folder so that you can copy the runway textures back).I am now flying FS2k2 with FS9 clouds and great textures, with framerates in the upper twenties, with a broken down 1.2 G Athlon! Plus, I can fly my Flight1 421 as it was intended to be flown. I have full use of MyTraffic, with no untextured aircraft. FlightMax works great, etc. etc.It was a heck of a lot to pay for a texture upgrade, but I am not complaining. One of these days, they will get FS9 and the add-ons upgraded and I will make the permanent switch.But for right now, it is FS2k2 with the, er, uh, FS9 upgrades.Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, Im gonna go do a search but run that by me again???? You can put the 2004 textures into 2k2?? Whoa! Clouds and terrain....please elaborate, ok im goin searchin now!!!Hornit

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