What is an acceptable framerate for FS2004?

[Guest]

Was this message directed to me? If so, I don't remember saying that I couldn't live without 1600x1200 or anything else for that matter. I was mearly questioning what was reasonable to get out of the product for a system like I have. If what I'm getting is normal thats fine, I'll play around and tweak it some more. But if people would have came back and said "Hey, I have that same class of system and get double that fps." then I'd start to look at what differences there are so I might be able to get some better framerates.-Allistah

[Guest SlimDady]

I like to run 15 to 24 my max.. anything uder gets a little choppy, anything over is just too much

[Deaf Pilot 1]

No no not directed at you... not at anyone in particular really... I'm not trying to lash out... sorry if it seemed that way :)

[ulisses 1]

If you already flew in a professional flight simulator, you are a pilot, you spent more than US$ 5,000.00 in hardware bulding your home cockpit and you have a screen projection of more than 50", you will easily understand the "can't live" expression. Sure I can live without flightsim and a good performance, but I will be a lot happier with it :)Question of references.Ulisses

[TomCYYZ 210]

I get 11-14 in CPU resource hogging areas like Seattle, New York Chicago dense scenery and I'm happy as heck! Above the clouds and away from these areas I can get upwards to 25-30 fps. My system is inferior to yours. It's a Compaq 2.0g HD with 512MB Mem and Nvidia GeForce Ti4200. I've followed all the tweaks and was getting at best 16 -18 fps above the clouds and believe me the tweaks have had a positive effect on my system. Especially Geofa's fs9.cfg tweak where I am able to run with, get this, autogen slider right off over to the extreme left and believe it or not, my framerates will decrease if I start moving the slider to the right at all. My settings just to give you an idea are:Terrain mesh - 90%Terrain Tex size - all way to RightTerrain detail - Land OnlyWater effects - none (Don't care)Scenery complexity - Very denseAutogen - none (Don't ask me, it just works on my system0Aircraft Quality - Low (and Landing Lights)Weather (3 sliders):60 mi40mi3-D = 90% (could have this at 100% I guess with no effect)cloud coverage density - 100%Hardware:Target frame = 25fps (could be lower for smoother processing)1024x768x32T & L (Transform & Lighting)Filtering = TrilnearMIP Mapping quality - 4Hardware rendered lights - 7 (not much effect no matter what I use)Global Tex. size - highSo, if was able to get the fps range I stated above on my machine, especially what you get in dense area such as Seattle, I would be happy. Don't get me wrong if I had your specs I would be wondering too. But to get, as you say 14-17 fps in a dense area like Seattle , with a lot of clouds, that is darn good, to me anyway. I am happy with my FPS. I fly a lot of IFR so when I get those 25 fps above the clouds enroute to destination I couldn't be happier. I'm through tweaking at this stage though. I just want to enjoy flying instead of wasting all my time tweaking, trying to get the optimun FPS. Because no one will ever be happy with what they have. I didn't buy FS2004 to tweak to my hearts desire. I bought it to enhance my flying experience in this great hobby.....just a thought though, with all the negative talk re: the Redeon cards, that could be one of your problems. I don't seem to see too much negative talk about the Nvidia cards.... Tom

[ulisses 1]

I have a radeon 9800pro and autogen has a high influence in frame rate, mine is set to OFF as well.I suggest you to do 2 additional tests to improve your FPS:Terrain mesh = try 60 or 70, still good visually and helps.Clouds 3-D = try 30% to 50% (it is not an immediate change, fly a little)Ulisses

[Guest product]

Cut your ground shadows, has a major influence on FPS and they don't look especially good anyway.Joel

[kerosene31 349]

I keep it locked at 20 (default). I have a new system, and my fps rarely drop much below that with my detail sliders set rather conservatively.