Info on FS9 on WinXP vs Win98SE

[Guest]

Does anyone have any info regarding the performance of FS9 on WinXP as opposed to Win98SE. I am currently running on Win98SE, due to lower overhead of the OS, and was wondering whether XP provides any better frame rates due to better memory handling or anything else. I would appreciate any info, or experiences anyone has had.Thanks,Bill

[Randall 82]

I recently upgraded my motherboard and CPU. I intended to upgrade to XP also, but I thought I'd see what would happen in Windows 98SE. Framerates were higher but stutters were still very noticeable. I then upgraded to XP and have good framerates and smooth performance. XP absolutely does make a difference.RandallAthlon 2200+Nforce2 motherboard (Epox 8RDA3+)384 MBSoundblaster 5.1

[Hornit 3]

Im using 98SE here too. I have read several posts claiming better performance in XP but the reality seems to be its not really an issue. There are also posts that show 98 running it better, go figure. I honestly dont see a reason why it wont run just fine in 98SE. Mine is fine after a bit of tweaking and optimization. The stutters are an issue for a lot of people, some worse than others. mine are all but gone. I believe there is ample proof something is amiss with bgl's or the way autogen is coded, there are workarounds for this. This sim will hit its stride next year as newer cpu's and video cards come out which can whip this puppy into shape. I'd submit that those who claim improvements upgrading thier OS are mostly due to the efficiencies gained by formatting and starting anew.Just my two cents!Hornit

[mverlin 0]

Blanket statements are always suspect. However I thought I would share my own experience. You may accept this information in that light.I had been running Windows Me for about three years with three versions of Flight Simulator: FS2000, FS2002, and FS2004. I ALWAYS noted stuttering of a greater or lesser degree despite significant hardware changes.No amount of tweaking or elimination of background processes would help. At the end I was running a P4 2.0 GHZ, 1024 MB and a Radeon 9600 Pro.Over the Labor Day Weekend I bit the bullet and went for a clean install of Windows XP Pro.It took me about three days to get everything put back together. Result: MARKED improvement. FS2004 runs very smoothly even at demanding places such as any of the Simflyers airports.Following that I installed a P4 2.53. With that I locked my frame rate at 31. Typically frame rates at altitude run at that level. With the P4 2.0 I was running in the low to mid 20'sI won't tell you that you HAVE to do this. It may not make any difference on your system, and I would hate to see someone drop a significant amount of money just on my say so. For me, however, the change was definitely worth it. I'm sorry that I didn't do it before.Michael VerlinHistoric Jetliners Group

[Guest daveg4otu]

I'll go along with Michael's statement above.XP does give a better overall performance with FS2004.Here I've got FS2004 installed on both WinME and WinXP(Dual boot PC).Obviously ,both installs of FS2004 are using the same hardware- the only difference is that XP is using NVidia 44.03KXP drivers while WinME has the 43.45-9X drivers.Both OS are FAT32.XP consistently give higher frame rates for exactly the same flight situation(all settings the same)- average is about 15 -20% better.(ME is locked at 25 fps,XP at 30 fps)In addition to fps,when flying on line,running all the things you need for that(Internet,Squawkbox,Servinfo,Rogerwilco etc),on XP I can(if I really want to) still open the Kneepad,use it as a web browser and surf while flyin).ME starts to grind to a halt if I try that.XP is a fairly recent addition to my PC but I see the time approaching fast when I'll ditch ME entirely.CheersDave

[Guest tascaso]

First of all HI Michael beautiful work on your vintage jets.. I just love them to pieces.OS's hmmm...I remember really liking Win98SE, it was tough and stable...but it could not run USB very consistently. WinME was a total fiasco for me. But it could run USB very well.I finally built a box whose hardware qualified for a WinXP install. I went for it and bought WinXP PRO. I have never looked back and in fact I have a WinME box running on a network right next to it and I cannot wait to upgrade that to WinXP.Overall with what I put my poor computers through ... floggings are a regular thing, I run a diverse menagerie of games and devices. Along with the occasional virus that runs amok before Norton can squash the critter. I am quite pleased! Of course there is FS9...I am very happy with FS2002, it runs very well on a XP2100 and so does all my other games n gear. Now FS9 is very pretty but I am stuck with almost unacceptable frame rates in order to have it look better than FS2002. I find that I fly a lot of VFR in FS9 and fly commercial jets with complex panels in FS2002.So if you have the hardware or can afford the hardware RUN do not walk to upgrade to WinXP, patch it all up and you will not be dissapointed.Tony

[ronzie 21]

W98SE at most will manage 512 MB RAM. W2000 and above will handle up to 1 GB at least. More available RAM means more graphical resources (besides the card) and also for other simultaneous apps by third parties. RAM above 512 in W98 can crash it especially if it totals 1 GB.

[Guest]

Thanks to everyone for their input. I happen to have XP pro, I just have not installed it yet, but based on what everyone seems to have experienced, I will give it a try.Bill