What can be done about the rapid drop in FPS when on final approach????I did a flight from KDEN to KSEA (about2.2hrs) and FPS were sweet up until I turned on final and the dropped from 20-23 to 8-10. Last week I updated my VC to a ATI 128 9600pro and installed two sticks of 333DDR 2700 ram so Im dual channeling now. I am running the new Cat 3.8 as well which have made a significant increase but not enough to overcome the drop in FPS on final. I have a AMD XP1800 in my machine with a MSI 6380E MOBO.I have tried every tweek I could think of and am just tierd....I dont like the slideshow finals. My drive has been cleaned and defraged.I am considering buying a AMD Barton 2500 and see if that makes a difference.Is there anymore I can do my setting are not even MAXED.....Help in Seattle

Try turning the shadows off and see what happens.Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

You simply don't have the `horsepopwer`, even though it's got racing legs. Buy a bigger horse. Short term you can do what I do with a similar machine - turn the sliders down. By experimentation you should find which of the gernal sliders affects your performance the most, as it varies from computer to computer. On mine - a very similar machine as I said - the key to low-level flying with acceptable fps around big airports is to turn down the autogen. But it might be shadows, it might be reflections, and depending on where you are it might be mesh.Allcott

I thought the solution of your problem would be allready common knowledge, because it is covered by "hundreds" of posts here in the forum.Rename the "default.xml" file into "default.bak", thats it. This file you find in the fs9/autogen folder.I'm tired of again stating the reasons for your problems and what you will miss by renaming the "default.xml", because it was done 100 times before.Wolfgang

although it appears that the origin poster did not use a proper subject title for his quest, there is no need to react like this.Indeed the default.xml is the best way to do this. His system is fine enough. He has a big horse and it can run like h....Next time, please attach some hyperlinks of the most important posts related to his request.

I'm with Wolfgang. Every new poster seems to believe they are somehow entitled to an individual reply, and exempt from the need to search through the posts that have been made before. If that is the case, WTH do we need historic posts for? Let Avsim save the bandwidth, and the simmers can answer the question every day about default.xml, opening and closing doors, how to switch frame rate counters on, or any of the other threads that reappear constantly. And let the experts never post their findings as nobody takes any notice of them anyway.If this thread had started "I've tried everything this forum recommends, and I'm sick of this" I think the poster might have got more sympathy. Allcott

I've got about the same machine. Simply put, this machine just hasn't got the horsepower. I experience the same loss of frame rates as you describe on final approach, and it make landing basically unacceptable. To get around this I back off the sliders until I get smoothness. I know I'm missing alot.Frankly, I'm not convinced 3.2 Ghz is even enough, for all this sim has built into it. I sometimes read here where people with even those machines could use more. So I've gone "on hold" until next year, when I can get something even more powerful.I may buy a stripped down 3.2, with memory, and a good video card in it, as an intrim move.... I'm not sure. I've been wondering if any medium priced video card, will give good performance with FS 2004 in a machine like this. Bob (Lecanto, Fl)AMD, Athlon XP, 1800+MSI, K7T266 XP ProPC 2100 DDR, 1024 MBXP, Home Edition Elsa GLadiac 920, GF3/64Mb andPNY, Verto nVidia TNT 2-M64/32WD, 100 MB, 7200, Ultra 100Sound Blaster, Audigy MP3+CH Prod, VPP Yoke - Sound CardCH Prod, Pedals - Sound Card

Are you landing only at high-detailed airports? Try keeping within low-detailed areas.I think some airports are too heavily detailed, and I avoid those.Nico

Nothing wrong with landing at 8-10 fps! That's OK for me and most people. You got to expect it around high density airports. It's good enough to get you down in one piece. It can be a little shaky sometimes but for me I experience nothing out of the ordinary at this FPS when on approach to any airport. Suits me fine. I can deal with it. i'm through with all this tweaking stuff, I just want to fly. I'm happy enroute at 20-25 and you have to expect that when you approach a high density airport like KSEA that there will be a significant drop in fps. I'm getting close to the same performance as you with a more inferior rig, a Compaq Pentium IV 2 ghz, nVidia 4200Ti (128mb), onboard Soundmax, and more importantly 30.82 drivers...yes, I said it right, 30.82's. I honestly notice a BIG difference between these drivers and the latest out there. Give 'em a try.Spend more time flying, and less time tweaking. It'll help your sanity and you'll soon be able to deal with the odd fluctuations in fps.Regards,Tom

>Next time, please attach some hyperlinks of the most important>posts related to his request.>I have offered him a solution of his problem, I think that's fair enough.And with all respect, why should I search the forum for the relevant threads and post hyperlinks? This is something he really can do by himself easily. That does not cause him more work than it would cause me to do.Wolfgang

Renamed XLM file to.....whatawaste.bak and downloaded the fix in the library.Turned down sliders........Nahda......no differenceTried landing at smaller airfeilds.......But that defeats the whole purpose of buying a upgrade version of FlightSim I might as well reload FS2000 if I have to give up scenery.I personally believe that the problem is at MS end. Why is it I can taxi a plane for 15 minutes on the ground in high density airfields and fly low level with out a hit on frames but then take it on a short flight from Seattle to PDX and on final the big frame rate drop in the bucket.. I have done upgrades to my hardware including drivers and MOBO bios, no one seems to be able to give me a answer to wheather I would reap any benifits by jumping from my AMD XP1800 CPU to a Barton 2500.I am one who gets frustrated with people who side with MS on every issue MS has turned out a defective product...AGAIN...this time they added bridges the ILS system at some field are still broke, the VOR intercept is still unrealistic according to a freind of mine who is a 757 F/O...it shouldnt take 80 miles to stablizer on a jetway. Sadly it is developers like PMDG,PSS,Dreamfleet,ATI,NVidia ect that are left to fix problems that are not theres....kinda like a Drywaller having to square up a wall the framers have made crooked.If MS wants to do a half#$$ed job then maybe they should release the SDKs in advace of their main release. I am not buying the Mantra that goes on here that MS released 2004 early because of consumer pressure personally I would have waited till Christmas....

There are plenty of people here who are not experiencing your issue. I know it's frustrating, but a problem doesn't resort to "Microsoft's fault" just because you are having a hard time resolving it.I suspect you are encountering this issue purely because of an outdated machine. I think that expecting high teens to 20s on your machine is entirely unrealistic. In detailed airports with sliders maxed, my fps will sometimes fall to mid 20s.Jim