Well, I've read the posts who say FS9 is better than a weekend away without the kids, and those who say they are sticking with 2002 but at least they have a nice new door-stop!In about a month I get a nice wee performance bonus at work, and the plan was to finally get my hands on FS2004. But I'm not so sure....Ya see, my PC is very low-end. I'm running a 600mhz, with 128Ram. It was received as part of an insurance claim when some piece of **** burgled my house when I was away on holiday, so I'm not totally sure what's in it, I just know it's not a Cray!I don't download third-party software, weather is nice but I don't lie awake at night thinking about how fluffy that cloud was over Tahiti - my big desire is the improvements in ATC and airports. More AI traffic would be nice, and I'm assuming that the sliders would have to go way down on pretty much everything else to accomodate this.So, if I was willing to make this compromise, do you reckon I should buy it given the limitations of my PC? Or is the sim so processor-hungry that even with most of the sliders at minimum I would be wasting my money?Looking forward to some opinions from those who have it, especially those like myself who own toasters more powerful than our PC's!!ThanksAllblack

Hi,I have had burglars too, while I was on a vacation - but I got a much better computer from the insurance! Would not have been possible if I had sold it as 2nd hand (nobody would have bought it, either). However, this does not compensate for the discomfort somebody went into your house and ran away with all your personal documents on that PC.To the point - with regards to buying FS2004 or not, I will definitely say that it is NOT worth it unless you get a stronger computer. That tiny difference in ATC does not justify it. The real improvements are on the weather and graphics side. For this you need at least 512 MB RAM, definitely, and a faster processor, preferrably more than 2 GHz. The graphics card you need should be a Radeon 9500 / Radeon 9600 Pro or better. Monitor should be at least 17".If you do not have the hardware, keep the Flight Simulator you have today and spend your bonus on something else.Trust me, you WILL regret that you bought FS2004, if you don't get a better computer first...Nico

Hi,I can only say that I agree with Nico. I think you will be sorry if you try and run FS2004 on that old clunker. And although 512 MB's of ram would do you, I recommend 768 MB's or preferably 1 GB. I only say that in case you decide to save that bonus towards something that will run it and keep you from popping a blood vessel when doing so. ;)Regards,Jim

FS 9 is a personal experience. You can read as many reviews of the game as you want. When it all comes down to the bottom line, it is all about your experience with it. Go purchase the game, what have you got to loose. Just remember to keep the reciept, incase you don't like it you can return it. I always ask the stores about their return policies.Remember too, that like FS2002 and FS2000 before it, you will have to do some tweeking to get the game working it's best. So don't get too excited when you open the box and install it and things don't seem right. I have not had one game that didn't involve some sort of tweeking in one way or another.Now for my review... FS9 is better than going to the proctologist on a sunny day....

I have FS9 and love it. I uninstalled 2K2 and never looked back. That being said, FS9 craves high-end systems. Until you upgrade I would keep 2K2. but when you upgrade run and get FS9 :)

Thanks guys, I appreciate your feedback.Nico, I got a better PC as a result of the insurance claim, what does that tell you about what I used to have!!!!Mind you, it was a hand-me-down from a family member, so at the time it was better than nothing.I feel I REALLY, REALLY need 2004, but I might be better keeping my $$$ in my pocket. Might buy a PS2 game instead......CheersAllblack

I have a 1Gig AMD and have given up on it... I'm still flying FS2002 and enjoying it with fluid 25-30FPS. FS2004 has to many problems, such as a huge Frame hit when using the 2D panel, autogen problems after long flights, etc... The list goes on and on...Funny thing is, I was thinking of upgrading my PC, but now will not bother... I ran across an Intel 2.5 Gig at a store with XP loaded, and FS2004... So, I quickly did a test. Went to KORD, max'ed all sliders, in fair weather conditions, and saw an amazing 4-6 FPS. LOL.... Hardware problem or software problem?Even a fairly good system, can't run FS2004 like FS2002.... To me, it appears FS2004 is running the FS2000 engine....SO..... FS2002 is still a very clear winner...Ok.... Ready for the insults directed towards me, for telling it, as it is...RJ :-wave

I fully agree !!!!Before I had a Athlon 1.4 Gb / 512 Mb SDRam / GeForce 3 TI500 128 Mb, and ran to my retailer the very same day FS2k4 was released here in Sweden. I think you understand that FS2k4 was impossible to run on that system. So, I unistalled it after two weeks of tweaking.Last week I got myself a new Dell P4 / 3.0 Gb / 512 Mb DDRam / ATI Radeon 9800 128 Mb. Thought I should give FS2k4 anotherchance,....but gave up again. Ofcourse it was much better than on my earlier system, but not as good as FS2002.Wow....now I get around 60 fps with all slider maxed out in FS2002. And crystal clear screens with knife sharp edges. I see no reason what so ever why I should change to FS2k4. All my addons work flawless in FS2002. And I don

Hi, "You just have to check out the forums to see how many problems the users have with FS2004. No other sim before have got this much disapointments,..not even FS2000, which in my opinion was #

Allblack, your mileage will vary, just look at the past 2 posts. If you have that low of a system spec, then FS2002 will look just like FS9, since the sliders will have to be minimum to run it.If you do get the chance to upgrade some, here is my deal, got it and installed on my internet PC, Athlon 1.4, Radeon 7200 64MB card, 1 gig 2100 DDR, and cranked everything up full, no AA and it was sweet!! (ran better than FS2002 ever did for me!) had a few issues, installed the new clouds and renamed the autogen file because my system wasn't really able to handle it, it was great then. I ended up building a new Athlon 3200 system, with 1 gig high performance DDR and my old G4 4600, this sim is amazing!!! if you fly VFR, it is THE sim to have, runs great, not a stutter in the world and on Bushnet yesterday I was seeing 40-50 fps with no clouds (a fluke I am sure as I lock it at 30 and it usually stays there)Of course if you check the forums you will see posts from all the users that are having problems as the ones that are not, do not post about it, and the ones that are .....don't want to hear it! ;-) Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://mysite.verizon.net/res052cd/mybannercva1.jpgCalVirAir International VAwww.calvirair.comCougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviationwww.cgrmtnhelos.com

Come on Chris, you can take a better shot then that... :-samuraiWhy do the same people always criticize and attack others? It's always the same nic.. :7The gentlemen asked a question, let him make a decision on the responses he gets, and by searching the forms... But please sir, quite attacking others...No hard feelings...... RJ :-wave

Hi, "Why do the same people always criticize and attack others?"Keeping sawing I am back to fs2002 which most users use fs2004 here, it's only waist of post and bandwith for avsim, these post do not help in any way for Msfs comunnity, they do not help on nothing it's not a tips or are 3rd party files or anything. Who care if users want to know which sim I use, fs98, fs2002 or fs2004. Maybe Avsim should create a new forum: Which sim I use.I hope these post will stop from now to two years, imagine these type of post for 2 years it's completly rediculous. ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

Attacking others, and making rude comments about others, is NOT flight sim related.... I find that a waste of bandwidth. And NO, asking questions about FS2002, FS2000 or FS98 is not a wasted post.The gentlemen asked a question about FS2004, NOT ABOUT GOING BACK TO FS2002, so please, stop attacking others, and concentrate on the question at hand..RJ... :-wave

Thanks Michael,Unfortunately upgrading isn't an option.If I wanted to sleep in the garage for three weeks with no beer then there are better ways of arranging it than coming home with a "Hi honey, come and see my new computer!".I liked your comment about FS9 looking the same as FS8 with all the sliders down so low - I hadn't thought about it that way.Jeez, this is tough. Half of me says "go for it, if nothing else you have a newer toy", and the other half says "don't be a dickhead, buy a new fishing rod instead".Decisions, decisions......

Hello 3Green, "Even a fairly good system, can't run FS2004 like FS2002.... To me, it appears FS2004 is running the FS2000 engine...."GOD, I saw many time your post from the begenning. We all know you CAN'T run fs2004, OK OK. But do NOT confusing the guy completly. I have Intel p4 3.2 GHZ gforce4 4600 128 MB, Fs2004 run way much better than fs2002. You will not help eithers with your statement like that's. Please think before you post next time.BestEric