Then, in a 64bit operating system, FSX can only use 4GB of RAM being that it's a 32bit programmed piece of software.  In Windows x86 (32bit) initially FSX could only use 2GB and then  (after adding the largeaddressaware flag) it could use about 3GB.

 

 

I assume you mean 4GB of VAS..  :rolleyes:

Desktop is the best bet for flight sims of all hues particularly if you build your own which is actually quite an easy thing to do and nothing to be afraid of. You can upgrade individual parts over time aswell which saves a fortune. You'll really see your money put to good use if you build.

Thanks for all the suggestions so far. At this point (if I stick with the laptop) then the 1TB HDD will be changed to an SSD. There is a higher CPU option that offers 3.00GHz Max Turbo 3.9GHz, however it's an additional $536, which will blow through my budget. Sadly in this model there is only one option for the GPU and that's the GTX 765M. I may mess around with the desktop configurations on CyberPC to see what projected cost could be in that range.

I assume you mean 4GB of VAS..  :rolleyes:

No 4GB of RAM....  it's a 32bit program in a 64bit environment.

 

For instance, buying 8GB of RAM won't help FSX - it will only use 4GB.  Coincidentally the VAS will also max out at 4GB virtual mem in FSX.

 

If FSX was 64 bit native and say a user ran Windows 7 x64 Professional - it could use 192GB of RAM (max supported in Win7 x64).

After reading my post I didn't mean to write it that way. I agree you need proper specs to get a nice PC - but buying the best parts and OCing the highest potential won't let you run settings maxed because of VAS limits.

 

 

Absolutely spot on Ryan.

 

The other day, a friend on the forum noted how my VAS was much lower than his, despite the fact that he was yet to install any demanding add-on's.

 

He did some tests, and set the same slider settings as me. The result... pretty much matched my VAS.

 

Many don't realise how much impact slider settings have on VAS. It's not just demanding add-on's.

 

The bottom line is that if you are having issues with OOM's, and you aren't prepared to dispense with any demanding add-on's, then you must reduce sliders.

 

We can't have our cake and eat it.

That being said am I in the minority here? I think that proposed laptop will be decent. Obviously he won't get 30 fps in heavy weather landing the NGX at payware airports (probably more like 15-18 with balanced settings).

I tried maxing out settings for fun, and I only managed to achieve 10-12 FPS. My VAS usage was around 2.6 GB. Didn't fly around though. I'm using DX10, so if I was using DX9 I'd probably OOM very quickly. Perhaps even before loading into an airport.

I actually run FSX with all sliders to the right (apart from water at Mid.2.x), and have the AA and AF set to 8xS and 16x respectively (plus super sampling at 2xSGSS; this is needed to reduce shimmering). However, I keep the LOD radius at 4.5, and my screen resolution is only 1280x1024x32bit. I also usually stick to calm weather and clear skies.

What does "maxing out FSX" really mean? :rolleyes:

 

With your specs, to avoid an epic slideshow, you will be on the mid to low end with many sliders, particularly with GSX, PMDG, and REX running simultaneously. I hate to say it but you should really consider a dedicated desktop, especially for that price!!!

 

16Gb is overkill for FSX

No ability to OC is a dealbreaker

Video card is good enough, especially for a laptop.

 

 

Good luck.

 

 

For instance, buying 8GB of RAM won't help FSX - it will only use 4GB.

 

I should preface this by saying that I am running FSX on a 4GB machine.. :unsure:

 

The thing is.. FSX is not the only thing running on your computer... just look at the task manager.

 

Even a lean and mean machine runs 30+ processes at all time in a Windows environment.

 

Each of which benefits from real memory (RAM) being available..

 

So 8 GB is not a bad thing to have, to give FSX and the other programs you may be

running some breathing room..

 

Now, it will all run in 2 GB too.. that is the magic of Windows virtual memory paging.. but

with some reduction in performance.

Bert I agree with you - 8GB is great to have!  I'm saying FSX won't use more than 4 though.  Yes your other stuff will eat up your RAM... I run photoshop along with FSX often and that thing gobbles it up... sometimes I wish I had 16GB.

You don't run out of RAM. When Windows needs more memory, it begins to swap out processes to the system pagefile.

 

Each 32-bit processes receives either 2Gib VAS, up to the max of 4Gib for the largeaddressaware flagged processes under 64-bit.

 

 

 

Andrew Entwistle

So you run out of RAM... Because performance goes to crap... It's basically the same thing.

 

Edit: at least for me since mines on a 7200rpm HDD.

Hi im nearing buying and building my new systems and i would lik to know many fps i would get (roughly) when using the following

Pmdg ngx or airbus x extended

Gex and utx

Aerosoft airport scenerys

Maybe rex

 

Intel i7 4770 k turbo boost up to 3.9 ghz (dont no whether ill overclock it yet

Gtx 760 2gb

2x8 16gb ram corsair vengeance

In heavy weather with scenery addons probably 18-20 (no overclocking)