>>oops ! yes of course. I Use the MSI 5900 regular bought in>2002 I guess with 128 mb onboard and driver 7.7.7.2 on a Asus>P4C800 with P4 3 GHz overclocked at 3.28. Video card is not>overclocked as it's a little hot today in the room.>That was a great card in its time, it's just that it's a little dated for all of the new graphical effects in FSX. It's no surprise to me that you have all of these problems.>>The sim works at mid to upper settings or doesn't stay on my>computer. BTW I switched off the water effect which seems to>be a CPU hog here as it is in FS9. The water is only a cpu hog on a lower-end card. On a 7000-series nvidia card, all of the water effects are offloaded onto the gpu, it appears...because it's fast as lightning on a 7xxx series card.>>> perhaps after a reinstall. >>I'll try tomorrow to re d/l and reinstall the demo but I'm not>optimistic. >Respectfully, it's hard for me to imagine what you expected performance-wise with the demo. It's not going to run well on a 4 year old graphics card. It's good to see that you are not overly optimistic, with your hardware. :)Rhett

Hi Rob,My Convair 340 gauges show up OK in the VC (admittedly a very simple VC), so it's not a universal problem with FS2004 aircraft.Have you tried other aircraft in the demo to see if this is a universal problem on your machine?Take care,--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

I truly hope you can resolve some of the issues. I have a 3.4P4 with 1 meg of memory and 256mb video card. The sim looks gorgeous on my system. The physics of motion appear much smoother that FS9 and the textures are extremely sharp. The sound is outstanding on the Baron and I'm still discovering the differences, but flying the Baron in a heavy T-storm was "scary"! As it should be. I love it!Bob..

>I truly hope you can resolve some of the issues. I have a>3.4P4 with 1 meg of memory and 256mb video card. The sim looks>gorgeous on my system. The physics of motion appear much>smoother that FS9 and the textures are extremely sharp. >>The sound is outstanding on the Baron and I'm still>discovering the differences, but flying the Baron in a heavy>T-storm was "scary"! As it should be. I love it!>>Bob..I did that today for a video I'm making.Pretty friggin awesome, if you ask me.

If you have on-board sound and a PCI sound card, try using both for FSX. In Windows control panel, click on the Sounds and Audio devices icon. Choose the Audio tab. Then chose the sound device that your desktop/stereo speakers connect to. Click on Apply. Now chose the Voice tab. Select the audio device that your headphones connect to. Select Apply and OK.Start up FSX Demo. Adjust your sound volumes in the FSX sound option. Now you should hear ATC via headphones and cockpit, engines, environment sounds via speakers! Thanks for this feature, Aces!:DDavid

Hi Tom,I've got it:-) It was something I had to brush out of the g-max model. I made the change, and recompiled. Now the gauges show up. I finished a few xml gauges, and it works fine now.Bye, Rob,And remember: no DC3 without the DC2Visit http://www.avsim.com/hangar/flight/dc2uiver/

I have an Athlon 64 3800+ with 1 GB dual channel memory and an ATI X850XT PCI-E videocard with 256 MB. I get about 13-14 fps but it feels and looks like 4-5 fps - totally unflyable in other words. The ground textures are just blurry and lacks any detail. Computer as always updated with latest drivers, BIOS etc. However, I am pretty sure it is hardware related but changing motherboard, RAM memory and videocard unfortunately hasn't improved anything. Next stop changing the PSU!

Got my FSX demo yesterday and installed it. Have only spent 2 or 3 hours on it so far. Love it. No major problems. Totally flyable on my 10 month old system at work, and my 3 year old system at home.Can

Just out of interest, question to the people who really know - how many polygons there are on average in the usual FSX scene with default terrain?For example in this case:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/154083.jpgThanks.

>In the last 12 months I have purchased several add-ons,>including on CD the PMDG 737NG, Flight1 ATR 72-500 and several>more as d/loads plus FSNav, ActiveSkyv6 and I'm concerned that>the revised file structure (Aircraft directory in a folder>SimObjects and no Modules folder for FSUIPC) means that many,>if not all, of these add-ons will not be able to be installed>even though otherwise they are compatible. This especially>applies to the ones on CD as there is no way of modifying the>installer in that situation.Iain,First of all, even though there's no Aircraft folder by default doesn't mean one can't be added (and indeed IS added by the add-on's installer). All it takes in one, simple edit to the FSX.cfg file to add the Aircraft folder to the list of folders to be parsed.SimObjectPaths.0=SimObjectsAirplanesSimObjectPaths.1=SimObjectsRotorcraftSimObjectPaths.2=SimObjectsGroundVehiclesSimObjectPaths.3=SimObjectsBoatsSimObjectPaths.4=SimObjectsAnimalsSimObjectPaths.5=SimObjectsMiscSimObjectPaths.6=AircraftSecondly, don't worry about FSUIPC. That is Pete Dawson's responsibility, and I have full confidence that he'll have it working just fine by FSX's RTM... ;)

Crank down the visuals. This is an unoptimized demo and there is plenty of information about this available (on this forum and in the readme). AI and autogen are especially framerate killers. Short of that, you certainly should be getting better performance.Randall

Weeeelll I still trying to run FS2000 with the sliders to the max right and its the only piece of software that has a lower framerate then the FS-X Demo :(But joking asside. Trying to build software for a future machine can be something of a hit or mis. The only thing thats sure is how the software performs on todays hardware.Look at the current DX 10 hype. We have some artist impressions and tech demo's (there is software outside the FS world) that use DX9 to emulate what DX10 wil be like.There is no DX10 hardware... Nobody knows what will work and how fast it wil be. As far as I know FS-X will be sold without DX-10 support. It is promissed that there will be a free patch to DX-10.Just imagine this scenario. You make a game, you sell the game, now you have (after deduction of costs) a modest profit. Do you realy:A) use your software development team to patch the old already sold game (eating away your modest profit) or :( Do you give them a new project (a chance for a new modest profit).Most companies I know choose :( or they do an A) minus (let some teammembers pact the code on their down time).

>Iain,>>First of all, even though there's no Aircraft folder by>default doesn't mean one can't be added (and indeed IS added>by the add-on's installer). All it takes in one, simple edit>to the FSX.cfg file to add the Aircraft folder to the list of>folders to be parsed.>>SimObjectPaths.0=SimObjectsAirplanes>SimObjectPaths.1=SimObjectsRotorcraft>SimObjectPaths.2=SimObjectsGroundVehicles>SimObjectPaths.3=SimObjectsBoats>SimObjectPaths.4=SimObjectsAnimals>SimObjectPaths.5=SimObjectsMisc>SimObjectPaths.6=Aircraft>>Secondly, don't worry about FSUIPC. That is Pete Dawson's>responsibility, and I have full confidence that he'll have it>working just fine by FSX's RTM... ;)Thanks for that Bill. Sounds a lot more optimistic, even though PMDG have said that they will not be supporting their 737NG for FSX as they are working on a newer version. However, sounds as if a fix will still be possible without their help! Iain

In the 2nd mission, after landing, I saw a 747 taking of from 09, but the flight lasted a few seconds, because of the mountain ... did y notice it?Igor

>>Thanks for that Bill. Sounds a lot more optimistic, even>though PMDG have said that they will not be supporting their>737NG for FSX as they are working on a newer version. However,>sounds as if a fix will still be possible without their help!>>>IainWait a minute...PMDG is pawning off a new version for people to buy instead of patching the old one and everyone still accuses ACES of trying to steal their money?