Sign in to follow this  
Guest MauiHawk

fsx is slow

Recommended Posts

My copy of FSX is slow, even with a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 HT and 512 MB of RAM. The outsides of the aircraft are all blurry, I can't read Boeing on the corporate livery. It takes a panful 5 minutes to load. Can you help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Yep, My system struggles in some circumstances too (clouds, cities, detailed aircraft). FSX needs a fast processor (core 2 duo E6600 or better, even overclocked), lots of RAM and a 512 or better graphics card. I am able to run Horizon Simulations photo realistic scenery (without autogen of course) at 42 fps locked. That's with careful selection of visibility and keeping airspeed below 200kts. Under those conditions FSX is almost perfect. Pity about the ATC though. Still sends me zig-zagging across the countryside, just like FS9.Cheers,Noel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I said when I bought FS9. I had a brand new P4 2.8 with 512 MB RAM. Anyway, I never did have a good experience with my P4 and FS. I upped my ram to a gig which helped a little and went through several video cards, both by ATI 9600 and my X800 produced pretty much the same results. Unfortunately, I never ran FS9 smoothly until I got my current system, which is a Core 2 Duo, I'll be honest, I don't think the P4 processor was any good, at least the 2.8 wasn't. With FSX, see if the patch helps you out at all, should be out last half of April.Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See the tips and tricks forum,http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=177Unfortunately your hardware is pretty old...you did not even mention your video card...Like others said if you plan on upgrading, I'd suggest an entire rebuild, with the Core 2 Duo, E6600 or E6700, and at least 2GB of RAM. Something like a 7950GT or 8800 GTS/GTX video card would be nice as well...here's a nice place to start browsing (or oogling hehe)http://www.newegg.com/Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Unfortunately, I never ran FS9 smoothly until I got my current>system, which is a Core 2 Duo, I'll be honest, I don't think>the P4 processor was any good, at least the 2.8 wasn't. Bingo. Generally the slowest Core 2 Duo is as good if not better as the fastest P4 in CPU bound gaming... even though the P4's frequency is twice that of the C2D. For example:http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showd...spx?i=2795&p=16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While there is truth in the replies about upgrading, I'm also curious as to what settings you are running at. I've run FSX on an older machine and it is possible to squeeze some performance out of it at the cost of some visual perks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>My copy of FSX is slow, even with a 2.8 GHz Pentium 4 HT and>512 MB of RAM. The outsides of the aircraft are all blurry, I>can't read Boeing on the corporate livery. It takes a panful 5>minutes to load. Can you help?Even with?? Without sounding too brash here, those specs you listed were on machines that were built almost 5 years ago. Time to upgrade mate. If you can't upgrade then fsx is not your bag I am afraid. FS2004 would be a stretch with that spec imo, yet alone fsx.________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing I've thought of is to defrag by /NameCheck out O&O defrag, and download the free 30-day trial version...http://www.oo-software.com/home/en/products/oodefrag/There's an option in that software to defrag by name, so everything on the hard drive can be accessed faster....look for the /Name defrag in there.That should help a little with loadings times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so sure, I can get 15-30fps in FSX with my P4 3.4EE and Radeon 9800pro. I have a lot of the candy turned down, but full AI aircraft traffic (both commercial and GA). I also installed a X1950XT AGP card last week that let me run with a good bit of the Candy turned up, but had to RMA the card for overheating problems. Now I'm back to the 9800pro and can't wait on the replacement card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my former box was a dell xps 3.6 with a 7900gt and 2gb of ram and i averaged 12-25 as well. Believe me when i say that that box was much faster than a 2.8 with 512mb and 12-25fps to me is not what i would call smooth. I wouldnt expect to get more than 10fps with sliders all turned down with his box. The box i use now averages 25-30 in major cities now and 50+ in the burbs with most sliders 3/4 to high and still i could go for 10fps more before i would call it 'smooth'. I'm hoping sp1 will give me that last 10fps that i need :)________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of performance you would get with the minimum requirements written on FSX box: 1 GHz, 256 MB, 15 GB of HD space!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some FSX specific benchmarks: http://www.behardware.com/art/imprimer/642/Compare the X6800 vs the P4 955:Core 2 X6800 (2.93GHz): 22.9 fpsPentium EE 955 (3.46GHz): 11.3 fpsC2D is more than twice as fast despite a 16% slower clock rate.Intel's NetBurst line of chips just weren't that good. They couldn't keep pace with AMD except in certain specialized benchmarks and they were hot and power hungry. Intel has completely turned the tables with C2D. They're great chips. Wish I had one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this