What are your FPS?

[Guest DiNozzo]

Hi,I must say, I am quite disappointed with the FPS I am getting. I have a fairly well-equipped system (specs in signature), and at major aiports, with the sliders set from medium high to high, I get an average of 15 FPS.Tom's Hardware conducted some FPS test with a variety of video cards. It's available here -http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_200...2=706&chart=292The 8800 GTX was tested on XP, and got an average of 22 FPS.On my system, checking the "DX10 Preview" seems to have a backwards effect. My FPS actually go down a few.I am curious to see what others' FPS are for major airports (SFO, LAX, ORD), with and without DX10 checked.Thanks!Dell XPS 410Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz3.0GB RAMnVidia GEForce 8800 GTXVista 32-bitFSX Acceleration

[Tabs 2,790]

You should be getting better than 15 with default planes...Check drivers, make sure they're up to date. Might be worth trying under XP too - I get much better frames in XP than in Vista...

[Guest Maul]

I share your frustration as well. Just got my 8800GT 512MB yesterday. Loaded up FSX and I still have problems running the sim. I have SP1, latest nvidia drivers, and it barely runs at 20 fps. The only way I can get it to run at 20, is to have zero autogen, zero water effects and uncheck aircraft shadows. So I load up Crysis, Company of Heroes, Lost Planet and Timeshift...all run incredibly fast, even Crysis looks incredible, which really surprised me. I know folks don't like to hear how OTHER games run great, but somethings gotta give! I hate to say it, but FSX may have to be uninstalled from my HD for good. When FS9 was released, sure there were tons of gripes, but it didn't require the same amount of tweaking that FSX does, not by a long shot in my book! I'm tired of spending hours tweaking the sim. If anyone has a similar system and can offer some help, I'll gladly listen, but FSX has just drained me completely.EricCore 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.4GHZNvidia 8800GT 512MB3 GB RAMVista Premium & XP PROFSX SP1

[FTD1949 0]

FPS = Processor speed. Faster = more FPS Vista = less DX10 = less Plain and simple Craig Lian Li PC 65B CaseCorsair HX Series CMPSU-620HX 620W Power SupplyPlextor PX-810SA/SW-BL DVD/CDGiagabyte GA-P35-DS3RCrucial Ballistix 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500)Arctic Freezer 7 ProIntel E6850 Core 2 Duo 3.0GHz 4M shared L2 CacheEVGA 7950GT KO 512mbSeagate Barracuda 7200.10 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATASeagate Barracuda 7200.10 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA10 Active USB Ports

[Guest DiNozzo]

Eric,I'm glad I'm not the only one out here. I totally agree, FS9 is a gem right now!I do have the latest nVidia drivers installed (public not beta), I defragmented my HD, and recently did a clean install. I don't have any background programs running except Norton Internet Security 2008 (which I disabled, with no noticeable change in FPS).Someone said in another post that FSX is a repeat of FS2002, and I certainly concur!!I don't even want to try the new PMDG 747 right now...I very well may get negative FPS :XDell XPS 410Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz3.0GB RAMnVidia GEForce 8800 GTXVista 32-bit

[Guest DiNozzo]

Craig,I am not certain I fully understand the meaning of your post. Are you saying that FPS are expected to decrease with Vista and DX10?Dell XPS 410Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz3.0GB RAMnVidia GEForce 8800 GTXVista 32-bit

[Guest DiNozzo]

What sort of FPS should I be getting? 20-25?Dell XPS 410Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz3.0GB RAMnVidia GEForce 8800 GTXVista 32-bit

[Guest Maul]

DiNozzo,You say it reminds you of FS2002, I'm thinking more like FS2000. At least that's what it looks like when I run it with no autogen and water textures :).Eric

[Guest DiNozzo]

LOL, Maul!The other poster was comparing the amount of tweaks necessary to get FS2002 to run decently. I distinctly remember that myself; my experience with FSX is very similar to what I experienced with FS2002 as well.Dell XPS 410Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz3.0GB RAMnVidia GEForce 8800 GTXVista 32-bit

[Guest DiNozzo]

I posted this question in the Harwdware forum, but it may not have been the appropriate forum in the first place. Can someone do me a favor and take a look at the attachment?Are you also missing a piece of texture as the taxiway leads to runway 01R?Thanks!Dell XPS 410Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz3.0GB RAMnVidia GEForce 8800 GTXVista 32-bit

[Guest Maul]

Hey DiNozzo,Can you give me a run through of your FSX settings in-game, wanna try and emulate yours and see the results.Thanks,Eric

[Guest DiNozzo]

Eric,I have used the settings recommended by nVidia available at http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_fsx_techtips.htmlHere are my settings now as I remember them from memory:nVidia 8800 GTXAircraft HighGraphics HighScenery Medium High Traffic Medium HighWeather High filtering Aniso AA On Target frame rate 30 fps Global texture resolution High Lens flare On Light bloom Off Advanced anim On Informational text Continuous Aircraft casts shadow on ground Yes Aircraft casts shadow on itself Yes Land lights illuminate ground Yes High resolution 3d virtual cockpit Yes Level of detail radius Large Mesh complexity 60Mesh resolution 60 Texture resolution 5mWater effects Max 2.x Scenery complex Normal Autogen density Normal Ground scenery shadows Off Special effects detail Medium Land detail textures Yes Cloud draw distance 60mi Cloud detail Detailed clouds Cloud coverage density Maximum Thermal visualization None Airline traffic density 15% General aviation traffic density 5%Airport vehicle density Minimum Road vehicles 2%Ships and ferries 8% Leisure boats 5% Dell XPS 410Core 2 Duo E6700 @ 2.66GHz3.0GB RAMnVidia GEForce 8800 GTXVista 32-bit

[Reset XPDR 1,303]

DiNozzo,If you run FSX in Vista in windowed mode you MUST set the windows task bar to autohide, otherwise your FPS will be down 50% or more. Try it!Gary

[ryanbatc 12,979]

It's hard to judge and compare, but I will anyway....DX9 version AccelerationThe most affected settings I run are:Resolution 1280x1024x32globabl texs: very highhi-res 3d cockpitNO bloom or self shadowsscenery high, a few specifics:texture res: 1mwater effects: 2.x lowland detail checkedscen complx: extremely denseautogen: very densespecial effects: highWeather...cloud render, 60midetailed clouds at HighTraffic...GA/Airliners: 78arpt veh: highland sea road: 17ishI also run UTX USA and FEX, Windows XP Pro SP2*******************************************************************All test FPS set to unlimited....locking decreases my FPS by about 2-3All taken in windowed mode, VC zoom set at about .40FPS at SFO, default C172, virtual cockpit (looking straight ahead),overflying RY 28L, 500ft, 110KTS, 3:30pm local time, fair weather theme:9-13 FPS9-10 looking left at terminalFPS at LAX, default C172, virtual cockpit (looking straight ahead),overflying RY 7L, 800ft, 110KTS, 3:15pm local time, fair weather theme:10-12 FPS9 looking left at terminalFPS at ORD, default C172, virtual cockpit (looking straight ahead), overflying RY 32L, 1000ft, 110KTS, 3:30pm local time, fair weather theme:9-12 FPS8 looking right at terminal...Here's a pic of what I tested on average (KORD)http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179991.jpg

[Guest]

HiIn the image below I am running in the 20-27fps range, with fps locked at 27, and that is without the SP1 update, which gives a 30-50% boost.The settings I used to achieve this are listed below the image, though I was using very dense autogen as opposed to dense. In addition to what you see listed, I also turn off traffic all together, and do not use bloom. The three biggest things you can do for performance are make sure bloom is off, turn off traffic, and do not set water any higher than low 2.x. With SP1 I easily run in the 27-35fps range in this scene. http://sio.midco.net/111lll/Eurotrip.jpghttp://ops.precisionmanuals.com/w/images/1/1a/Fsxscenery.jpg