Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About krishcanag

  • Rank
  1. When you fly in most other places, the stutters is reduced a lot, heathrow is the biggest stutterer!!!!I still think if I had better hardware it will be less, question which piece of hardware changed will have a reasonable impact?krishan
  2. reggieVery intertesting response. I would never have thought that an add-on does not increase stutters. When I load default aircraft I have at 50-60 fps, when I switch to LDS767 its down to 35-45. That would suggest add-on does reduce fps but as you say maybe stutters and fps are NOT directly connected. Now reducing the traffic did reduce the stutters a lot. To check your theory, I will fly somewhere like dubai to abu dhabi and see what happens, if it does not stutter there or somewhere like italy, then you are correct. Now if that proves to be the case, is there a way of getting around this issue at london?regardskrishanPS. My request is really to find out which part of my PC if upgraded would make an impact on perfermance.Asus P5BW-LA Basswood (HP special board) mATXE6400PNY 7600GT 256M2G RAM250 HDD 7200 8M
  3. I have been testing fs9 with traffic 2005 and come to the conclusion apart from reducing fps it also dramtically increases stutters, these stutters tend to be very big at a major hub like heathrow Now if you reduce traffic from say 69% to 39% the stutters reduce a lot on landing but is still there.I would like to know which part of a PC hardware might make an impact on performance to reduce these stutters?Would it me GPU memory?GPU stream lines, ie., 24, 112, 128system memory speed?CPU FSB?ETC, ETC..lokking at this way, without traffic 2005 it runs clean no real stutters, so what have we added, more CPU, HDD or GPU memory requests?krishan
  4. wilco is the orginal, I have just flight 737 PIC, which is also a product some time ago. It is the grest product, I really enjoy flying it, I fly it and LDS767.krishan
  5. HiI cannot understand this whole subject. My PC is compaq standard PC:ASUS P5BW-LAE64002G 666MHz250g h/d7600gt 256m1440 x 900 x 32Now if I load default flight I will get fps changing rapidly between 60 and 90. At EGLL (heathrow) it is 50 with LDS767 2D view it drops to 31. My setting are all display set to HIGH, traffic set to 69%. No changes to .cfg no further add-ons. Wht am I getting more fps than you, why does it seem that everyone that has similar rigs have very different results, why is there some much differences?PS. No fpsI have tried these to no avail.1.TERRAIN_DEFAULT_RADIUS=9.500000TERRAIN_EXTENDED_RADIUS=4.500002.(DISPLAY)TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=40 <------------ to a higher value ex: 400(microsoft site says this will actually reduce fps)3.Antialiasing: 4xAnisotropic: 8xImage Settings: QualityVertical Sync: OnForce Mipmaps: TrilinearConformant Texture Clamp: OnExtension Limit: OffTrilinear Optimization: OffAnisotropic Mip Filter Optimization: OnAnisotropic Sample Optimization: Off or OnTriple Buffering: Off or OnNegative LOD Bias: ClampThis one does reduce the flicking effect but when you are close to ground and you pull hard on stick you notice a consisitance micro stutter, that is when you do this on the nvidia card.In the end I have not made any changes unless someone can reall tell there will be a noticable difference in performance without loss of quality, ever going to be the case, you gain in one therefore you must lose in the other.krishan
  6. do not tell me that this picture is real and you have about 8 PC configured to run fs9!!!, you must be the madest sim guy I have ever.krishan
  7. I would start watching processes in windows and see if your memory is leaking away,ie watch that your memeory is staying still not reducing and reducing to very little.krishan>Having taken a fairly long break from playing FS, i just got>a bug to play it the other day. So i load it back on my>system, start flying, then run into a problem. I can fly for>about 10 minutes tops and then FS9 just crashes and brings me>to my desktop. Any ideas what the issue could be? Not sure>if this would be a hardware or software issue.
  8. This topic has been moved by the moderator of this forum. It can be found at:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...&topic_id=32484
  9. thanks for the input, I already am running on a E6400, 2G RAM,ASUS P5BW-LA mATM, 7600GT 1400X900X32. I find at heathrow EGLL, fps is lowest at around 44, on loading LDS767 down to 31 (2D cockpit). This without any anti.. anything on, no changes to FS9.cfg (all the changes I have read about never seem to do anything and maybe a little negative. All display setting for me is HIGH and traffic set to 80%.It is good, I can lock fps at 30 and fly anywhere no issues only a few stutters at ground at heathrow.From what I read, people are having things maxed out, put anti.. everything on, use traffic add-on s/w, other s/w and at around 30 fps. I have 2 options, upgrade my compaq PC : change 300W psu for a 430/500w, change gpu to 7950GT at see.Else start again and built a totally new gaming PC.But then I have also seen there poeple with top of the range PC's having very poor fps, < 10fps!!!, so it all is confusing, but I think dual core is the way to go.It is just given what I read, people think FS9 is more CPU dependant than GPU.regardskrishan
  10. HiAs we know FS9 only uses one core of a dual core processer, even if I have both on by default. Given this fact would the best PC for playing FS2004 be a singhle core, like a Intel
  11. Hi JeffDo you think provided I upgrade my PSU will a new graphics card be enough to have a clear performance impact with my SATA H/D 7200RPM 8M, and 2G RAM? If so what card would show such a improvement?regardskrishan>My system and especially my video card are very similar to>the original poster's. FSX runs well enough for me that I>write reviews for the add-ons. The biggest frame rate hits>are bloom and water effects, and autogen and AI traffic>densities. It also greatly depends where I fly. Over Wilkie,>Saskatchewan, I get 60fps. Over Seattle, 20fps. FSX seems to>have mostly eliminated those "stutters", but it does get>"blurries", and you will probably have corrupted night water>textures with your 7600 card. >>Certainly, run both FS9 and FSX if you have the room and money>for them. >>Jeff Shyluk>Assistant Managing Editor>Senior Staff Reviewer>AVSIM
  12. Hi reggie, gregThanks for your detailed posts. I think the bottom line for me is to stick with FS9 for now. I also have a MCE 2005 platform which I have been told is slower than standard XP. I wonder what vista is like speed wise, it uses more memeory than XP but that's all I know.I think I would need to upgrade to a DX10 graphics card PC before going into FSX.regardskrishan
  13. Thanks guysI have tried the FSX demo and did not like it, not an issue with frame rates but for some reason poor secenry, worse than fs9 on the carb landing.I think overall, I am better sticking to fs9 until I get a PC with more punch and a 8800 graphics card, really that would might as well be a new PC given a new PSU will also be required.regardskrishan
  14. I just tried the FSX demo, arrrrrrgg what rubbish, maybe its supossed to be poor graphics because it was worse than fs9 in scenary. I think having read your comments I will stick with FS9, it runs good on my E6400 DUAL CORE, 2G RAM, 7600GT, 250 SATA H/DThis might interest you; This makes both CPU's workI found a way of making fs9 always operate in AboveNormal priority.%windir%system32cmd.exe /c start "" /AboveNormal "C:Program Files/Microsoft Games/Flight Simulator 9/fs9.exe"I then get CPU usage up to 80%, before around 54% with one CPU maxed out. This is dispite having both CPU 0 & 1 set to operate with fs9.exeThis causes an increase in frame rates. But note it seems to make a big difference with light aircraft not boeing or add-on aircraft, why? I don't know.NOTE: This is a new shortcut creation!!!
  15. HiMy system isdual core E64002G RAM250 SATA H/DPNY 7600GT 256M GRAPHICSOK system I guess, but still always get slight stutters on the ground.krishan>A) What sort of system do you have?>>:( While not a great predictor of what the full version is>like, why not try the FSX demo and see how it runs on your>system?>>http://www.microsoft.com/games/flightsimul.../downloads.html
  • Create New...