• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Flight Simulator X poor performace or is it just me?

N

n19htmare

Senior member
E6300 @ 3.2Ghz
1GB (2x512mb) cruicial balistix
7900GTO eVGA stock speeds

Everything is 10 hour prime orthos stable.

Now, I have the game at 1600x1200, Anti-aliasing is OFF, I'm using Anisotropic FIltering, Global options are high...
Aircraft: Ultra high
Scenery: Medium High
Weather: Medim High
Traffic: Medium High

....

I'm averaging like 15-20FPS......WTF?... the game choppy and graphics don't even look that gret (nothing like screen shots i've seen).... what could be wrong 🙁......
 
hmm...i dont think it would be badly optimized (its msft and they actually spend time on their games). maybe lower the options to medium and see what happens? try a lower resolution too.
 
I lowered res to 1280x1024 and still same performance. I can hardly Break 25FPS when using the outside viewing angle. and i've locked fps at 80 in options. I'm not even coming CLOSE to that. 🙁

I know I don't have a LOT of ram but still, i'd expect it to be a lil better than this. just wondering if anyone else has bought this game and if they could compare.

 
I'm confused by MS Flight Sim X graphics.

Every screenshot I've seen looks just about as bad as version 9. I saw a commercial on TV last night for it and it looked amazing, unless that was a pre-rendered scene? I only caught the the last 5 seconds of the commercial.
 
My experience with *every* version of FS has had nothing *but* slow framerates. I think it's more CPU-dependent than CPU-dependent.
 
There is a slider setting somewhere that is the FPS that the game shoots for. Try to up that to your desired FPS. See if that does anything.

My computer can't handle this version that well so I can't tell for sure.

I was also disappointed with the grapics. The screenshots looked amazing. My gameplay looks similar to 2004.
 
According to Gamespot's review, the game is an absolute resource hog, and they reported similarly low FPS on all but the highest end systems. I don't think you can get a PC today that can run the game smoothly at high settings.

 
I'm not a consumer of the FS series, but the commercials on TV advertising X have been horrible. The framerates alone are attricious... and considering they're airing the best it can produce... Yuck!
 
Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm not a consumer of the FS series, but the commercials on TV advertising X have been horrible. The framerates alone are attricious... and considering they're airing the best it can produce... Yuck!
Click to expand...

Yeah, The game would probably be choppy even on an overclocked CD2 X6800 with CF'ed X1950XTXs with 4GBs of RAM and 10,000RPM raptors.

Has anyone with a super high-end rig played the game on his/her rig? How does it fare?
 
k, first, adjust your expectations:

1. It's a simulator, *not* a game. The pretty graphics you see are not the focus of the app and that's not where most of the resources go (explains why when you drop res...you notice little gain). The physics calculations are where your horsepower goes.
2. The machine that can run SimX at full settings has not yet been built. I hear this was a deliberate design decision.
3. 20-25 FPS should be expected. You can tweak up to 30-40 for say stunt flying if needed. For an instrument approach in a 747, 15 fps is more than enough.
4. If you are settign the slider at 80fps.... rofl, good luck.


Second,
It is actually very well optomized if your hardware is up for it. It will do three separate threads plus one for just servicing the interrupts to your video card. When Quad-core CPU's hit this will likely be the only thing out there that uses them. It will easily use 2gig of memory if you have it. I've heard it will use up to 8, but haven't seen it myself.

I'm running on the rig in my sig.
Dual core AMD 4600+, 2Gig dual channel DDR2 ram, Dual core 7950gx2 GPU w/Gig of memory, Dual 10krpm raptors in a raid 0.

Yes it runs GREAT but I am NOT running on Ultra settings across the board. From my tweaking It appears much harder on my CPU/mem than on my GPU. I've got my slider at 25fps and it pulls that off no problem while keeping the graphics beautiful. If you are trying to fly in such a manner that requires more than 25fps you are probably not a very good pilot (not that I claim to be 😛 )... the single engine acrobatic plane is maybe the only exception where framerate helps *some*.




 
Try:
drop to 1280x1024, turn AA back on. Turn anisotripic back to bilinear (you won't notice it much at distances).

keep shadows off.
Bump scenery up to high (at least)
weather leave at med-high
traffice down to medium (very cpu intense)

for your cockpit (this is a playability thing, not so much a graphics-performance thing). Use the 2-d cockpick and set some translucency. The controls are much easier to manipulate without the 3-d cockpit (unless you memorize all the hotkeys).


Remember: reset your expectations a bit... This is a simulator frequently used by real pilots and trainers. Precision flying is part of the challenge. If you want a dogfighting game that wings 40-80fps this is the wrong app for you.

 
Originally posted by: swtethan
15gb for install, yay!!!!
Click to expand...

If this is a gripe, I'm not following you. The install is TWO DVD in size and cover 24,000 airports - more than you could fly to in your entire lifetime. The scenery covers the entire earth's surface with high res zones around every major city or landmark (great pyramids etc).




As a continuation of my earlier post.. I flipped on the FPS display (Shift-X-X I think). With everything at 'very high' or 'max' I'm doing 15fps but hadn't really noticed it was that low. The only time I get any annoying frame drop is when rapidly flipping views around.
 
Thanks smilin. I'm quiet familiar with FS series... been a customer/user/simulator since the birth of FS..... I might have been expecting too much (since the previous versions ran much smoother). I was just going off by the previous version butt his seems to be a HOG.... I know i dont need a gob of FPS on most of the flying but when doing stunt missions, it got pretty choppy. I'm just trying to get it to run smooth, not expect 80FPS or anything. it's was just runing plain choppy (sometimes going to low 9FPS when moving around the Control panel.

I think my settings were too high, considering the native res of my monitor is 1600x1200.

I guess i'll have just tune em down a bit. I also upgraded to 2GB of ram, let's see how that plays out.

thanks for setting tips smilin, will try when i get home.

 
This is standard for the MS Flight Sim. In the past my experience has been the simulator is able to fly at high settings and good fps on hardware about the time the next iteration of the software comes out.

In other words, I bet machines in 08 will run this sim perfectly at high rez 😀

 
Since it's so much harder on the CPU than GPU you might try leaving res high (16x12 or 12x10) then bumping down other things.


But yea, if you want to bust out the stunt plane, you'll have to crank stuff way down. 🙁



Flight Sim 1.0 was targetted at 7fps btw 😛

 
Originally posted by: Smilin
k, first, adjust your expectations:

1. It's a simulator, *not* a game. The pretty graphics you see are not the focus of the app and that's not where most of the resources go (explains why when you drop res...you notice little gain). The physics calculations are where your horsepower goes.
2. The machine that can run SimX at full settings has not yet been built. I hear this was a deliberate design decision.
3. 20-25 FPS should be expected. You can tweak up to 30-40 for say stunt flying if needed. For an instrument approach in a 747, 15 fps is more than enough.
4. If you are settign the slider at 80fps.... rofl, good luck.


Second,
It is actually very well optomized if your hardware is up for it. It will do three separate threads plus one for just servicing the interrupts to your video card. When Quad-core CPU's hit this will likely be the only thing out there that uses them. It will easily use 2gig of memory if you have it. I've heard it will use up to 8, but haven't seen it myself.

I'm running on the rig in my sig.
Dual core AMD 4600+, 2Gig dual channel DDR2 ram, Dual core 7950gx2 GPU w/Gig of memory, Dual 10krpm raptors in a raid 0.

Yes it runs GREAT but I am NOT running on Ultra settings across the board. From my tweaking It appears much harder on my CPU/mem than on my GPU. I've got my slider at 25fps and it pulls that off no problem while keeping the graphics beautiful. If you are trying to fly in such a manner that requires more than 25fps you are probably not a very good pilot (not that I claim to be 😛 )... the single engine acrobatic plane is maybe the only exception where framerate helps *some*.
Click to expand...

Wait, so this version is multi-threaded? Is there a link that confirms this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top