 |
Site Menu |
 |
| |
|
 |
Advertising |
 |
| |
|
 |
Random Image |
 |
| |
|
 |
User Info |
 |
| |
|
 |
Forums |
 |
| |
|
 |
Fly Away Ads |
 |
| |
|
 |
Support Fly Away |
 |
| |
|
| |
|
Fly Away Simulation, Flight Simulator #1: Forums |
|
question about EHAM (and system perf.)
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ruud Guest

|
Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:19 am Post subject: question about EHAM (and system perf.) |
|
|
hi all,
overall i can say i am very pleased with FS2004, but since i live in the netherlands (and i worked for ATC at EHAM) i have a few questions.
first of all, i was very surprised that the landing runways are still wrong. we no longer have 19L/01R and 19R/01L, but a third runway has been built: 18L/36R, 18C/36C, 18R/36L. I think this should have been updated in FS2004. also, for some reason, a third tower has been added at EHAM airport in FS2004. it is true, taht because of the new runway, a new control tower has been built, but the new one in FS2004 is placed totally wrong, and it doesn't even look like the new one. So i'm wondering how/why they created this one.
i also read some previous articles about system performance. i still think microsoft is doing a very bad job when it comes to frame rates. i have a Asus P4T533-C, PIV 2.26 GHz (533 FSB), 512 MB PC800 RIMM, and a GeForce4 Ti4200 128 MB. pretty much a kickass system i would think. well, first I had FS2000. this was the worst one. i had to put everything to LOW to get it running at a proper frame rate (which for me is at LEAST 15 FPS). then I got FS2002, which was better. i had to put down quite a few options to 'low' or 'medium' to get nice frame rates, which i think is weird for an old game like that, with a nice system like mine. but i thought maybe it is because it isn't optimized for the Pentium 4 and the GeForce 4 family. so i got FS2004. and again, the same problem. i dont expect 30FPS and up when i put every detail to the max, but again i am very limited, and have ot make choices. or less textures, or less viewing distance, or no clouds, or no traffic, bla bla. i'm getting tired of this! do i really have to get a 3 GHz, 1 GB of RAM, and 256 MB videocard to get FS2004 running at the max?? microsoft might have thos esystems, but the average gamer doesn't! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
davesmith Trainee


Joined: Sep 20, 2003 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2003 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
My system is a P4 2.6Ghz, 512Mb Ram and a 64Mb Geforce3 Ti200 card, I'm getting 27+ fps on most occasions with detail levels pretty much set to maximum. Try turning on "transform and lighting" in the hardware section, that worked for me.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
| |
|
Fly Away International

Page Generation: 0.244 Seconds
|
|