andyjohnston Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I bought a new PC with lots of juice expecting to replace my old one which was starting to go, hoping it would really do a great job with FSX. Instead, the frame rates are horrible. Maybe I should consider P3D. Spent way too much time using these sims... FS 5.1, FS-98, FS-2000, FS-2002, FS-2004, FSX, Flight, FSW, P3Dv3, P3Dv4, MSFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Like many, you probably didn't realize FSX is CPU based. The speed of your Central Processing Unit is the real speed determinate. When FSX was written video cards weren't nearly as useable as they are now. So they had to use the CPU for speed. P3D & pretty much all the newer programs out there are GPU based. Which means the speed of & memory capabilities of your video card is the big speed changer with those programs. You probably just bought a GPU favored system rather than a CPU favored system. That's pretty much the "norm" in today's store bought computers. Being an old chopper guy I usually fly low and slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyjohnston Posted January 16, 2015 Author Share Posted January 16, 2015 I got one that's supposed to be pretty good in both, with scads of RAM. My 5 year old system ran FSX much better. Spent way too much time using these sims... FS 5.1, FS-98, FS-2000, FS-2002, FS-2004, FSX, Flight, FSW, P3Dv3, P3Dv4, MSFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrzippy Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I got one that's supposed to be pretty good in both, with scads of RAM. My 5 year old system ran FSX much better. Might help if you list your computer specs. Scads of RAM ain't gonna help much. Still thinking about a new flightsim only computer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScatterbrainKid Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 And FSX is a 2006 game written for 2006 technology, so modern chips and stuff probably look at it and think "what the hell's this?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvarn Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Your claims are not useful without OS, CPU speed, physical/G-RAM memory size. "Juice", "pretty good" and "Scads" are all terms we've heard before and turns out was not so hot. If you think you can buy ANY machine off the shelf which runs FSX with all the sliders up and no stutters you are mistaken. My friends with P3D are getting about the same frame rates under the greater load the newer DX shaders and effects produce while loaded down with add-ons. Added: Here's another guy just a few posts down from this with a "pretty good" computer: https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?286514-FSX-General-FPS-Issue -Pv- 2 carrot salad, 10.41 liter bucket, electric doorbell, 17 inch fan, 12X14, 85 Dbm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjrhealth Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 FSX doesnt need "scads " of ram. Sometimes its worth reading before buying, There are thousands of PC building question on FSX forums. It wouldnt of taken much. FSX is 32bit cant use more than 4 gig no matter how much you have. 8 gig is sufficient gives a bit of overheard for other apps. As mentioned CPU is number one even with P3D. FSX with DX10 does tend yo use a bit more VRAm but generally that is depedent od the complexity of the plane you are flying. Intel 4790k@ 4.6 1.223V Gigabyte GAZ87X-UD3H, Gigabyte GTX 680 2Gig GPU, 8 Gig Cas 11 2100 Mhz ram, Win 7 64 Bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyjohnston Posted January 16, 2015 Author Share Posted January 16, 2015 The computer has an Intel i7 5930 cpu, running Windows 8.1 64-bit, and 32 gigs of RAM. I tried running another program and found it incredibly slow as well. Spent way too much time using these sims... FS 5.1, FS-98, FS-2000, FS-2002, FS-2004, FSX, Flight, FSW, P3Dv3, P3Dv4, MSFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvarn Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 What is the clock speed of the CPU? If you are running it at the typical 3.5 GHz, then you should expect medium to medium high FSX graphics settings. There is no way this CPU will run FSX flat out with add-ons. You need over 4GHz to do that. You have 24 gigs more RAM than you need to run games unless you are a high end graphics designer or CAD designer. According to one source I read, you are giving up some CPU power to address all that extra RAM. -Pv- 2 carrot salad, 10.41 liter bucket, electric doorbell, 17 inch fan, 12X14, 85 Dbm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringBean Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 What is the clock speed of the CPU? http://ark.intel.com/products/82931/Intel-Core-i7-5930K-Processor-15M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz WWOD---What Would Opa Do? Farewell, my freind (sp) Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyjohnston Posted January 16, 2015 Author Share Posted January 16, 2015 Thought I had included that. 3.5 GHz. I'm not trying to run flat out, just a little higher than medium. Spent way too much time using these sims... FS 5.1, FS-98, FS-2000, FS-2002, FS-2004, FSX, Flight, FSW, P3Dv3, P3Dv4, MSFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
il88pp Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Microsoft produced updates for FSX DeLuxe, to make it run better. For people who have it, 'acceleration' is the complete update. For people who don't have that, Microsoft produced service packs: fsx SP1 and SP2. Those are free to download. Perhaps you had the update installed in your previous install and forgot this time round? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvarn Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 " I'm not trying to run flat out, just a little higher than medium. " Just a little higher than medium is normal for that clock speed. If you have acceleration or Deluxe with SP2, you can expect 25-30 frames without add-ons or AI and MS default quality add-ons. If you are adding high resolution planes and AI and rich scenery, your frames will drop. You should also visit the tweaking guides in the stickies at the top. Not all tweaks work on all computers and your skill with computer hacking will greatly influence the results. Low to the ground in areas close to enhanced airports will be lower frames. -Pv- 2 carrot salad, 10.41 liter bucket, electric doorbell, 17 inch fan, 12X14, 85 Dbm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Hurst Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 According to one source I read, you are giving up some CPU power to address all that extra RAM. What source was that? MarkH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsxar177 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Andy, Most your system is likely enough to very comfortable run the simulator. It's a matter of optimizing the specific system, to run it well. There's plenty of information on these, and other forums to equip you for this. Time to start digging! Just a couple mis-configured settings is enough to through any system for a loop. I run a set-up considerably less than yours, and virtually run full-out with 30 locked all the time. You can do it.. - Joseph - VFR Simulations - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvarn Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 ^^^ "What source was that?" I was not able to find that source so discount it. More relevant: http://www.simforums.com/forums/the-fsx-computer-system-the-bible-by-nickn_topic46211.html Some quotes: MEMORY LIMITS FOR WINDOWS 7 x64 versions: Windows 7 Professional/Ultimate x64 -192 GB Windows 7 Home Premium x64 - 16 GB Windows 7 Home Basic x64 - 8 GB Windows 7 Home Basic 32bit version - 4 GB Windows 7 Home Starter 32bit version - 2 GB That means if you have Windows 7 Home basic x64, and you install 16/32GB of memory, not only have you wasted your money, it wont be used and if the OS falls in that category... ... Running FSX with all addons and Windows does NOT require any more than 6GB-8GB of physical memory. ----------------------- The money spent on unused RAM could have been spent on CPU clock model or a nice cooler in an overclock. -Pv- 2 carrot salad, 10.41 liter bucket, electric doorbell, 17 inch fan, 12X14, 85 Dbm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jandjfrench Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Hi Andy, It sounds like a background task is hogging resources. Look into a program or settings that would inhibit anything that's not needed when running FSX. I use the old Gamebooster 3 as I have complete control over what to allow and what to inhibit. Jim F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napamule2 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Good point Jim. Take a look at my Task Manager. How does yours look like? The number of processes running DO tax your system. So ram or not, the CPU load needs to be trimmed down by manual disable of some processes. I get 30 fps (locked) with my rig (look at specs). I am in fact surprised (no, more like amazed) I can run FSX and get stead 30 fps. Chuck B Napamule i7 2600K @ 3.4 Ghz (Turbo-Boost to 3.877 Ghz), Asus P8H67 Pro, Super Talent 8 Gb DDR3/1333 Dual Channel, XFX Radeon R7-360B 2Gb DDR5, Corsair 650 W PSU, Dell 23 in (2048x1152), Windows7 Pro 64 bit, MS Sidewinder Precision 2 Joy, Logitech K-360 wireless KB & Mouse, Targus PAUK10U USB Keypad for Throttle (F1 to F4)/Spoiler/Tailhook/Wing Fold/Pitch Trim/Parking Brake/Snap to 2D Panel/View Change. Installed on 250 Gb (D:). FS9 and FSX Acceleration (locked at 30 FPS). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyjohnston Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 Solution found! The store who I paid to put the machine together, never bothered to install any video drivers, so it was running off the basic Microsoft ones. Downloaded and installed some drivers and...what a difference! Spent way too much time using these sims... FS 5.1, FS-98, FS-2000, FS-2002, FS-2004, FSX, Flight, FSW, P3Dv3, P3Dv4, MSFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Hurst Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I was not able to find that source so discount it Yes, it sounded absurd. MarkH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alaskancrab Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Solution found! The store who I paid to put the machine together, never bothered to install any video drivers, so it was running off the basic Microsoft ones. Downloaded and installed some drivers and...what a difference! Yeah that'll do it alright... back in the XP days you needed to install the Intel chipset drivers as well. You might want to do that just in case, they are available from the motherboard's support page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Solution found! The store who I paid to put the machine together, never bothered to install any video drivers, so it was running off the basic Microsoft ones. Downloaded and installed some drivers and...what a difference! Sounds like you're pumping a ton of money into a store that isn't interested in their product. I can't see anyone building a unit for sale and not adding the video drivers for what they just installed! I suggest your next build be done by someone else! Being an old chopper guy I usually fly low and slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvarn Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 " install the Intel chipset drivers as well. " Yea, the chipset on all MBs are very important. They provide the communication between your CPU, network card and video driver. If they forget the vid driver, no doubt they forgot that as well. Most MBs do not come with the latest drivers (including what's on the disk.) AN outdated sound driver can slow down the machine or even crash it. -Pv- 2 carrot salad, 10.41 liter bucket, electric doorbell, 17 inch fan, 12X14, 85 Dbm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivanmiki Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Solution found! The store who I paid to put the machine together, never bothered to install any video drivers, so it was running off the basic Microsoft ones. Downloaded and installed some drivers and...what a difference! Good point. I'm not familiar with Windows8, but IMHO it must offer to upgrade all the drivers for the found hardware in the computer, didn't it do ? Neverthless, I had the very same problem years ago. Bought a new PC, installed the FSX and Acceleration - and got ~30-60 FPS, depends on the settings of AI vehicles. I was a bit disappointed so bought P3D Academic, as it could use all the cores of the CPU. Yes, it does, but i get the same FPS, so really no difference, except the visuals (shadows quality for ex). For FSX, you could give a try to tweak up your FSX.cfg here. Aerosoft Manhattan X (ok, i know its an odd product) had 10 FPS before, and gave 18 after. I think the tweaking reduced the rendered terrain radius - i have tried comparing the backup and tweaked config file, but I've lost within. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pvarn Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 "Windows8, but IMHO it must offer to upgrade all the drivers for the found hardware in the computer, didn't it do ?" ivanmikj, Windows (all recent versions) rely on a MS database of "approved" drivers and these are updated infrequently. If you relied totally on your OS for drivers, they may be years out of date. Working, yes. Latest and fastest... Not always. The manufacturer web site for each device in your system is the best source for drivers. Unfortunately, this means the user or the manufacturer has to be pro-active. Most gamers care about these kinds of things. Casual computer application users do not. They are largely unaffected by small performance margins. There are free text file comparison programs available for download. I use one that's a part of a freeware source code editor called Komodo Edit. It will color a display of the portions of the two files which are different from each other without changing them. -Pv- 2 carrot salad, 10.41 liter bucket, electric doorbell, 17 inch fan, 12X14, 85 Dbm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.