Jump to content

Video card for MSFS?


Recommended Posts

I was all excited and was finally loading MSFS onto my machine. Got about half way thru the install and it said my video didn't meet the requirements or something like that! BUMMER!!!

 

I am running an i7-2600@3.4Ghz with an AMD Radeon HD7000 series card with 1GB RAM. Maybe if I bump up my RAM it will run? Do I need to upgrade my video card? How much is a "decent" low cost one for an old man on a budget?

 

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the demand for computers and components as well as the peripherals like joy sticks and other fight controls is so high that there pretty much isn't anything that can be considered reasonably cheap available. MSFS is a monster program that can tax even the highest powered gaming computer with all the settings on high. With the age of you're computer it's unlikely that the motherboard and power supply will support the level of upgrade necessary. Meanwhile demand is pushing prices of last generation parts higher than they were last year that is if you can even get them. If you are very careful you can probably come up with a suitable moderately performing rig for $1,500 or so which doesn't include a gaming monitor or a joystick or yoke outfit. You can also easily get taken advantage of too. The demand is so high that companies can slap the word gamer on anything and send it out the door. You can go to the sim home site and look up the system recommendations but just know that many people will say that their highest performing recommend is actually close to the lowest reasonable performance wise. I realized the other day that I'll end up spending more to pretend flying than I spent on my actual PPL in 1970.
Liquid cooled, Intel i7-10700K, NVIDIA 3070, G.Skill Ram 32 GB, 2TB M.2 NVME. Z490 MB Loads of Christmas lights. :pilot:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Raven Flight, am interested in your progress on your journey re MSFS, since I joked with you a month or so ago (am that "downunder" guy, hope you didn't take offense, it was all just in good fun). I might give myself a retirement present in 2021 (if I do indeed retire, at 66) and go for MSFS, but like many old guys, I don't want to spend thousands to get a workable setup, so will content myself for now with my legacy world of FS2002, given I got it free. You certainly sound as though you know your way around a PC, and can build from scratch. Your posts, and others, is a little scary to me re the cost and all the glitches that one might encounter to get to that holy grail of a reliable, good, modern sim "as shown on TV" etc. Cheers, MAD1.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Raven Flight, am interested in your progress on your journey re MSFS, since I joked with you a month or so ago (am that "downunder" guy, hope you didn't take offense, it was all just in good fun). I might give myself a retirement present in 2021 (if I do indeed retire, at 66) and go for MSFS, but like many old guys, I don't want to spend thousands to get a workable setup, so will content myself for now with my legacy world of FS2002, given I got it free. You certainly sound as though you know your way around a PC, and can build from scratch. Your posts, and others, is a little scary to me re the cost and all the glitches that one might encounter to get to that holy grail of a reliable, good, modern sim "as shown on TV" etc. Cheers, MAD1.

 

Another bloke from Downunder here,

I have to concur with MAD1 re the cost and capability of the modern hardware as it relates to flight sims.It seems we have Microsoft developing a sim that is stretching even high end gear and the hardware guys piling on to develop cards etc to meet that new sim and blowing the prices to hell. I am fully aware of "progress and development" etc.but do get a little bemused at the arrogance of MS and the new flight sim.It appears to be half baked as a complete product with a lot of home based computers unable to run it at an enjoyable level.

I reckon one day they (devs and manufacturers) might learn that most of us in Flight Simming community are not interested in the latest, biggest, ballsiest set up.. We just want a reasonable, reliable set up so we can enjoy our hobby and fly ,not fiddle endlessly with programs and machinery that really should not be considered "fit for purpose" until further development is performed.

Just my random thoughts.

Now back to flying. Cheers, suncoast. P.S. All the best for 2021.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you get a rig that meets the "Recommended" specs, you should have a very nice MSFS 2020 experience without mortgaging the farm for the gear.

 

I'm NOT running a top end system but can fly just fine and have great immersion with most parameters at least set to Medium - High and have not experienced a CTD yet. I agree that to run everything at "Ultra"? Find that deed and head to the mortgage broker - lol

"Don't believe everything you see on the internet." - Abe Lincoln HP Pavilion Desktop i5-8400@2.8ghz, 16gb RAM, 1TB M.2 SSD, GTX1650 4GB, 300 MBPS internet, 31.5" curved monitor, Logitech yoke-throttle, Flt Vel trim wheel, TFRP rudder pedals, G/M IR headset, Extreme 3D Pro joystick, Wheel Stand Pro S Dlx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the early 1980s, I worked for a company that required an extensive economics spreadsheet run for each project. It took just over 50 minutes to run that on an 8088 machine. When I purchased my first PC, I splurged and bought an 80286. That ran the program in 12 minutes. A few years later I got an 80386 machine that ran it in under 3 minutes. Later still I got an 80486-66 PC that ran it in a few seconds.

The point to this chronology, is two fold. First, computer power is consistently growing. That expanding capability encourages program developers to add more detail and complexity to use that extra power. The second point is that software often is created waiting on the hardware to run it efficiently. Waiting over 50 minutes for a program to run, was a huge waste of time for a scientist. By the time the 80486-66 came out, the hardware had caught up to the demands of that software.

Most flight simulators are written with the expectation of advancing hardware. When FSX first came out few had hardware to really run it well. Now it runs at everything maxed and FPS never dips below my lock. In 3-4 years, we will have hardware that can really exploit the full potential of MSFS FS2020 at 4k. But it is really amazing even at 1980x1200 with last year's hardware.

Edited by plainsman
I7-9700K, RTX-2070, Asus Strix Z-390-H MB, 32gb G Skill 3000 CL15, Corsair Obsidian 750D case, WD Black 1tb M.2, Crucial CT500MX SSD, Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium PSU
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 11 months later...
Me, 69 underbudget, just finished my first PC build, as prebuilds have a lot I don't want but lack what I do want... So now: B550M , 5 5600X , 2x16 3200 16 , 1TB NVMe, Cooler, 650W Gold all for $ 800,00 with that I reinstalled my 'old' ODD, HDD, and SSD. One thing left: 'GPU' I now run FS9 FSX all maxed on my 'vintage' GTX1050TI. But for MSFS I need to upgrade. Luckilly prices are 'falling' now, but have not yet reached my available budget of $ 800,00. Further I cannot decide what is more important: GPU Memory size or Memory 'Interface speed' (same as 'bus speed' I guess) It looks like increasing the memory interface speed is far more expensive than increasing memory size. 2:1 I think. Most budget cards $400,00 stay under 192bit while finding a GPU that has 256bit will start over $700,00. My gaming is 1080p , 25# , 144hz. I would be satisfied with fps of around 40 and settings on high. Anyone being able to give some advice if memory interface speed or memory size is the preferred option... thnxs for any comment....

I5 12600K - RTX3060TI - 32GB 3600 - M2 - WIN11 - FS8/9/X - MSFS - full ORBX UTX etc. 

 

zweefvlieg1987s.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info. I am currently creating a video. The only problem is that I cannot find how to combine vob files. Maybe someone came across a similar one.

 

convert any video format and much more..... this may be your solution, convert them to the format you're working with instead....

 

 

https://handbrake.fr/

Edited by daspinall

ASRock X570 TAICHI Mother Board

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 3.79 GHz *Overclocked*

Corsair 240mm H100i ELITE CAPELLIX RGB Intel/AMD CPU Liquid Cooler

Corsair DOMINATOR PLATINUM RGB 64GB 3600MHz *Overclocked*

MSI NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB SUPRIM X Ampere.

1000W PSU. Samsung 870 EVO 2TB SSD. HP Reverb G2 + Oculus Quest 2

Samsung Odyssey G9 C49G95TSSR - QLED monitor - curved - 49" - 5120 x 1440 Dual Quad HD @ 240 Hz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Handbrake program can also be used to reduce file size. I made a 40 min video (*.mov) and ran it thru Handbrake and the finished size (*.mp4) was 330 mb. I Love Handbrake.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...