Should I replace the computer or just the video card?

[Sid2008]

Hi, I get frustrated with FSX stuttering whenever I fly over road traffic or around brids. I thought that I had a good system, but apparently not.

I have a desktop with Intel (R) Core (TM) 2 Quad Q8300 processor at 2.50 GHz, 4 gigs of RAM, and a NVIDIA Ge Force 9500 GT video card with 512 Mb of memory. My op system if Windows XP-64 bit edition.

I have read on this forum that folks with a NVIDIA 470 video card is one where FSX is always smooth. So, I was wondering if changing my video card will make FSX smoother.

Thanks for your responses,
Sid

[Daube]

Hi, I get frustrated with FSX stuttering whenever I fly over road traffic or around brids. I thought that I had a good system, but apparently not.

I have a desktop with Intel (R) Core (TM) 2 Quad Q8300 processor at 2.50 GHz, 4 gigs of RAM, and a NVIDIA Ge Force 9500 GT video card with 512 Mb of memory. My op system if Windows XP-64 bit edition.

I have read on this forum that folks with a NVIDIA 470 video card is one where FSX is always smooth. So, I was wondering if changing my video card will make FSX smoother.

Thanks for your responses,
Sid

2,5 GHz is slow, and the 9500 is a low-end video card.
If you can overclock your CPU to make it reach the 3GHz, then you won't need to replace it, and replacing the video card by a real high-end will make you computer "good enough" for a reasonnable price.
However, you will have to ensure that the power supply is powerfull enough for this new card.

[Helldiver]

I'm through chasing the Frame Rate Fairy. I'm using a GTX 250 and it still ain't enough. So as a result I went back to FS 2002 and opened everything up and away I go. I even get to fly out of Meigs Field, completely against Mrs. Obama's wishes.
No flicker, no jaggies, no shimmering. It's as stable as a rock at 55 FPS.

[AndyE1976]

I was running a Q6600 quad core at 2.4ghz (I think), 4gb RAM and an Nvidia 8600GT with 512mb.

When my graphics card crapped out I got a Gigabyte 9800GT with 1gb and W7 also crapped out doing a system restore so I took the opportunity to go to 64bit at the same time.

The results are that I can run FSX with all the addons and get good crisp photo scenery and extreme density on the scenery even in VFR London X and it runs at around 15-20fps, whereas before I'd be lucky to get more than 10.

CPU and RAM are important as is IO performance, but there's a lot to be said for upgrading the graphics card to fix slow graphics.

Personally I'd say a GTX470 is overkill for the system you have and you may not see the full benefit, but on the otherhand you won't need to replace it when or if you upgrade the rest of your system.

[ryanbatc]

Both.

[txnetcop]

I'm through chasing the Frame Rate Fairy. I'm using a GTX 250 and it still ain't enough. So as a result I went back to FS 2002 and opened everything up and away I go. I even get to fly out of Meigs Field, completely against Mrs. Obama's wishes.
No flicker, no jaggies, no shimmering. It's as stable as a rock at 55 FPS.

The GTX250 was supposed to be an improved 9800GTX...it wasn't! It was a dismal failure.

[roger-wilco-66]

I'm having a similar problem with my setup ( except for a NVIDIA 9600 GTO card, which did fairly well enough for a long time ) and will try one of the new low cost fermis, the NVIDIA 450 GTS.
The only thing that bugs me on that card is the lowly 128 bit memory interface (my 9600 has 256 ??!!). But it's worth a try at only around 100 bucks (Euros).
You also might want to consider switching to Win7.

Just my 2ct,

Mark

[Sid2008]

Well, thank you all for your comments.

To sum up, it seems best to replace the computer and video card.

What would be a recommended system (computer processor, RAM, video card) that will make FSX run smoothly, without breaking the bank?

Any recommendations?

[mmann]

Well, thank you all for your comments.

To sum up, it seems best to replace the computer and video card.

What would be a recommended system (computer processor, RAM, video card) that will make FSX run smoothly, without breaking the bank?

Any recommendations?


You do realize of coarse, that even replacing your existing computer and video card may not result in a satisfying FSX experience.

So many variables come into play: where do you fly, what do you fly and what slider levels.

Then there is your operating system: what processes are running, background programs etc.

[gera]

You do realize of coarse, that even replacing your existing computer and video card may not result in a satisfying FSX experience.

So many variables come into play: where do you fly, what do you fly and what slider levels.

Then there is your operating system: what processes are running, background programs etc.

Agree 100%, there are many variables in this. But it is safe to say that with a dual processor 3.0MHz, 4 Meg, 700 Wats P.S, and a good 260 Nvidia card you do fine....still you have to constantly do "clean ups and defrags on your turf"......so much fun, no????

[dharris]

I took Ted's advice about a year ago and changed from an 8800 gt to a 260 evga and it was quite beneficial. The 3 ghz is also an important consideration. Tweaks can help or hurt depending on your system. All things considered, the 250 does not cut it. But fsx is now stable and runs smooth with fps set at 23, most sliders on max or close to it, traffice at 53 %. You have to play with your system, a change anywhere will affect everything else, you just have to reach a balance. Worked well for me. A big thanks to Ted, his research and help has been invaluable.

[hey_moe]

Get a 10ghz processor,10000 gig of memory,one super duper video card,10,0000 rpm hard drives and ya might..just might get away from da skipping...lol. :monkies: The best bang for ya buck is going to be the processor.

[txnetcop]

Get a 10ghz processor,10000 gig of memory,one super duper video card,10,0000 rpm hard drives and ya might..just might get away from da skipping...lol. :monkies: The best bang for ya buck is going to be the processor.

If you'll let me borrow Linda's credit card for an hour I will!!!!LOL

[Lionheart]

I'm through chasing the Frame Rate Fairy. I'm using a GTX 250 and it still ain't enough. So as a result I went back to FS 2002 and opened everything up and away I go. I even get to fly out of Meigs Field, completely against Mrs. Obama's wishes.
No flicker, no jaggies, no shimmering. It's as stable as a rock at 55 FPS.

LOLOLOL....


Funny, I am back into FS2004 myself for fun flying.. Developing FSX birds, but flying in FS2004. Smoooooooooooooooooooth....

EDIT: I am 'not' knocking FSX. Just stating that I fly again in FS9. Thats all. Peace to all... :d

[LonelyplanetXO]

I must admit I'm rapidly coming to the same conclusion. I love FSX's terrain detail, esp the OrbX scenery. But everythings limited on my system, and I have no inclination to upgrade my quad core computer just because FSX is so inconsistent. Truth is X is very pretty low and slow, but I have found that the number of simming hours per month has consistently fallen since moving to FSX. There's weeks go by now where I never even open the sim.

Maybe I'll go back to FS9 for a while. Sooo many addon planes, scenery, and so smooth, oh, oh, oh.

LPXO

[sblzei]

Sid2008,

Before investing money in new hardware, I suggest that you take a look in the FSX Tweaks Forum to the post titled ~ Thank you Jesus ~ Jesus Altuve, that is. * FSX Important * (by "boxcar").

It worked for me in a extraordinary way, and for the time being I have dropped the idea of replacing my vid card
(to play safe, just back-up your original FSX .cfg file).

Good Luck,

Ezio

[mmann]

As some others have mentioned here, I tried to go back to FS2004 after using FSX but ran into a snag; although my frame rates were a fair bit better, they varied greatly and I returned to FSX for a much smoother flying experience.

[Bjoern]

The GTX250 was supposed to be an improved 9800GTX...it wasn't! It was a dismal failure.

It had a new power saving mode and a new BIOS at least, lol.