[jhb_airlines] Re: FSX Official Add-On Acceleration

  • From: "Mike Brook" <mike.brook@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 11:46:13 -0000

Looks as though Gerry has been reading the same book as me <g>

Thanks for your observations, chaps.  It's a jungle out there ...

M.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb_airlines-
> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
> Sent: 05 November 2007 11:43 am
> To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: FSX Official Add-On Acceleration
> 
> Sorry Frank but if your first para refers to FSX, then it's 100%
> out!
> The large number of people having difficulty with FSX v
> framerates,
> stutters and blurries, have cured them only by going to dual core
> processors. Prior to SP1 it didn't access the second core but now
> it
> does. The dual core route has produced improvements where more
> and
> faster memory, higher spec graphics card etc have had little
> effect.
> 
> Even in the case of FS9, my change to a slightly slower but dual
> core
> processor has totally transformed it. In FS9 I flew over pea
> soup, at 25
> fps. Now it's crytstal clear and, if I unlock them, fps are above
> the
> max it can record.
> 
>  From what I've read, quad cores are even better.
> 
> The jury seems to be out on dual graphics cards though.
> 
> Gerry Winskill
> 
> 
> franklyn fisher wrote:
> 
> > Mike
> >
> > That sounds like a heavy spec and well future proofed.
> >
> > Cannot see any gain for quad or duo for FS at the moment,
> others may
> > say different, and bearing in mind that software writers are
> very slow
> > to rewrite to take advantage of the multi cores, and it will
> take
> > years to recode for that. So for software to take advantage, it
> is
> > still a way down the line.
> >
> > The only real advantage will be for multitasking.
> >
> > I have a budget of around 2 grand, and hope to be able to buy a
> > complete new setup with controllers/multi screen etc, which
> means
> > having to compromise a bit on the computor side.
> >
> > My current machine copes quiet well with what I run, and yes
> FS9 runs
> > like a rocket, will everything cranked up, and I have no plans
> for
> > upgrading to Vista, so my new machine will be FSX specific,
> networked
> > to my current.
> >
> > Regards video, a single or dual 8800 could be OTT, and stepping
> down
> > to an 8600 will save a few bucks, and still run what you want.
> But
> > that is your choice.
> >
> > Again FSX is not currently geared for it.
> >
> > These days, hardware development is way ahead of software, I
> can
> > remember when software drove hardware development, yes I am
> showing my
> > age here.
> >
> > Do you remember when the DOS OS came on a 5 and a quarter inch
> > floppy?? even the first Windows came on a few of the latest 3
> and a
> > half stiffies. I do.
> >
> > These days, it is a couple of DVDs or more uugh!
> >
> > Enough.
> >
> > FF
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 




Other related posts: