[jhb_airlines] Re: VFR

  • From: "Peter Dodds" <pdodds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:39 +0100 (BST)

The RAM game in 2Gb chunks and it was cheaper to put in 2 x 2Gb than 3 x
1Gb, as i'm sure you know, pricing is often daft like that.

Anyway 80FPS is a slight improvement over 14, which in FSX is actually
quite flyable.  I've never been a frame rate chaser - I wanted more than 20,
so 80 is a bonus!!

Peter

> *From:* "F FISHER" <ffisher991@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Date:* Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:21:58 +0100
> 
> Peter
> 
> A fairly good spec, I am aiming a little higher, and will opt 
> (against my better judgment) for Vista 64 bit(32 bit apparently 
> will only read up to 3gig ram, so putting in 4, will be a bit of a 
> waste, WinXP is also 32 bit by the way, same limitation).
> 
> Assuming that FSX will run happily in Vista 64.
> 
> SP1 and 2 does ramp up FSX, the extra coding to cope with the newer 
> technology. A plus.
> 
> Frank F

Other related posts: