Delta Virtual Airlines Water Cooler - I need to share this I just went from 8 fps MAX to 30 fps MIN in FSX

Delta Virtual Airlines Water Cooler | PC Support | I need to share this I just went from 8 fps MAX to 30 fps MIN in FSX

DVA6534
Senior Captain, B747-400
OLP

Joined on October 19 2008
50 State Club
Online Triple Century Club
Quincentenary Club
DVA Ten-Year Anniversary
Everett 250 Club

Cleveland, OH USA

576 legs, 1,329.4 hours
377 legs, 879.4 hours online
570 legs, 1,318.5 hours ACARS
36 legs, 87.6 hours event
30 legs dispatched, 40.9 hours

Posted onPost created on July 21 2010 19:59 ET by John DeBarr

ok I debated posting this here.. I was going to post it if at the other forum I posted didnt come to a solution. Here.. a FPS problem was GOING to get solved with some in depth analysis. whatever. So for those of you that are thinking about an OS upgrade you need to think about this.

I am going to admit something I am the Network Operations / Data Center Manager for a medium sized City. (you know where if you look at my profile) yea.. the whole city.. that is mine. I am going to admit something that is embarassing but if it helps someone else that might be a old pc jockey like me. with certain pre concieved notions of what is and what is NOT true.. here you go.

I got a pretty ok.. Gaming rig about 2 years ago..

I got a AMD 7750 Black Edition (overclocked 10%)
4 gigs of ram in 2 matched sticks running at 1033 (overclocked another 10%)
I have a Nvidia GT 8800GT 256 Meg by EVGA card.

so.. I have seen peoples flight reports.. and i am about average on FS2004.. A little above the norm.. i get like 50-60 fps if I am not screwing around with the pc encoding video at the same time as flying or somehing silly.

but I always wanted to be in FSX.. it looks better. it is neater.. more views.. it is the newest.. but I ran it before.

I ran just about EVERY tweak and default FSX KATL with the Airbus (Payware) a320 I was getting parked in Concourse A with medium settings about 8 FPS..

it stunk.. I could slideshow my way into the air to get somewhere near 20 fps off the ground.. went to a low res VC.. still about 20 MAX FPS and looked BAD.

so.. I went and bought anew video card.. with the logic.. ok when I bought the 256 meg card.. there was that and the 512.. my wallet said 256 ( got a new egg deal for a good price) That is what I bought. so I figured.. 3 days ago.

Ill get this 1 gig DDR5 card from ATI.. SURELY this will scream I said.
so i packed up my 9 year old daugher into the car and headed to best buy. They had a sale on a 5750 for 150 bucks. Figure.. thats pretty good.. lets give it a go..

i go .. get the card.. come home.. install it get lastest drivers from ATI website.

..

guess what..

8 FPS..

NO difference.

so i run benchmarks..

the score of the PC is the SAME with both cards.. even tho the video score for the new 1 gig ATI card is double what my 8800 GT is.

no FPS difference.. I was floored.. ??? WHAT is it?

so I started researching procs. Mine is at 2.8 GHZ it is a dual core.. so.. it aint the best but from my looking in the scheme of things it SHOULD be ok.

but it isnt..

so i posted on the other forum and gave ALL THe dumps of the pc..

well.. one guy says.. hey dummy you have 4 gigs of ram.. and you are running a 32 bit version of windows 7 you can only address 3.2 gigs of ram INCLUDING your video card.. so.. it cant address it.

well long story short.. I nuked win7 32 bit.. and installed 64 bit.. put all software back on.. and mind you HERE is the important thing..

the 8800GT is the card in the machine not the ATI 1 Gig card

so it WAS 8 FPS maybe 10..

guess what.. with settings MAXED (from a default un tweaked install) i am getting 25-35 FPS

So.. 64 BIT OS.. apparently THERE is a difference.

i dont fully understand it but I felt I needed to share. I with my background SHOULD have known this.. but I am like.. so 700 meg is unaddressable.. SO what..

yea.. my mistake. i have been running a nice machine crippled for 2 years because of my mistake.

Ill post more later.. but.. I got a A320 calling my name out of KATL.

John DeBarr

Senior Captain, B747-400

DVA6983
Captain, B737-800

Joined on February 07 2009
Century Club

""Can't, never did anything..""
Phoenix, AZ USA

125 legs, 233.4 hours
4 legs, 7.2 hours online
125 legs, 233.4 hours ACARS

Posted onPost created on July 21 2010 20:29 ET by Dale Westlund

I have a pretty good system myself but also shot myself in the foot with windows 7, 32 bit.. I am looking to upgrade to the 64 bit version myself and I figure about 8 GB of RAM should make my fsx work alot better also. I'm in the same boat as you. My computer kills fs9 but just won't run fsx the way I'd like. It's the 32 bit OS holding my system back.

Dale Westlund (DVA6983)

DVA8158
Captain, B767-300
OLP

Joined on December 31 2009
Century Club
Online Century Club
50 State Club

"Eight hours bottle to throttle."
Newnan, GA USA

197 legs, 437.5 hours
161 legs, 329.8 hours online
196 legs, 435.9 hours ACARS
5 legs, 17.1 hours event

Posted onPost created on July 22 2010 09:35 ET by Peter Bagrationoff

I had an e6600 oc to 3 GHZ and 4 GB DDR2 800 with a 640MB 8800 GTS getting about 30 FPS in Windows XP 32 bit in FSX but sliders were only at about 30%. Built a new i7 860 Lynnfield w/ 4GB DDR3 1600 and an ATI 5850 and getting 35 to 40 FPS with sliders at 75% in Windows 7x64. Memory addressing does make a difference as does CPU in FSX. I didn't notice much of a jump in performance between the nvidia 8800GTS and my ATI 5850. I had the 8800 GTS in my new rig when I first built it so I tested both. I maybe gained 5 to 10 FPS which proves FSX is more dependent on CPU and memory.

Peter Bagrationoff (DVA8158)

Posted onPost created on July 22 2010 18:29 ET by Dale Westlund

Yeah I have the E6600 core 2 duo. 2.40 GHZ (not OC'd at all) and a 256 MB, nVIDIA 8800GTX.. It does fairly well in flight around 20 fps and around larger airports it drops to 10 - 15.. Just barely stays above "slide show" mode. And sometimes like at LAX it will start to stutter pretty bad but I have my sliders set to around 60 - 70 percent depending on which one it is and some cranked all the way but I just can't fly in a baron waste land. So I sacrifice some performance for the eye candy.

Dale Westlund (DVA6983)

Posted onPost created on December 26 2014 21:16 ET by John DeBarr

Funny reviving my old thread from eons ago .. I now have a AMD 8 core and a GTX 660ti and FSX runs like hot garbage and crashes all the time. frown

John DeBarr

Senior Captain, B747-400

DVA11957
Captain, MD-11
OLP

Joined on February 02 2014
DVA One-Year Anniversary
Double Century Club
Online Double Century Club
Everett Century Club
Events Century Club

"Fly everything, it never hurts."
Centereach, NY

290 legs, 843.0 hours
256 legs, 779.3 hours online
276 legs, 797.1 hours ACARS
117 legs, 260.7 hours event

Posted onPost created on December 26 2014 21:55 ET by Darren Tung

Consider getting Steam edition. Steam is more GPU dependent than CPU dependent, and it might work really well with your current rig.

Darren Tung

Captain, MD-11

For flight simulation purposes only. Not a commercial website. In no way are we affiliated with Delta Air Lines, its affiliates, or any other airline. All logos, images, and trademarks remain the property of their respective owners. Delta Virtual Airlines is a non-profit entity engaged in providing an avenue for flight simulation enthusiasts.