My computer

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

I have a HP Pavilion XT938 cpu 1.3 Ghz/200, and I'm running 640 MB ram.
With a front side of only 200 Mhz it is a bit slow. When operating
Fs9 I would have to have the settings set at the lower setting. Even
then I wasn't happy, I didn't see the graphics I had heard about. I
would notice that I would be stuck on lessons.

After reading that 2002 could be run along side fs9 I looked around and
found a copy at a local store. I bought it and put it in. Since this
older program only required 300Mhz and 64Mb ram I can now run with 100%
on all my settings With these settings I can see the beauty of the
landscapes. If it looks this good at 90 meter resolution I can't wait
to try some 76 or 38 meter add ons. This brings up a question. Is it
possible to export some planes from FS9 so I could run them in 2002?

Last week I read "yes it's possible to install 2002 along side FS9 but
who would want to." Let me say after doing just that and seeing such an
improvement in the view go for it.

Mike

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Hi Mike... That's pretty close to my two HP computers here. Your stock specs can be found at:

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/genericDocument?lc=en&cc=ca&docname=bph06803

Here is what I got:

HP Pavilion, AMD 1.2ghz, 386MB, GeForce AGP 400MX (64MB)

HP Pavilion, PIII 533mhz, 256MB, SiS315E PCI (32MB)

And FS2002 runs very well on both machines (graphic mostly maxed out). FS2004 runs faster frame rates on the 1.2ghz computer (half maxed out). Although the photo like displays are not anywhere as good as the SiS card. I wish I could swap the two, put there isn't a AGP slot on the Pentium III.

The cheapest way to get better performance on your machine is to add a decent PCI video card. I would guess you can get upwards of 50% or better performance on that machine. For example, I disabled the built-in Intel 310E video card in the PIII and added the SiS one. And the performance doubled for running flight simulator. And the graphics are far better as well.

Bill



"mike wheelock" <wheels2@twmi.rr.com> wrote in message news:H2GWd.18$Kq4.2@fe2.columbus.rr.com...
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 16:17:43 GMT

> I have a HP Pavilion XT938 cpu 1.3 Ghz/200, and I'm running 640 MB ram.
> With a front side of only 200 Mhz it is a bit slow. When operating
> Fs9 I would have to have the settings set at the lower setting. Even
> then I wasn't happy, I didn't see the graphics I had heard about. I
> would notice that I would be stuck on lessons.
>
> After reading that 2002 could be run along side fs9 I looked around and
> found a copy at a local store. I bought it and put it in. Since this
> older program only required 300Mhz and 64Mb ram I can now run with 100%
> on all my settings With these settings I can see the beauty of the
> landscapes. If it looks this good at 90 meter resolution I can't wait
> to try some 76 or 38 meter add ons. This brings up a question. Is it
> possible to export some planes from FS9 so I could run them in 2002?
>
> Last week I read "yes it's possible to install 2002 along side FS9 but
> who would want to." Let me say after doing just that and seeing such an
> improvement in the view go for it.
>
> Mike