Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Fsx from microsoft

Tags:
  • Microsoft
  • Components
Last response: in Components
Share
December 11, 2009 8:09:57 PM

i have a computer with intelcore7 920 and windows 7 prof and gtx280 and 2 disks total 600 giga.
for fsx flying with a propellor aircraft the gtx280 memory is not sufficient enough.
we need for fsx a single grafic card with more then 1 giga memory.
does someone knows a better card?

during a flight my propellor aircraft gives a hard time to my card which end in a crash.
with a jet i have no problems which turned out that to much pixels go to the card it cannot be handled.
also when there is heavy weather involved.
The rest runs smoothly and i have enough frames per second.

doeke

More about : fsx microsoft

December 11, 2009 8:23:15 PM

How do you know video memory is the problem?

I'd be pretty surprised if that were the case, since I run FSX (both prop and jet) all the time with 1GB graphics memory and it works great.
December 11, 2009 9:02:56 PM

Jets/props shouldnt make any difference at all.Its not memory.
Is this prop plane a downloaded one,or came with game?
In fact the faster the aircraft the harder it is on gpu.More stuff flying by.
Its not the card mate.
Related resources
December 12, 2009 3:36:30 AM

As said... how do you know its the card?
What rez are u running?
Multiple monitors?
Assuming those are all 'normal'...

FSX doesn't really utilise the gfx card much. You could run it on a 6800 with the same results.

Make sure you have the service pack installed. That will ensure FSX uses all 4 cores.
The only thing that helps FSX is the cpu and since urs is pretty good, either try OC it or turn the detail down.

If you do have insane rez/multiple monitors, a 2nd card may be easier. Borrow one and try.
December 12, 2009 6:22:11 AM

i have 3 monitors of iilama -prolight 1920x1200
my resolution via matrox is 1280x1024 this is the max.
i learned from some guru's that fsx is not supported by a dual card and is useless.
thats the reason i did not try a second card.
but some of you dont believe either in the card.
i installed all service pack.
my fps are 25-60.
the reason that i thought its the card is as follows:
fsx has a bufferpool in default about 4 million.
than i have stutters all over, so some people say increase it to whatever and it is solved.
that didnot turn out well so i reduced it to zero and then i had no stutters at all.
but then i got the black rain and the snow and the crashes when i fly props.
my computer shop men sais the props need much more pixels to handle then a jet.
that should be the reason he said the card is not enough and also by putting a bufferpool in cost the card its power.
i use the default cnessna and also a commercial one.
i tried furthermore to fly in windows mode and then there is no problem at all only
when i switch over to 3 full screens.
does this explanation give you some ideas?

December 12, 2009 8:00:38 AM

sorry but even if i fly in windows mode, i got immediately a scrammbled screen when i fly with a prop.
with a jet i dont have this problem only if i take away the cockpit and fly with the full screens.
December 12, 2009 8:53:54 AM

That could well be a graphics card problem, but not due to lack of memory. Do other games run fine?
December 12, 2009 3:19:13 PM

its my only simulator, i will try this thread on overclocking due to the fact may be this is a problem with memory speed overclocking and card

thanks anyway
December 12, 2009 4:03:29 PM

doeke said:
i have a computer with intelcore7 920 and windows 7 prof and gtx280 and 2 disks total 600 giga.
for fsx flying with a propellor aircraft the gtx280 memory is not sufficient enough.
we need for fsx a single grafic card with more then 1 giga memory.
does someone knows a better card?

during a flight my propellor aircraft gives a hard time to my card which end in a crash.
with a jet i have no problems which turned out that to much pixels go to the card it cannot be handled.
also when there is heavy weather involved.
The rest runs smoothly and i have enough frames per second.

doeke

have you updated your bios? do that: then clock that thing up to about 3.6ghz and enjoy!
December 12, 2009 6:49:10 PM

my bios has been installed last week so i assume all is well.
heatthread unabled.
what else could i do, all is filled inn aut.
i already clocked it 21x169= about 3.6

what i discovered tonight by checking all type of flights is follows:
i dont have problems with any aircraft in commercial airport and also
in vfr uk etc.
as soon as i am in the scenery of fsx then all went wrong.
i repaired my fsx but still the same.
i installed everything very thoroughly.
could it be some like UTX!
any ideas?
December 12, 2009 7:08:28 PM

before I clocked up I had scenery problems too. found a post that said disable autogen. tried it and my load times went down drastically. It was always slow from 70% to 80% when loading a mission. I did not notice much difference after I disabled autogen as far as the scenery went. It was just quicker to load!when I was flying all the usual scenery was still there/ Vista is such a memory hog that it causes the slowness in loading as well as the jerkiness while flying. could you have a bottleneck on the fsb?
December 12, 2009 7:13:07 PM

doeke said:
my bios has been installed last week so i assume all is well.
heatthread unabled.
what else could i do, all is filled inn aut.
i already clocked it 21x169= about 3.6

what i discovered tonight by checking all type of flights is follows:
i dont have problems with any aircraft in commercial airport and also
in vfr uk etc.
as soon as i am in the scenery of fsx then all went wrong.
i repaired my fsx but still the same.
i installed everything very thoroughly.
could it be some like UTX!
any ideas?


how many watts on your psu?
December 12, 2009 7:42:24 PM

does disable autogen means the slider to the left?
i have 1000 watt
December 12, 2009 11:40:28 PM

doeke said:
does disable autogen means the slider to the left?
i have 1000 watt


yeah. slider left. You might try a total reinstall instead of repairing fsx. I didn't get a good total install until about my 3rd try! that was AFTER all my improvements. I reinstalled after adding the graphics card. had problems with slow loading. added the new gpu.-it got a little faster-clocked up-it got somewhat faster. then my progressive taxi disappeared so I did a complete deletion of everything pertaining to fsx all the way down to saved flights. I did a thorough cleaning of the computer and defragmented the hard drive. Then, and only then, did i reinsert the first installation disk. when it asked me if i wanted to erase fsx i thought "what the hell?" and clicked uninstall. after it was through I ejected the disk, cussed Dell for a few minutes, then I cussed Vista for a few minutes, inserted the disk #1 and stayed right there with the machine while it downloaded everything. same thing with disk #2 and the acceleration disk. when everything was installed I put the disks away and went to the fsx home page. Everything was much better than it had been. More scenery which was much quicker and easier to see. much smoother flying. what the heck? its worth a try. You aren't happy with what you have now.
December 13, 2009 6:35:28 PM

doeke said:
i have a computer with intelcore7 920 and windows 7 prof and gtx280 and 2 disks total 600 giga.
for fsx flying with a propellor aircraft the gtx280 memory is not sufficient enough.
we need for fsx a single grafic card with more then 1 giga memory.
does someone knows a better card?

during a flight my propellor aircraft gives a hard time to my card which end in a crash.
with a jet i have no problems which turned out that to much pixels go to the card it cannot be handled.
also when there is heavy weather involved.
The rest runs smoothly and i have enough frames per second.

doeke

nvidia gtx 295 has 1792 mb and newegg will be happy to sell you one for $695.00! the shipping is free. what a deal!
December 15, 2009 12:48:21 AM

Yeah im kinda stuck on that one tbo.

Before forking out $$$ for a new card that may or may not fix the issue, id install some GFX monitoring tools... ATI Tool etc.

Those should have graphs for things including memory usage. After testing if your card is maxed, then yes, it could be safe to assume ur running out of ram.
December 15, 2009 4:21:50 AM

devtran1 said:
nvidia gtx 295 has 1792 mb and newegg will be happy to sell you one for $695.00! the shipping is free. what a deal!

That would be worse than what he currently has. The 295 has 2 GPUs, and the memory is evenly split. As a result, each one only has access to 896MB, and they can't pool the memory. In other words, if you're running out of memory on a 1GB card, then a 295 will only exacerbate the problem.
!