Heathrow at 20 fps in FSX

[Bernabie 0]

Yes, you're not alone in your assessment of the UK2000 airports. A luck that I first tried out the demo because it would otherwise have been a rip off of your hard earned money.

My fps was even lower at Stansted. Got only a 5fps at the gates in my ATR, but the strange was that the closer I was coming to the Rwy for taking off the extreme it became in negative sense, meaning that it went thus from 5 fps at the gates gradually down to 3.5, later on to 2.7 to eventually become just 1.6 exactly on the spot of the Rwy.

Something is clearly designed very badly at those Runways in those UK extreme airports, and my guess is that that is what causes the very extreme destruction of the fps on them. Not worth a buy anyhow. At least not in the way it has been designed as it is of this moment.

Maybe that it will better when the updates for SP2 will come out, but I doubt it. And it's a kinda of sad because they are very well designed I noticed.

Note: My PC is even a quad core one with 4Gb of Ram and a nVidia GTX 8800 768MB Ram graphics card running on an Intel Viiv chip.

So yes, really this is a very bad fps for these airports when having a PC that should at least be able to get into the twenties.

Edit: And one note by the way also is that ATC is a complete mesh when you have lucky to land somehow, but not smoothly. They will direct you to a complete wrong direction, as I came to notice when I asked for a parking spot at the gates. They instead directed me to a hangar all the way on the other side of the airport. So yeah, it's sad, but it are clearly airporst that are not finished at all, or at least won't work at all in FSX that is, as how an airport should work at 100%, not 50% for FS9 and the rest for FSX, meaning that you only get yourself a 50% working airport with lots of problems. At least this is a fact on my system with for sure one airport that I tested out that is completely unusable in FSX. And I don't think that any other airport of the Exteme version will be different to this regard. FSX clearly can't stand FS9 code very well.

[limp 29]

I did a defrag friday night... I also ordered new ram 2*2 GB instead of my 4 * 1 GB because I'm getting some memory errors... I'll report back as soon as my Windows issues are solved

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

After reading all your posts, I am lacking confidence in my pc. I have a pretty decent setup...so I don't see why I'm only getting about 7-8 fps. with the settings discussed here for Heathrow X.

Specs:

AMD Athlon 64 fx 60 dual core

Windows Vista Ultimate x64

2048MB DDR RAM PC3200 400MHz

Asus A8N32-SLI-DELUXE Socket 939 Motherboard

BFG GeForce 8800 GTX OC 768MB GDDR3 (core clock 626mhz)

FSX SP1+2 (not acceleration)

I'm trying to think what is wrong but I can't pinpoint it.

Regards,

737Best

Well you got a CPU and a OS that are not very suitable for FSX. 2 Gb of mem and your graphics card are great. The simple fact however at this moment is that the Intel multiple core CPU's offer the best frames for the amount of money.

[minhnghia89 0]

Hi!everyone

My system specification is

ASUS P5K motherboard

Intel core 2 Dou E6850 @ 3.00Ghz

Visiontek ATI 3870 512 MB GDDR4

Kingston 3GB RAM (4.00GB actually but window could not detect)

500Gb Western Digital Sata II 16MB

Window Vista 32bit

But when i run FSX with high performance my FSP is also between 6-12????

Is anything wrong with my computer? (Good Driver)

And at heathrow my FPS only about <13 :roll: with medium setting

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Hi!everyone

My system specification is

ASUS P5K motherboard

Intel core 2 Dou E6850 @ 3.00Ghz

Visiontek ATI 3870 512 MB GDDR4

Kingston 3GB RAM (4.00GB actually but window could not detect)

500Gb Western Digital Sata II 16MB

Window Vista 32bit

But when i run FSX with high performance my FSP is also between 6-12????

Is anything wrong with my computer? (Good Driver)

And at heathrow my FPS only about <13 :roll: with medium setting

Could be a dozen things (from hardware to drivers), but you should get better performance. Either some settings are not right or something is eating your CPU cycles.

Are we talking a clean FSX (*what SP?), did you do some of the silly tweaks that are advised on forums?

[minhnghia89 0]

I am using SP2 and before i did tweak it was still the same and now after i tweaked it was a bit better. And when i set the setting like you then i saw something from the buildings going up??????like triangles. After i ran FSX few mins then i could not see any text or letters either in ATC window and menu bar

[a320wolf 5]

Mmmm.... Hey guys, please, there something wrong for me in this thread.

I have an E6700@2.9Ghz 4GB RAM PC6400 8800GTX ULTRA 2x150GB RAPTOR HD in striping mode Vista64 Ultimate and with EGLL2008 I have also 10fps. Why? Because there are others important things to write down to compare different systems:

- video resolution (1280, 1600 or 1920 can change fps!)

- the "others fsx settings" are important on the fps impact (first of all the BLOOM LIGHTS feature)

- I use FSX and FS9 to fly and not only to see around the airport. If you want to test a system you should try a normal situation: how many fps do you have if you try to land at EGLL with a PDMG 747 or LEVEL-D 767, and some clouds in the sky ? :wink:

Probably in this case you'll have low fps even if you have a Quad Core and a 8800GTX! The same story again: new FS version (not fully optimized - when it was released it hadn't the Dual Core support!! Do you remember?) and low fps also for best pc available now on the market! Probably next year we'll have better hardware and FSX will be more flyable.

Try to fly with FS9 with a Dual Core now: you have 30fps with all setting at max level and also flying with heavy add-ons! :wink:

Bye, Max

[Stuart McIntyre 3]

hey guys, thought i would chip in on this topic as ive been having trouble getting my FSX to work as good as everyone else says it should my system specs are :

Intel E2200 2.2 GHz

4Gig of ram (3.5 avail)

Nvidia GeForce 9500GT 512mb driver 197.45 (for nHancer)

Windows 7 Home 32-bit

FSX SP2 (acceleration)

i had a look at your settings that were displayed and laughed to myself thinking I'll never get that, well guess what!

this was taken using 1024x768 resolution and the same settings as posted yet still such low fps (5.4) (this was also not at its worst! its been as low as 3 which is basically unusable!)

here are the settings i turned water effects down to 1x as any higher and it would be even worse!

i did another test this time with 1680x1050 (the resolution the rest of my computer uses, and which i have no problems *usually*) (6.6 fps - strange considering the lesser resolutions results! )

the thing i am starting to think is that im not doing something right, i believe you when you say its possible to get 15+ fps but im not sure whats wrong, i also use the orbx auz scenery which gives me at least 15fps with most addons. Im not looking for click my fingers magic answer apears but if you guys have any ideas that may help as i really want to trasfer over to fsx its just the fps thats holding me back, and hearing about other people with system specs less than my own with higher fps makes me confused (i should also add that this is not limited to just heathrow i also get low fps at other addon airports!)

[Shaun Fletcher 570]

Hello Stuart,

You may want to try to get rid of the 3D clouds and the shadows from aircraft and buildings and see what you get then.

[Stuart McIntyre 3]

thanks for your advice sean ill try that out later and let you know what i get