SurClaro Flight Simulator Resources

fr4ntic · Joined: 11 Sep 2004 Posts: 8 Location: Portugal

I just bought a new PC thinking FS only... no~work. I won't even install office or any boring software.

This is my config: Pentium Quad extreme QX 6800 at 2.93 GHz; Nvidea 8800 GTX 768; 2 G RAM corsair dominator, 2x 500 GB sata II 7200; MB: Gigabyte P35C-DS3R, all ina a cooler master cosmos cage.

When I play FSX with all set to Very High, I still get a message saying there is not sufficient memory and I must shut down FS... :evil:

Can anyone help me: what is the perfect (or near) detail settings so I can fly with no problems?

Thank you.

mel wilson · Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:21 pm Post subject:

The only advice I can give you, is to back off you sliders untill such time as you get settled performance from FSX, it will eat everything you throw at it.

There is no optimal settings, it's a matter of suck it and see.

Mel.

Cat1 · Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:39 pm Post subject:

I'm thinking 2 more GB of RAM and you may have better luck. Just my opinion and it is based off nothing other than me reading specifications lately.

groundsquirrel · Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:57 am Post subject: can you...

Can you post up a link to the spec for the motherboard? I have an idea, but cant say 'till I check on a few things.

viche12345 · Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Posts: 835 Location: San Diego, CA, USA

That monster machine can't handle maxed out settings? Maybe I'm underestimating FSX's real potential, but that's hard to imagine! Did this machine come with any annoying bundled software? Or was this a clean install?

As GS suggests, please post up your full system specs, including the motherboard spec. Thanks!

fr4ntic · Joined: 11 Sep 2004 Posts: 8 Location: Portugal

No other software... just FSX/SP1, Track IR Pro and Flight Club X. Other than that... virgin machine.

GA-P35C-DS3R

CPU Support Intel® Core™2 Extreme Quad-Core/ Core™2 Duo / Pentium® D Processor

CPU Socket LGA775

FSB 1333/1066/800 MHz

Chipset Intel® P35 + ICH9R

Onboard Graphics -

Graphics Interface 1*PCI-E x16 slot

Memory Dual Channel DDR3 1066/800 MHz

Dual Channel DDR2 1066/800/667 MHz

Memory Socket 4*DDR2+2*DDR3

Max Memory 8 GB by DDR2 or 4 GB by DDR3

Expansion Slots 3*PCI + 3*PCI-Ex1

ATA connector 8*SATA 3Gb/s + 1*PATA

RAID SATA RAID 0, 1, 5, 10 (ICH9R)/
SATA RAID 0,1,JBOD
(GIGABYTE SATA2)

Audio HD Audio, 8-channel

IEEE 1394 -

USB 2.0 12*USB 2.0

LAN Gigabit LAN

BIOS Virtual DualBIOS

Features Quad-Core Optimized,
Vista Premium,
All-Solid Capacitor, Silent-Pipe,Speed, Smart, Safe,
Blu-ray/HD DVD Support

Software Easy Tune 5,
Norton Internet Security,
Kapersky Antivirus

Form Factor (mm) ATX (305x244)

RoHS RoHS Compliant

jaeger52 · Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Posts: 442 Location: Minneapolis, MN

I wish I could remember where I heard what I'm about to say because I would post it up here. So you'll have to take the following with a grain of salt.

I seem to remember an official MSFSX video release (six to eight months ago,) in which one of the FSX design team, stated something to the effect that FSX was "upward designed" waaaaaaaay beyond the capabilities of the best gaming machines (of the day), because they wanted the End User's to enjoy FSX for many years to come.

In otherwords, FSX was developed in such a way as to challenge the computer mfg's, video card mfg's et, al for many, many years to come.

In other words, the computer that can take advantage of all "everything" FSX has coded into it....does not yet exist and may not exist for years to come.

And don't think for a minute that MS doesn't already have the technology to overbuild this game.

Okay, everyone lock and load and take out Jaeg- as soon as he raises his head!

Ha ha!

Jaeg-

harkonnen · Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2007 8:37 pm Post subject:

I do remember reading the same thing a while back, right from the horse's mouth at FSinsider or on one of the 'ACES' team member's blogs...they want the hardware to be challenged for a good two years with FSX. It makes sense that the 'ACES' team is going to load up a modern sim with more than we can handle, You don't want the whole thing to be outdated graphics-wise in 10 months...and that way they can put a whack of wish-list stuff in for all us scenery junkies despite a lot of folks not being able to run at higher settings yet. Makes good business sense too, I suppose releasing PC-killer software likw FSX and Vista fuels a number of other hardware-based industries. It's the big guys scratching each others backs while we scramble to keep up! :twisted: :D :D

groundsquirrel · Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 12:37 am Post subject: do you...

Do you have the on-board graphics turned off?

viche12345 · Joined: 01 Apr 2005 Posts: 835 Location: San Diego, CA, USA

jaeger52 wrote: I wish I could remember where I heard what I'm about to say because I would post it up here. So you'll have to take the following with a grain of salt.

I seem to remember an official MSFSX video release (six to eight months ago,) in which one of the FSX design team, stated something to the effect that FSX was "upward designed" waaaaaaaay beyond the capabilities of the best gaming machines (of the day), because they wanted the End User's to enjoy FSX for many years to come.

In otherwords, FSX was developed in such a way as to challenge the computer mfg's, video card mfg's et, al for many, many years to come.

In other words, the computer that can take advantage of all "everything" FSX has coded into it....does not yet exist and may not exist for years to come.

And don't think for a minute that MS doesn't already have the technology to overbuild this game.

Okay, everyone lock and load and take out Jaeg- as soon as he raises his head!

Ha ha!

Jaeg-

Oh yeah! I remember reading that. Gosh can't believe I forgot about that point!

What marketing can do...

michael_horatio · Joined: 10 Oct 2007 Posts: 6

Get rid of Norton Internet Security (pure BLOAT)

make sure you turn everything off in the system tray so only the sim is running.
Leave the AV on if you are flying online.