| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
liascm
Joined: 30 Sep 2008
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 6:22 pm Post subject: do you think i can run fsx in ultra high quality |
|
|
my specs:
8gb ram
768 mb NVIDIA® GeForce™ 9600 GS with PureVideo® HD technology
1 terobite hard drive
2.4ghz processor |
|
| Back to top |
|
mel wilson
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 1891
Location: England, Biggin Hill, (EGKB)
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Better than most with those stats.........I'm sure we would all love to see some fab screenshots... post a couple up, so we can see FSX as it should be... :wink:
Mel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Cat1
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 1161
Location: KFTW (Meacham Intl, Ft. Worth)
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2008 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Only way to know for sure is to slide all the sliders to the right and fly it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
heeshung
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 549
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 1:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| To be blunt and honest, no. Not even close. If you run at 640x480, you might be able to reach 20 FPS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
tropicalfish
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 860
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
What processor?
2.4ghz is not enough info... |
|
| Back to top |
|
heeshung
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 549
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
No difference. Even if he were on a $1020 Core 2 Extreme QX6850, his 9600GT would still be a bottleneck.
What resolution you run it will drastically affect your graphics settings. However, like I said before, even at 640x480, I doubt you'll be able to achieve 25FPS on Ultra High.
Without ultra high quality however, you'll be able to play FSX just fine. If you want to see how it will run before you buy it, just get the FSX demo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
mel wilson
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 1891
Location: England, Biggin Hill, (EGKB)
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Somehow guys..... I have my doubts we will see any screenshots, that's why I posed the question in the first place, if i had that rig with those specs, then, I at least would have tried it before asking the question........
He's the man on the ground, he should already know !
Mel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
tropicalfish
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 860
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ahh, FSX. I didn't notice that.
FS9, pretty well. FSX? Not very well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
heeshung
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 549
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yep, like tropicalfish said, on FS9, pretty well, but on FSX Ultra High, in a word, horribly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
viche12345
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 833
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 01, 2008 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
heeshung wrote: No difference. Even if he were on a $1020 Core 2 Extreme QX6850, his 9600GT would still be a bottleneck.
It's the 9600GS, heeshung, not the GT. This should definitely lead to a bottleneck.
With DX10, Ultra High graphics isn't necessary at all. You can produce rather nice screenshots with that new rig of yours. Just remember to turn off AA when needed. You can turn it back on temporarily if you want to impress us with a stunning screenshot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
