We just puechased a new laptop wih Vista Ulimate 64 bit OS. Of course I had to load my FS9 right away , but poo, it wont fly! Has anyone out there run FS9 on Vista 64bit platform, I mean successfuly? I would like to hear how it is done. I also loaded FSX and it runs after a fashion, not good due to the poor graphics.
Post by Tom Goodrick on Aug 12, 2009 10:04:12 GMT -5
I think there may be more in the graphics system that determines how well FS will run than just the OS. Most laptops now have graphics on the motherboard but share ram with the system. That slows down the graphics display.
I am curious to see what my wife's new emachine does. It sounds great to have 2GB ram and nvidia geForce graphics but, for $349, I don't think it will be a whizzer. i am watching her play a game where you explore and look for objects before moving on. The display is great - super high rez and wide. But it does not move much.
Post by flaminghotsauce on Aug 12, 2009 11:20:08 GMT -5
Tom, your post set me off on a search this morning to see just how cheap a gaming machine can be had. A dual core machine with a decent graphics card can be had for under $500 new, or much less on Ebay. I saw a used machine on Ebay for $300 with an Nvidia 8800gt, in excellent condition. I'm still trying to get down to the state auction to see what I can pick up for $50. Lots of P4 machines down there that would be in the 2.8 ghz range. But none of these include a monitor.
It frustrates me knowing you are sitting on that 1ghz machine. You deserve a better one.
I have found that a recent update reset the FS9 compatibility mode. Bah. Reset things and am flying but poorly. We are presently here in Japan and I am without my CH Yoke & Pedals. I did haul over my trusty joystick.. The new laptop is a HP Pavilion dv7 /64 bit with MS Vista Ultimate OS Intel Core 2 2.4GHz and 6.0GB RAM Integrated video Nivdia GeForce 9600M GT shares main memory
Post by flaminghotsauce on Aug 13, 2009 7:45:17 GMT -5
Bud, I think the Vista OS is fine for FS9, but having integrated graphics is more likely to hurt the process.
My playing with 2002 reminded me of my FS9 upgrade days. I could run 2002 fine, but FS9 required a video card. The Nvidia 9600 gt dedicated GPU would be plenty sufficient, but somehow integrated chips just don't do as well. My old Compaq had a dedicated GPU chip and would outperform my main (at that time) gaming FS9 computer. That said, ATI has some new chip to intall on motherboards that is supposed to do very well, but I haven't seen it yet. I'm going to go read up on your model, and the GPU chip and see what I can find out.
The specs of your laptop says it should run FS9, but the details of graphics processing will tell. Dedicated VS integrated. I'll post back later to see what I find out.
Should you be so inclined to put 2002 on your machine, I guarantee your laptop will fly 2002 most excellently. It looks very much like 2004, so you won't miss much. I bought 2002 for $15 off of Ebay.
Post by flaminghotsauce on Aug 13, 2009 13:54:20 GMT -5
I did a little reading, and each review of your laptop says "9600m gt Video Card", so it's a card. That should be more than enough video card to run FS9.
It also says it's a 512mg memory card. With that, it shouldn't need to borrow too much memory from the main system! That's a good thing.
I guess you'll have to test different settings in the sim software to see if you can speed it up and smooth it out.
Oh, under Vista, did you shut down the User Account Control? Do that. You can also turn off all the eye-candy, and there's a setting for "max performance" vs good looks. When enabled, your windows will look like you're running Windows 2000. Every bit will help.
When you run your Vista Experience test (control panel/perfomance information and tools), what does it show? Typically , the lowest perfomance number there will be your bottleneck. Even though my graphics processor is my lowest, it's still 5.9, so I"m cruising.
flame Thanks for the heads-up on the Vista. The first thing I did was to get rid of the dim User Account Control thing. What a bother ,UGH! I am working on checking all FS settings so as to get best out of it. I have taken your advice and set the OS for max performance, as I am quite sure this will help a lot. I have run the Vista Experience test and the score was 4,8. As you said the graphics was the low score obtained, The others are in the 5.4 - 5,8 range. Thanks again, I will let you know how all these tweaks work out. Bud