timholyoake wrote:I still have 2004 up and running. And I love it. Does this patch mean that in a system with a 64 bit OS that FS 2004 is actually accessing the full 4 Gig already? and can I get it to access 8 Gig if it is available?
It is a patch to overcome the limits of the software, not the operating system, so FS2004 will never use more than 2 GB without the patch. As it is called a 4 GB patch I would think it is rather unlikely to allow you to use 8 GB but I'm doubtful that much would make a lot of difference. Best to read the details on the web page than ask me on things like that, though.
Or just try it - you are just patching one FS file and if it is no good you can of course restore your backed-up original.
timholyoake wrote:I still have 2004 up and running. And I love it. Does this patch mean that in a system with a 64 bit OS that FS 2004 is actually accessing the full 4 Gig already? and can I get it to access 8 Gig if it is available?
It is a patch to overcome the limits of the software, not the operating system, so FS2004 will never use more than 2 GB without the patch. As it is called a 4 GB patch I would think it is rather unlikely to allow you to use 8 GB but I'm doubtful that much would make a lot of difference. Best to read the details on the web page than ask me on things like that, though.
Or just try it - you are just patching one FS file and if it is no good you can of course restore your backed-up original.
John
Sorry Chaps, but this isn't strictly true, x64 or not. Being absolutely frank, you will never get FSX or FS9 to use for GB or RAM. It won't. As a rule of thumb, to start eating RAM you need to be running something Like VMware or somebody's SQL server. This "Patch" isn't a patch for FS, just to make that clear. It changes the default behaviour of the OS. This has been discussed on here many times. The windows OS typically limits 32bit apps (all of them that are running) to a max of 2GB, leaving the remaining 2GB (in a 4GB system) to the OS. The "patch" changes that so that on a 4GB system (as an example) the apps (all of them ) can use either 3 or 3.5GB of the RAM leaving the OS with less. I know lots of people that run this mod reliably, but my personal view is that if MS who write the opperating system thought this was a way of improving vista performance in a safe and reliable way, they'd do it as standard. Simple facts chaps. FSX and FS9 are 32bit apps. Having 8 GB in a desktop system these days which is only runing FS (either 9 or X) is pissing money against the wall. You will never use it properly.
I've run FSX on an XP workstaion we have in work with 16GB of RAM and 2 x Xeon processors and my current machine was quicker. 4Gb Vista x64 and Intel Q6700 with Nvidia 8800GTX.
Ben, I cannot claim to have the technical knowledge that you do, but may I make a few points?
1. When you run the software that makes the patch, you have to define the file to patch - this being fs9.exe in the case of Flight Simulator 2004 and you have to run it again if you want to patch other games. I cannot see how you can possibly interpret this as a patch to the operating system and not the individual software. It does in fact modify fs9.exe and is also capable of modifying the no-cd patch of fs9.exe so that you can have the best of both worlds.
2. Flight Simulator 2004 is now quite old and in the days when it was created nobody ever considered using anything above 1 GB RAM on a home PC and when I use the word "nobody" it is not unreasonable to include Microsoft in that. I'm sure they never considered that people like us would pack our game with ridiculous levels of add-on software, pushing everything to its limits.
3. My statement of this patch eliminating the "out of memory" errors when approaching large add-on airports is categorically true - this was happening irritatingly often to me but hasn't happened once since installation of the patch. Fact. There have been no adverse effects. Fact. I do not know how it would work with Vista - I only have XP.
Search the web for "fs9 out of memory" or similar and you will find many people who use it and recommend it, including payware scenery developers. I get the impression the patch is used very heavily by shoot-em-up gamers to great advantage.
It is a patch that can be used to some benefit - it will never solve some niggles with Flight Simulator because much is limited by the hardware. Obviously it cannot give you the full 4 GB as you have other things using memory, but it will give you access to a lot more memory than without the patch.
It is up to each individual whether they use it or not, but to condemn it is pointlessly negative.
Hi John. You may well be right about it giving you access to more memory with the patch than without, but it is not possible in a Windows 32bit OS for ANY application to use more than 2GB of RAM without actually modifying the OS settings. (using the 3GB switch) Its just the way it is I'm affraid. These guys may have done something clever though so that FS9 can use more that it would usually, but in a default OS it can't use more than 2GB. Glad its sorted your errors though
.Hi Ben how you doing?EricT