FS9 Performance: memory, CPU or graphics card?

Post by **TSR2** » 29 May 2007, 20:06

The largest performance boost on FS is achieved through more system memory. The rendering in FS Isn't particularly heavy, although a good graphics card will improve it, the big problem is getting lots of image files from the disk to the CPU, so that tends to be the bottle neck. Having recently lost one of my 1GB dimms, FS is virtually unusable, despite having a high end graphics card. It now take 3 - 5 minutes to load a flight! :shock:

DanKH · Post by **DanKH** » 29 May 2007, 20:14

Then pull out your wallet Ben and aim for those 8 GB ..

Post by **Rick Piper** » 29 May 2007, 21:16

Hi Gevers

I have an ATI (Sapphire)X1950 XTX for sale PCIX 512mb GDDR4 VIVO fully Boxed etc.

(worked better than my current NV 8800GTX which has such crappy drivers after ATI stuff.

PM me with Offer if your serious.

Regards
Rick

Post by **TSR2** » 29 May 2007, 21:58

DanKH wrote:Then pull out your wallet Ben and aim for those 8 GB ..

Much as I'd love to go over the 4GB with x64, there is no point for FS as its only a 32 bit app and will only address a maximum of 2GB directly (It would use the rest for paging) My next step will be 4GB, but I really can't see me going for 8, unless i do win the lottery.

gevers1 · Post by **gevers1** » 29 May 2007, 23:22

god forgive me for asking this (again), but I'm going doolalley with all these video cards ...

okay, so the Radeon X1950 XTX or the nVidia GeForce 8800 GTS? Both roughly the same amount, the GeForce has slightly more onboard memory ... anyone have any opinions ..?

DanKH · Post by **DanKH** » 29 May 2007, 23:26

If you like ATI go for it, if you like nVidia go for it.....

Seach Google and get all the comparions you can get, and make up your own mind.

Post by **Rick Piper** » 29 May 2007, 23:38

Hi Gevers

The prices are very different i think.

I payed Â£250 for the X1950 XTX

Pretty sure the NV 8800 GTX is still approx Â£400 give or take Â£20

(under Â£200 now for my 6 week old XTX)

Regards
Rick

gevers1 · Post by **gevers1** » 30 May 2007, 22:48

Ok, I'mposting this only to relate my experiences in case anyone else out there is thinking of the same thing but .. today the new memory arrived, all 2gb of it. I added it to my system (so it's now got 3gb) and guess what - not a blind bit of difference. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that in some cases performance (measured in fps) has gotten worse. I'd expected some performance increase, but there's been none whatsoever.

The video card is on order (thanks for the offer Rick, but i'd already ordered when I saw your post) so I'm hoping thats going to make some difference at least.

very confused, and slightly miffed ... :crying:

Post by **TSR2** » 31 May 2007, 00:19

If your system uses memory in pairs to enable the higher performance, you might find that 2GB is faster than the 3 you've got... especialy if the latency's of the different DIMM's don't match. The memory bus won't know if its coming or going.

What memory configuration have you now got? i.e. which ize dimms in which slots, and also what is the model number of the new stuff you have bought?

Post by **Garry Russell** » 31 May 2007, 00:36

So basically Ben it's best to upgrade to even number or the extra odd amount can be ignored :think:

Garry