+- FsPassengers Forums (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Flight Simulators (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: FSX General (http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Quick Question (/showthread.php?tid=11038)
Quick Question - gronji2004 - 25-11-2006
Will FSX run OK ish on this:
Intel Pentium 4 524 Processor
3.06GHz, 533MHz FSB, 1MB Cache
Microsoft Windows XP Media Center
1GB DDR RAM
80GB Hard Disk Drive
Multi-Format Dual Layer DVD RW Drive
128MB ATI Radeon X200 Express Graphics
8-In-1 Media Card Reader
6 USB connections
15" TFT Monitor
Regards,
Alex
Re: Quick Question - FsP Dennis - 25-11-2006
No not optimally! Maybe on lowest settings
Re: Quick Question - pj_3 - 25-11-2006
Nope. You'll have no water effects, no traffic of any kind, poor quality graphics and still be clunky. Most big cities will kill your fps - I mean 4
- 10fps if you're lucky. i.e. a bicycle will be faster if you intend going anywhere from Seattle.
Minimally you need to add a decent graphics card and disable the x200, plus another gig of ram - but you'll still not get to a place where you'll be
happy. Stay with FS9. You'll save yourself a ton of frustration, aggravation and disappointment. Most folks with high-end systems - including mine -
have to tweak the heck out of FSX in order to get "acceptable" performance. Save up the cash and upgrade in a few months - when the current top
hardware is down in price. I spent $1700 Canadian for my bits and pieces: I can get that same system now for about $1300.
Yes - I'm back with FS9 because of my addons.
Re: Quick Question - Airliner - 06-12-2006
My opinion?
3.06GHz, 533MHz FSB, 1MB Cache - Good
1GB DDR RAM - Should go 2GB minimum
80GB Hard Disk Drive - Speed? Might make a difference
128MB ATI Radeon X200 Express Graphics - 256MB should be the minimum.