by toprob » Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:49 am
I think this really depends on exactly what is causing the lower frame rates. Your system should fly with about 80% settings. How far away from the default 'bucket' settings is it? It would be interesting to figure out where the bottleneck is -- to do this, you really need to vary the settings and figure out what is hitting your performance the most. It may be that with a couple of lower settings you can get it nice and stable. For instance, many photo scenery developers recommend unlimited framerates, but I've never liked the choppy result -- have you tried lowered your frame rate?
What about graphics drivers? One of the major complaints about ATI cards is that it is difficult to find a good driver for your particular card, and you really need to try a few before you find the ideal solution for your card.
Since I don't know how much time you've put into setting up your system, it's difficult to give suggestions without offending, but you'd be amazed how many people get a big boost in performance from housekeeping tasks like defragging.
I admit that I'm more inclined to look for another solution to improve my clunky old system, since buying new bits is not often an option for me, but if you are happy to upgrade, and you want to run FSX with all the settings turned right up, then you will need a faster processor first. Nobody got good performance with full settings until quad-core Q-series CPUs were released, and even then only paired with an 8800 512MB graphics card.
Of course I'm talking Intel/Nvidia here, personally I'm happy with AMD/ATI, but I know that I would have to work a bit harder to get a top-of-the-line system. And even then I'm more likely to be hampered by poor drivers.