I have a rather old PC. It's a single core P-4/2.85 mHz processor, and (if memory hasn't failed) an AGP video card.
I think before I can even get close to FSX, I need a new rig. However, the one I have (and as old as it is) still fits the bill for what I use it for, and FS9 works great on it.
FSX vs. FS2004 (FS9)
Moderators: Staff, HR, Flight Ops
-
mvm
Re: FSX vs. FS2004 (FS9)
I hava a rig that will run FSX problem was I couldn't run SB4 it was constantly knocking me offline...so long story short unless someone comes up with a better pilot interface I'm sticking with FS9...once I added REX to the sim there is not much difference between FS9 and FSX...with lots of UUmmph left under the hood so to speak...I can wait until someone gets either the sim or SB/FSINN right...
-
jacques
Re: FSX vs. FS2004 (FS9)
Man, you guys sure are dredging up the memories! I remember sitting in my dorm room absolutely enthralled with the sublogic flight sim on my roomates Apple IIe. We'd stay up until the wee hours of the morning computing best glide rates to that small airport on the northeast most grid, waiting to get close enough for the database to populate the runway. Either that or flying "around the world", off the grid, in the dark waiting for the 2-d mountains to appear over the horizon. All of this between hours wasted playing Castle Wolfenstein. I used to marvel at what my grandfather saw throughout his lifespan: from horse and carriages to the space age. I guess all of us, through time, will witness the same amazing progressions in technology -- it just doesn't seem so daunting when you are in the middle of it all. But when you look back to where you came from...sheeeeite.
But, to the question at hand, I always seem to skip generations of FS, since it requires so much computing power to run the newest and best version. I'm happy now with FS9. Even now, several years after the release of FSX, the computers available to the general public are just now catching up with its potential. Do I want FSX...hell yes. Can I wait? I guess so..but not for long. I keep finding add-ons and scenery that amaze me in FS9. What will finally cause me to commit is when the developers begin to leave FS9 behind. PMDG is already there and the others will soon follow. Today, I had to uninstall the RFP from my computer because it just became too unstable..I couldn't get a flight out of it without a CTD. I guess the writing is on the wall. I really like my (relatively) trouble free FS9. I love the RFP. But I really want that sexy FSX. The best of both worlds, for me, would be for someone to develop a new, immersive 742 for FSX. There is hope out there...just look at the "new" A300, or the B-17 for FSX. I'm pretty close to that jumping point ..just not yet.
Jay P
But, to the question at hand, I always seem to skip generations of FS, since it requires so much computing power to run the newest and best version. I'm happy now with FS9. Even now, several years after the release of FSX, the computers available to the general public are just now catching up with its potential. Do I want FSX...hell yes. Can I wait? I guess so..but not for long. I keep finding add-ons and scenery that amaze me in FS9. What will finally cause me to commit is when the developers begin to leave FS9 behind. PMDG is already there and the others will soon follow. Today, I had to uninstall the RFP from my computer because it just became too unstable..I couldn't get a flight out of it without a CTD. I guess the writing is on the wall. I really like my (relatively) trouble free FS9. I love the RFP. But I really want that sexy FSX. The best of both worlds, for me, would be for someone to develop a new, immersive 742 for FSX. There is hope out there...just look at the "new" A300, or the B-17 for FSX. I'm pretty close to that jumping point ..just not yet.
Jay P