Graphics cards.?

[PETER B]

I'm back again.If you think the X1650Pro is best then I'll probably get it.(Remember If i make a mistake here,I won't have the money to resolve it).I also need it to be capable at working at the highest settings with a high framerate.Here is more detail on our computer.System Manufacturer American Megatrends inc.System model P4S51.Bios version 1.00.System is Microsoft Windows XP Professional.Version 2002. Service pack 2.Huge Intel Pentium 4.CPU 3.00 GHz. 512MB of RAM finally we use creative surround sound and have Direct X 9.0c. FSX is whats the problem.When all the settings are at full it takes about 5 miutes to load and the system never fully sets up.I can't move my aircraft. Frame rate is about 1 frame every 10 seconds. Strange,in FS2004 when settings are at full its not terribly bad.My card hates having to look at AI traffic,detailed landscapes and detailed aircraft. In FSX even when settings are at there lowest its still bad.Very Poor graphics.Is this a computer problem?

[Andr]

Sounds to me like either the graphics card has not been detected (or physically inserted correctly) or the drivers need to be reinstalled. Just in case - try the graphics card with another game, using frame-rate detection software - search the internet for this.

[Serious]

Seems like 512mb of ram just doesn't cut it nowadays. Try upgrading to 1024mb (even better 2048) and see what happens. Oh yeah...if you don't have that graphics card already... get it first.

[Wintersnight]

Upgrade your RAM to at least 1Gig. The video card you're getting is comparable to the x1600 pro and if you can get the x1600 pro for much cheaper, you should get it because the x1650 pro isn't much better. They're good video cards though, and should be able to run your program. You could always go for a more powerful geforce 7600 GT or 7950 GT if you have the budget.

[Matt B]

The new FSX is ridiculously demanding...the only people I've heard that can run it the way it runs on the commercial are people who had a barebones kit and really beefed it up that way. My recommendation would be to get at least 1 GB of RAM, the video card should be able to handle it, and your processor is fine. I would go for 2 GB of RAM if you can't even move your aircraft.

[des182001]

Don't feel bad about not being able to run FSX at full detail. To do that you're talking about $12,000 of computer. I run an ASUS board with an AMD 64 X2 4200+, 3GB of pc3200 ram, and a Nvidia 7800 GS OC video card. With all of that I can only run it at 1024X768 at medium detail to get a decent frame rate. But as you were saying, I can run FS2004 at 1280X1024 with all the detail at full with no problems. I recommend a faster CPU and more RAM. Go with at least 1GB more of ram, and anything faster than a Pentium 4. If you put that video card in your current system You'll be wasting your money because your CPU and RAM will severely hinder that video cards performance.

[ANTHONY G]

fsx is very graphic and processor hungry. try to read the article in January's PC PILOT it deals with all these problems. one answer among many is to set your target frame rate to unlimited this has worked wonders for me.

[Wide Zu]

Hopefull this will answer your questions. Its one of two problems. You have too little ram. Get more ram. In other cases get some info on if you have installed your graphics card driver because if you haven't your probably running VGA graphics from just your processor. Other wise, rebuild your computer. x1650 is a good card but if you are passionate about games, dish out £400 for a GeForce 8800gtx.