I think I need to upgrade my memory card or graphics....or something!  I often find that it takes a long time for a plane to appear when I select it and when I switch between views it can take for ages - particularly with bigger planes.

I have a Dell Dimension Dim 2400 Intel (R)
Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.66 Ghz
256 MB of RAM

I've probably left out the most important bit but then my hobby is planes not computers.

Grateful for any advice.  Thanks

Hi ft,

I have an HP system very similar to yours.

A memory upgrade will definetly help, as the system can use a large part of your 256mb, leaving little for FS. I upgraded to 768mb (added 1 512mb dimm about $80 US) and loading delays are now minimal.

As for video card, your sys has the integrated intel extreme 3d chipset , uses system cpu and memory (64mb shared) . An upgrade will definetly help, but you are limited to choices as, like I, you only have PCI available, no AGP.

Dont know about ATI but in the GeForce line I think the 5200 series is the best offered as PCI. Your sys lists a 250w power supply, so should handle the 5200. $75-$150 or so depending on options.

Even the GeForce 2 MMX4 I use is an improvememt over the Intel chipset, but I would recommend you go better than that.

Cheers,
Dave

I agree with what dave says aswell.

fellowtraveler,

Also...... if you are using Win XP.... that alone takes 128M to load itself.  So minus the 64 M for the shared video card.... that is leaving your sim only at MOST (assuming nothing else running) 64M to run.   That just won;t do it <g>.

So plan on more RAM too if you are running XP.  512 is the minimum.....and a gig would be better.

best,

..................john

Thanks everyone.  I took Dave's advice; added a further 512 Mb of memory and upgraded my graphics card to Geforce 5200 series.  Everything is working so much better.  Of course I shall never be COMPLETELY satisfied.  Glad I don't fly in the real world; have you seen those new European drinking laws for pilots?? Tho' as a passenger I'm pretty happy about it!!  My only other complaint...the cost of hardware/software in the U.K.  Everything Dave quoted in US dollars cost me about the same in £ sterling. (Should have done that New York shopping trip.)  Cheers 

Quote:


Hi Terry,

I have a Compaq 2.5Ghz that had 256Mb RAM with on-board video. Updated everything to 1 Gig RAM (twice 512Mb - 190$) and a XFX GeForce FX5200 PCI (140$), both at Future Shop. I was lucky to have a rebate on both...

Future Shop...that means... it's Canadian $$$!



Made a great difference, especially if you're running XP (like me).

From a fellow Canadian.

JF

Fellowtravellor,

Did you actually try the RAM and then the video card seperately on their own to see what made the "biggest difference"?

Or, are you just taking a shot in the dark with other peoples money?

Well I think the question is worthy of an answer, so I'll answer myself.

RAM itself is not really a "graphics" solution. Extra RAM will only help, (in varying degrees, depending on configuration), if the system is starving for RAM....which was part of your problem.

I like to use the analogy- enough room to swing a cat-...

The CPU needs working space to carry out it's job. Put it in a closet with no RAM- it doesn't have swinging room.

Give it plenty of RAM, it's free to swing that cat around the front yard on a string!

Put excess RAM in the PC.... You can only swing a cat so far...... The CPU becomes the limiting factor, it can't process enough data to use all the available RAM.

Graphics Performance POTENTIAL is determined by the Graphics Engine (graphics processing unit or GPU).

The more powerful the GPU, the more potential for good graphics. Thus, a video card's performance is primarily identified by it's GPU genre. ie. FX5700, Radeon 9600XT.
Those numbers represent the "class" of the GPU. Many variations often occur within the class, such as the amount and type of RAM onboard the video card.

Graphics Performance always stops somewhere...... a limiting factor, whether it be the CPU, RAM, GPU, bandwidth limitations or the software itself.

Identifying the limiting factor, or determining the most critical bottleneck, requires:
1. enough facts about the system to make an informed analysis, and
2. sufficient understanding of gaining the most POTENTIAL out of a particular hardware setup.

The solution can then be passed on to the poor soul who, when he/she bought the machine, said "That's Pretty!"  

Pointerboat,

As you probably already know, Onboard Graphics chips, (onboard video cards, built into the mainboard), use a percentage of system RAM from the main memory of your PC. This amount of "shared" memory is usually set in the Computer's BIOS settings.

The more memory shared to the onboard video chip, the better the capacity the onboard GPU has for processing the graphic data;

However, the GPU, (or onboard graphics chip), is still limited by design in it's potential power. Typically, onboard GPU's are low in graphics processing power, no matter how much ram you throw at them.

Also, the memory you allocate from your main system RAM is not really "shared RAM", but more like "robbed RAM". Your system can no longer access the shared ram for the CPU to use at will.

In a low RAM system, the sharing of system ram to onboard video will bottleneck the CPU, negating the effects of increased GPU power.

A major benefit of addon video cards has been the very fast RAM built into the video card itself.

Modern mainboards using 400mhz system RAM shared to an onboard video system should be capable of high performance; alas, there is hardly a product on the market, with an onboard graphics unit, that would meet the required specs for a simmer or serious gamer.

Best advice to you Pointerboat, is to make sure you have excess ram, so you can throw plenty to the onboard graphics chip via BIOS settings, and still have plenty left for the CPU. Minimum 512mb's for your rig.

If your mainboard has an AGP slot, you could upgrade the graphics via a good addon video card.

It's possible to build a decent gaming rig on a budget. But this usually means custom building it yourself, which requires at least a little knowledge to put it all together, and a good deal more knowledge in selecting and buying the appropriate hardware.

Personally, I wouldn't do it any other way, but it's not for everyone of course. It's kind of a "catch 22" situation.

If you buy "off the shelf", by the time you get the thing up and running with all the extras you have to add to make it work, you have the knowledge required to build it all in the first place!

My advice to anyone who has onboard graphics and wants to upgrade their graphics via a PCI slot..........

DON'T !   (unless you get a PCI graphics card Cheap!)  You won't see much improvement from that upgrade.

The money is better saved for a new mainboard/system upgrade.

Systems built with onboard graphics on the mainboards are generally rock bottom, el cheapo hardware, (but usually sold at massive profit!), targeted to the mass market and are not suitable for modern  Flight Simulation.

Vonald, you need a PSU upgrade sorry.