Visit Captain Sim web site  
  Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

 

Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 Send TopicPrint
 10 Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767 (Read 9616 times)
libertine
New Member
Offline



Posts: 2
Joined: Dec 9th, 2008
Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Nov 10th, 2010 at 2:45pm
Print Post  
hi there!

got a question regarding the 767 ... currently i own the 757 aswell as the C130. The C130 performs great on my Box with no Framerate Issues whatsoever(flying ORBX Scenery)...however the 757 still gives me headaches as its impossible for me to land in any bigger city as the framerate drops to below 10 quite often during approaches ... this even outside ORBX sceneries ...

thing is ... im considering getting the 767 aswell but at the moment im reluctant due to the fact that i dont really need another bird that i cant land at major airports due to it being a "hardware hog" ...

so the question is, what are you experience with this plane(framerate wise) to the other 2 mentioned. is it as hardware hungry as the 757 or lightweight like the C130(or maybe somewhere in between) ?

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markoz
CS Team
*
Offline



Posts: 12445
Location: Victoria, Australia
Joined: Apr 24th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #1 - Nov 10th, 2010 at 3:01pm
Print Post  
767 frame rates are similar to the 757 frame rates. I don't know your computer specs, but you can turn the sliders town just a bit to increase the frame rates though. The Orbx FTX scenery still looks great, even if you don't quite have the settings they recommend. One of the best ways to gain frame rates is to decrease the settings of the Aviation traffic and Land and sea traffic.

Hope this helps.

Mark
  

Mark Fletcher



PC: i7 10700K @3.8/5.1GHz | 64GB DDR4 3200 | 12GB RTX 4070 Super | 32" LCD Monitor | 1TB SSD + 2TB SSD + 2TB HDD | Win 11 Pro
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
libertine
New Member
Offline



Posts: 2
Joined: Dec 9th, 2008
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #2 - Nov 10th, 2010 at 3:17pm
Print Post  
Specs are:
Q6600 overclocked to 2.8Ghz
8GB Memory
GTX280
15k SATA Drive(OS running on a seperate drive)

tweaking the scenery settings hasnt done much good(maybe +3FPS on average in the 757 but i have to really turn it down quite a bit to achieve that ... low autogen ... very little cloud distance ... and so on) ... traffic is set to around 20% for aviation and <10% for land vehicels and ships ... any lower and ill be flying in a ghost world  Wink

the 757 also gives me problems while ORBX is deactivated and i just fly europe or north america(Europe with UT). UT doesnt seem to make a lot of difference tough, hardly noticeable.

i will admit as much that the 757 is a helluva lot more detailed then my other planes but its still kind of a let down ... 

well ... i guess thats a "better not" for the 767 ... shame ...  Sad

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markoz
CS Team
*
Offline



Posts: 12445
Location: Victoria, Australia
Joined: Apr 24th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #3 - Nov 11th, 2010 at 6:01am
Print Post  
Yeah it's a pity. I think the Captain Sim 767 is the best one available. And yes I own the other two developers 767's. I never fly them (no longer installed in FSX), I always fly Captain Sim's. Grin

Mark
  

Mark Fletcher



PC: i7 10700K @3.8/5.1GHz | 64GB DDR4 3200 | 12GB RTX 4070 Super | 32" LCD Monitor | 1TB SSD + 2TB SSD + 2TB HDD | Win 11 Pro
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul787
Full Member
*
Offline



Posts: 103
Location: Chicago, IL
Joined: Aug 27th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #4 - Nov 12th, 2010 at 3:06am
Print Post  
Hi there,

The 767 is a bit harder on frames than the 757. I usually get 20-25 frames while using the 757. My frames drop to 17-20 when using the 767. It's not a big difference on my system, but if your framerates drop to 10 on the 757, then you would probably get around 5 FPS on the 767, which makes it impossible to fly.

Regards,

  

Paul P. Kawalec - KORD - Chicago O'Hare International Airport&&&&Last Flight:&&6-11-11 - B737-700 - Southwest Airlines #2139 - KMDW -> KTPA&&
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Karolina
Full Member
*
Offline



Posts: 28
Location: Czech Republic
Joined: Jul 21st, 2010
Gender: Female
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #5 - Nov 14th, 2010 at 7:34pm
Print Post  
I have a PC listed in my signature. I bought it only to fly FSX without problems, but it did not solve anything. When I fly the default 737 (everything set to medium with no traffic - air and ground too), I have about 45-60fps, but when I fly the 767, the fps drops down to 8-18fps. I do not fly it, because I can“t. I installed only the flight deck, but it does not help.
FSX is ugly peace of unoptimised software and I cannot understand why it does not work properly on a high-end pc bought five years after the release - it is not normal. I have no problems to set newest games to the highest possible settings and still have 60fps, but FSX - set to lowest settings with no airtraffic and still have problems on the i5+HD5850.
I do not think it is mistake of Captain Sim, but the problem is the software it is made for - FSX.
I really hope the new MS Flight will be greatly optimised and playable without the tweaking circus. I hope MS will do better job with Flight than with FSX. When it will work correctly, I will buy the CS767 for the Flight again, because it is best possible to buy and nothing compares it.
The one thing I can do is to wait for it - or to learn the ATPL in reality...
  

i5-750 2,7Ghz&&ATI HD5850 1Gb&&8Gb Kingston Hyper X 1600Mhz&&500Gb WD Black 7200 - System&&2Tb WD Green edition 7200 USB 3&&24" 1920x1080 LED&&
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
nath2889
Senior Member
*
Offline



Posts: 836
Location: Wiltshire . UK .
Joined: Jan 2nd, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #6 - Nov 14th, 2010 at 11:55pm
Print Post  
You can bet that MS will make flight the same way FSX was made basically to only run well on PC made 10years from now so don't hold your breath for a smooth ride with flight
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Karolina
Full Member
*
Offline



Posts: 28
Location: Czech Republic
Joined: Jul 21st, 2010
Gender: Female
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #7 - Nov 15th, 2010 at 10:07am
Print Post  
Yes, thats why I called it badly optimised.
Decision to make something playable on pcs 10 years after release is very bad. Why should MS do it when it releases new versions every 3-5 years after release? I do not know what MS was thinking about in the 2006.
Yes, they thought we will have 20Ghz processors now, but we have only 3,5Ghz max. I hope MS will learn from their mistakes and do it playable on high end machines now, not five-ten years later. If they will think this way in the future, people will be angry, because nothing they release will work smoothly and properly... Sad
For example why should they release "Windows 12" now, when it could not be run on today high-end pcs? Noone would like to buy it. Why should I play the FSX in 2017 when Flight will be seven years on the market? Why should I play Flight in 2025 when Flight II released eight years ago? I do not think it is good decision to make it this way...

As I said - hope they will learn from it, because they cannot know what type of machines we will have in 2015...
  

i5-750 2,7Ghz&&ATI HD5850 1Gb&&8Gb Kingston Hyper X 1600Mhz&&500Gb WD Black 7200 - System&&2Tb WD Green edition 7200 USB 3&&24" 1920x1080 LED&&
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kiniu
Full Member
*
Offline


Virtual Pilot

Posts: 110
Location: Temporary London Uk
Joined: May 20th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #8 - Dec 13th, 2010 at 10:41pm
Print Post  
hello All Simmer
I have the same problem frame rate in fsx
What I learn in past 4 years is no matter what comp spec do you have is never enough to play fsx on max setting!
Microsoft when release FSx doesn't care about all the addons we will install on it after .
I did one test 2 years ago I install fsx without any addons and I try to play on high setting and this was working just  fine about 30 fps all the times I think is enough.
when we start install new airport and aircraft FPS drop down drastically and we need to minimize the setting to play the game.
Today I buy new video card nvidia geforce 480 gtx just to play fsx with high setting and frame rate better  then 8 fps on Egll mega airport heathrow.
Unfortunately my power supply is to weak to give enough power my graphic card so tomorrow I will need to buy 850 watt monster
and hopefully I will be able to play FSX on setting better then medium low Smiley

let you know how's  it going .
regards
Chris
  

Intel Q6600 | 4GB ram |Nvidia 480 GTX | 2x 1TB HDD sata |24' DELL Monitor | Vista 64 Bit |
Back to top
IP Logged
 
shebejammin
Full Member
*
Offline



Posts: 8
Joined: Dec 10th, 2010
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #9 - Dec 14th, 2010 at 7:24am
Print Post  
kiniu wrote on Dec 13th, 2010 at 10:41pm:
hello I did one test 2 years ago I install fsx without any addons and I try to play on high setting and this was working just  fine about 30 fps all the times I think is enough.
when we start install new airport and aircraft FPS drop down drastically and we need to minimize the setting to play the game.
Today I buy new video card nvidia geforce 480 gtx just to play fsx with high setting and frame rate better  then 8 fps on Egll mega airport heathrow.
Unfortunately my power supply is to weak to give enough power my graphic card so tomorrow I will need to buy 850 watt monster


You are on the right track for sure, this is a link to a different thread offering a fix for this same exact issue...

http://www.captainsim.org/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1291943175

Also a good power supply calculator from newegg and easy to use.

http://c1.neweggimages.com/BizIntell/tool/psucalc/index.html?cm_sp=Cat32_PowerSu...

PC's are far under powered and a good solution to many problems is providing the right power source to your PC,My ATI is 500W minimum and my PC came with 475W! The i7 uses around 250W! Do the math, that doesn't include the monitor or anything else I have, you will be upset at how much you've missed by not doing it sooner.
Good Luck Cool

i7 CPU  920  @ 2.67GHz, 2668 Mhz,
RAM9.00 GB DDR3 1600
ATI HD 5870
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kiniu
Full Member
*
Offline


Virtual Pilot

Posts: 110
Location: Temporary London Uk
Joined: May 20th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #10 - Dec 15th, 2010 at 9:17pm
Print Post  
Hello all simmer

So finally I can run my fsx smooth and be a happy person
I bought new power supply for my BRAND NEW graphics card ge force 480 GTX and I have to say this was good choice
On ORBX scenery YBCS I have 30 frame on Boeing 767 and more after airborne
On Mega Airport Munich EDDM only 16-19 but is better then 7 before!
I just find out yesterday when I play fsx on full screen I have lot more fps then in windowed mode .
I also use NHancer its helping a lot
I was waiting 4 year for this moment to say I have smooth running FSX in max setting .

My comp spec:
processor Q6600 2.40
4 Gb ram ddr2
2x 1 TB WD 7200 RPM
GE FORCE 480 GTX
POWER SUPPLY 800 WATT
vista 64 BIT

Thank You and see you on the air
Chris

  

Intel Q6600 | 4GB ram |Nvidia 480 GTX | 2x 1TB HDD sata |24' DELL Monitor | Vista 64 Bit |
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Markoz
CS Team
*
Offline



Posts: 12445
Location: Victoria, Australia
Joined: Apr 24th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #11 - Dec 15th, 2010 at 11:45pm
Print Post  
NHancer 2.5.9 (latest version) doesn't work on the latest Nvidia 2xx drivers, only the 19x drivers. So are you using the 19x drivers? Or is there a new beta release that I can't seem to see or find?

Mark
  

Mark Fletcher



PC: i7 10700K @3.8/5.1GHz | 64GB DDR4 3200 | 12GB RTX 4070 Super | 32" LCD Monitor | 1TB SSD + 2TB SSD + 2TB HDD | Win 11 Pro
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mbucholski
Full Member
*
Offline



Posts: 142
Location: Kolobrzeg, Poland
Joined: Feb 20th, 2010
Gender: Male
Re: Framerates 757 vs. C130 vs. 767
Reply #12 - Dec 16th, 2010 at 3:02pm
Print Post  
Nvidia Inspector does.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send TopicPrint
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board  ^Top