Scrubbing FlightGear because of framerates was excatly what a friend of mine
did. I agree with Innis that someone should fix this problem.
On July 17, 2004 10:08 am, Innis Cunningham wrote:
> The following tests were done using windows 98SE
> The old box was a 850meg duron with 256 meg ram and
> a GF4-MX-440 64meg graphics card.On this box I could get 27fps
> sitting at the end of 28R at KSFO looking at the terminal.
> The new box a 2gig athalon with 512meg ram and a FX5200
> 128meg graphics card could only give 22fps under the same
> conditions.Also my son who has a 2.8 gig rig running an ATI 9800pro
> card could only get 15fps.It seems the more powerfull the computer
> the slower FG seems to run.
> Now I dont know why that is but if we want to get new people into
> FG we should see what the problem is.
> As my son says if he had downloaded the game(sorry sim)and seen these
> kind of results he would have just scrubed it and moved on and I guess
> there are a lot of other people who would do the same thing.
> My son says that he gets frame rates of well over 100 on Quake and Doom
> which seem to be much more graphics intensive than FG.
Flightgear-devel mailing list