Dave Martin wrote:
How do you think this sort of system would fair displaying 'out of the window' views as a *slave* unit for FlightGear (FDM etc running on seperate machine). This machine would only be running a 'landscape' visual - no 3d cockpit or airframe components in view.

Target: 1024x768x32bpp / 35fps.

AMD Sempron 2200 (1.5Ghz 333FSB, 256kb cache 32bit)
256MB PC2700 DDR GeForce FX5200 128MB (128bit mem bus)


My own experience is generally of quite high-performance machines with FlightGear so I have no measuring-stick to guage how performance is affected with lower-end systems.

The reason I ask is that a machine at that spec could be built for around 100GBP (probably cheaper in other countries).

Effectively, if you wanted multiple display-driving machines, you could get a fair few at 100GBP a shot.(Even cheaper if netbooting were used (no HDD) and the scenery etc were loaded from a CDROM drive using a 'constant-seek' trick.

Of course, this does not include the display device itself but that is another matter (be it monitor or projector etc) ;-)

What do you think? Could the above system make the target res / fps or does it need more ram / better gpu / cpu etc?

I think you'd struggle to maintain 35FPS in complex scenery areas with the 5200 - although you could probably replace that with an older GeForce4 card of a higher spec or about the same price. The motherboard/CPU is perfectly adequate though - I've run flightgear on far less.


--
Jon Stockill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to