Dave W wrote: > > On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 06:18, Scott Taylor wrote: > > > > My X windows is on it's knees when trying to run Flightgear. This must be a > > common problem as I have a powerful system. > > I second the thought. I'm running a 1.5 GHz box with 3/4 gig of RAM and > an NVidia card with the NVidia binaries and acceleration... and > FlightGear wants all my box has to offer in terms of cycles. I thought > it was just me...
FlightGear tries to generate as much frames per second as possible. This is necessay to get a smooth animation - wich is essential to make the user feel like flying the real thing. And it normally doesn't matter, as a flight simulator requires the full attention of the user and isn't an application that you can or should run in the background thread. But on the other side there are 1 1/2 things that FGFS could do: - it could limit its frame rate. But the sensible limit is 60 fps. Something that fast systems might reach, but new addions (dynamic objects, 3d clouds, ...) can easily cost that many fps that 60 fps are generally not achievable. And (the 1/2 point) FGFS could limit the frame rate to 5-10 when it's in pause mode. Because then you can easily switch to another application and e.g. answer that email that just arrived. But so far nobody has implemented it as so far nobody had the need for it. That could be nice litte projcet for starters. :) CU, Christian -- The idea is to die young as late as possible. -- Ashley Montague _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
