On 3/3/06, John Matro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > My system is about 4 years old and runs Windows XP with an Athlon 1 Mhz > processor, 512 MB ram, and an nVidia GeForce2 MX AGP graphics card. > > Problem: I've tried FlightGear 0.9.6 and 0.9.9 and they both run > extremely slowly. (Interestingly, until I recently upgraded Windows, FG > 0.9.6 ran okay under Windows ME.) > > I assume that just upgrading my graphics card will solve the problem. > Do you agree? > > If so, I've seen a fairly inexpensive nVidia GeForce MX 4000 AGP card > (128 MB). Do you know if that is sufficient? If not, are there any > (not too expensive) cards that do work? (I'm pretty sure my ASUS > motherboard is AGP 2.0 compliant and the slot will also physically take > an AGP Pro card.)
Well, for comparison, I have an Athlon 2600+ with the same 512MB of RAM as you, running Linux. I threw away my GeForced2 MX when games much simpler graphically than FG ran choppily and with low resolution, replacing it with an MX 4000 and NVidia's supplied Linux drivers. FG runs smoothly for me so long as nothing else wants much attention from the CPU, but there will occasionally be moments of stutter or stalling, possibly related to caching, but not otherwise explained where I've seen it (pointers welcome!) It will of course come down to other issues such as quality of componentry and the resolution you try and run your monitor and FG at, but the card itself should keep you happy for a while. Cheers, JH ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid0944&bid$1720&dat1642 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-users
