Eaglsoft Cirrus SR20

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Anyone tried this yet?

Is it heavy on frames rates. The minimum specs look pretty high

Clive

 

[dallas]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Clive"
> Is it heavy on frames rates. The minimum specs look pretty high

Yes... it is quite heavy on frame rates.

Here is a cut and paste of my last post in thread "Cirrus SR20G2
Screenshots":

I need to correct myself here a bit... to run the "full 2D & VC" model
*without compromises* it looks like you will need an up to the minute
bleeding edge computer. I have what used to be a high end system a couple
of years ago: AMD3200+ FX5900-128MG & 768MB RAM - Frame rate limiter is
set to 20.



In the 2D cockpit with default scenery and a cloudy ActiveSky day, things
can get a little choppy. Not a slideshow... just choppy. Frame rate goes
from 20 to 13 to 20 to 11 to 20 to 16... add UTUSA at dusk, things were
even more choppy.



Now here is the weird part, frame rates become more acceptable in the VC
than the 2D cockpit sticking pretty close to 20-17 fps. If I picked the "VC
only" or the "2D only" model, frame rates stuck closer to 20 fps also.



The bottom line, this is the first add on to make me feel my computer's age.
The Cirrus is the first modern glass cockpit for a GA aircraft in FS9 and it
clearly puts a load on resources. It's not a deal breaker for me at all,
but anyone with a less powerful computer needs to be prepared to make some
compromises with weather, slider settings and choice of model to fly.



Dallas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:gNJQe.1997$4P5.1467@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Clive"
>> Is it heavy on frames rates. The minimum specs look pretty high
>
> Yes... it is quite heavy on frame rates.
>
> Here is a cut and paste of my last post in thread "Cirrus SR20G2
> Screenshots":
>
> I need to correct myself here a bit... to run the "full 2D & VC" model
> *without compromises* it looks like you will need an up to the minute
> bleeding edge computer. I have what used to be a high end system a couple
> of years ago: AMD3200+ FX5900-128MG & 768MB RAM - Frame rate limiter is
> set to 20.
>
>
>
> In the 2D cockpit with default scenery and a cloudy ActiveSky day, things
> can get a little choppy. Not a slideshow... just choppy. Frame rate goes
> from 20 to 13 to 20 to 11 to 20 to 16... add UTUSA at dusk, things were
> even more choppy.
>
>
>
> Now here is the weird part, frame rates become more acceptable in the VC
> than the 2D cockpit sticking pretty close to 20-17 fps. If I picked the
> "VC
> only" or the "2D only" model, frame rates stuck closer to 20 fps also.
>
>
>
> The bottom line, this is the first add on to make me feel my computer's
> age.
> The Cirrus is the first modern glass cockpit for a GA aircraft in FS9 and
> it
> clearly puts a load on resources. It's not a deal breaker for me at all,
> but anyone with a less powerful computer needs to be prepared to make some
> compromises with weather, slider settings and choice of model to fly.
>
>
>
> Dallas
>
Thanks Dallas, useful info there. My 3-4 yr old machine looks like it will
struggle.

A couple of people I know have high end PC's and Eaglesoft aircraft seem to
eat frames even on their systems.

I asked a few weeks ago in this NG, why some writers manage to get their
aircraft 'frame friendly', while other are 'frame 'eaters'. I'm a big fan of
Dreamfleet - as their a/c seem to un smoothly even on my old machine.

I suppose it's time to upgrade my system!

Clive