HUYguy From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 274 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2793 times:
Well I just ordered fs2004 literally a few hours ago. The thing is, I have no idea whether my computer is good enough to run it! Here are the specs:
Windows XP, Pentium 4 Processor 2.53GHz, 512MB of RAM, Vidoe Card = GeForce 4 MX440 (64MB). Basically, these are really just numbers to me, and as I know that my computer hasn't got brilliant specs, how bad are they? Do you think they'll be enough to run fs2004 well? I've seen some of the screenshots on this forum before I joined and I have to say they were so amazing, that they made me want to buy fs2004.
Also, the other thing is I've been looking on POSKY's website, and the aircraft look good for freeware, but are they easy enough for beginners to fly? Thanks for any replies -shane
Elcableguy77 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 523 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2782 times:
Your specs look good enough to get you going, though you may want to invest in at least another 256MB of RAM to help traffic flow a little smoother. I have close to the same computer, and I can run the Utlimate Traffic AI at 100% with only minor slowdowns when there's a lot of traffic (like ATL at 8am).
As for POSKY's aircraft, they fly just fine, and most of them have two different flight models: one for beginners, and one that's quite realistic. I would highly recommend any of their aircraft, and a good place to start would be their 737-800.
If you like, drop me an e-mail, and I'll be happy to help any way I can.
Former ZW F/A | "Wisconsin 72A, contact departure, see ya."
Jetflyer From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2778 times:
I'd say your graphics card will give you the trouble with that system to be honest, it is a 5 year old model. Upgrading it is certainly a priority over your memory, because 64MB on the graphics is inadequate for FS2004 by a long shot. But with more graphics memory, say 256MB, FS2004 won't be needing to use as much system memory. 512MB system RAM is sufficient and your money should go into a faster graphics card. Your processor looks good and memory is always an option for the future; if you don't run a lot of programs at the same time then 512MB is not bad at all. But your graphics card is the Achilles heel, I really think. The difference in my computer before and after upgrading from a GeForce TI-4200 to a Radeon 9800 Pro is about 65 frames per second.
Clrd2go From United States of America, joined Feb 2003, 1000 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2672 times:
I have the same card as the author on a 2.66ghz system and 512MB memory and while I know there are much better cards on the market, I'm not terribly unhappy
with it. I've planned on getting another the last year or 2 but decided it wasn't my top priority and I still enjoy FS.