fs2004 and screen resolution

[cam lowes]

Howdy,
Went down to theWalMart last nite and picked me up FS2004. ( I'll drop the
bad Texas acccent)
Installed flawlessly and runs almost nice using a HP 6636 (667 MHz Celeron)
with 256 Ram, intel 8210 video with 11 MB on board.
Problem: Both FS2002 and Train Sim allow me to use a sreen res.of
1024x768x16- while FS2004 only allows 800x600x16!
Ideas, thoughts, and solutions please.
Camster02813

[Skyhawk]

More than likely this is a function of the video card memory. Also, the
frame rate would be real slow with the Celeron processor at the higher
resolution. FS 2004 is even more dependent on CPU speed, video card memory,
and RAM than FS 2002. The enhanced scenery and weather really need a fast
CPU (1.3 GHz P4 or higher, a lot of RAM (256 MB is good if running less than
XP, with XP, 512 MB RAM or higher really helps, and a video card with at
least 64 MB to really get good frame rates at higher resolutions. When
Combat Flight Simulator 3 was released many had to tackle a hardware upgrade
in order to get decent frame rates, the same will be true with FS 2004. The
autogen scenery and weather are very system demanding. Good Luck.
"cam lowes" > wrote in message
...
> Howdy,
> Went down to theWalMart last nite and picked me up FS2004. ( I'll drop
the
> bad Texas acccent)
> Installed flawlessly and runs almost nice using a HP 6636 (667 MHz
Celeron)
> with 256 Ram, intel 8210 video with 11 MB on board.
> Problem: Both FS2002 and Train Sim allow me to use a sreen res.of
> 1024x768x16- while FS2004 only allows 800x600x16!
> Ideas, thoughts, and solutions please.
> Camster02813
>
>

[Mark Cherry]

In ,
cam lowes wrote:

> Howdy,
> Went down to theWalMart last nite and picked me up FS2004. ( I'll
> drop the bad Texas acccent)
> Installed flawlessly and runs almost nice using a HP 6636 (667 MHz
> Celeron) with 256 Ram, intel 8210 video with 11 MB on board.
> Problem: Both FS2002 and Train Sim allow me to use a sreen res.of
> 1024x768x16- while FS2004 only allows 800x600x16!
> Ideas, thoughts, and solutions please.
> Camster02813


Strictly speaking, 1024x768x16 would need precisely 12Mb! (1k=1024; 1Mb =
1024x1024; {12,582,912/1048576} = 12)

Maybe the other progs let you get away with being 1meg short because large
blocks of single colour (portions of control panels, etc) can be represented in
some shorthand way (like in file compression)? Or else it borrows what it needs
from mainboard memory. Wild guesses here, sorry!

The only other thing I can think of is that the maximum frame rate setting is so
high that this is the only resolution it can offer which would permit that level
of performance. You shouldn't need much more than 20-25 fps (film/video
quality) anyway but YTMV.... (your tastes may vary)


--�
regards,

Mark