Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Asus g73 sw flight sim x

  • 08-09-2011 5:23pm
    #1
    remydegreat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 84 ✭✭


    hi guys,last flight sim i played was flight sim 98 with airpot 2000 add on,long time ago,i recently purchased a asus g73sw laptop intel i7 qm 2630,6gb ddr3 ram,750gbsata 7200 rpm hardrive,1080 screen,nvidia geforce gtx460 1.5gb graphics card.I used to be up on computers years ago,but will this be able to play fsx with some off the add ons with good graphics(1080)good fps etc.

    I dont know if this question has been asked before but id like to know before i buy game as i dont want to get game if it wont play it at good resolution etc.


    thx guys


Comments

  • #2
    bandit197
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 907 ✭✭✭bandit197


    Id imagine it would handle FSX quite well. Thats a pretty powerful laptop with a good dedicated GPU.
    You could try the demo on this page before buying.


  • #3
    remydegreat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 84 ✭✭remydegreat


    thx bandit,flight sim 98 was good with airport 2000,hope fsx is good :)


  • #4
    Firekitten
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Firekitten


    2011-9-7_14-45-41-471.jpg

    is the sort of graphical quality you can expect from fsx on a rig like yours, although you may need to turn down the autogen a tad, it should be fine.

    In default, it will look ok, great even in certain places, but you seem to be up for addon stuff, so yeah, it can look spectacular with addons. Better than 98 by several country miles, and a few nautical ones.


  • #5
    bandit197
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 907 ✭✭✭bandit197


    remydegreat wrote: »
    thx bandit,flight sim 98 was good with airport 2000,hope fsx is good :)

    No worries, take a read through the attached file when you get a chance. Its a good guide as to what settings to use.


  • #6
    remydegreat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 84 ✭✭remydegreat


    thx lads :) whats the "autogen" ? il have a look at that file


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Firekitten
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Firekitten


    Autogen, refers to 'automatic generated scenery' which is certain non fixed scenery objects (ie, specific buildings placed as landmarks, or bridges etc)
    Auotgen is a mix of houses, trees, and other such niceties, that are placed on the terrain. you can set the level, dependent on your computer's crunch power, max, sucks juice, as microsoft's programing, sucks. Min, is nearly none. you can play with the slider to see what your computer can handle. Not a big deal really.
    However, payware scenery sets typically rewrite the autogen programing, things like Orbx scenery areas make autogen far more inteligent (ie it doesnt spawn a tree in your runway (happened once) though Tongass Fjords, for example (northern british columbia, canada, and the southern Alaskan pan handle, is ALSO inteligently placed, there's just a metric TON of it... a real cpu muncher.


Advertisement