In article >,
(Remco Moedt) wrote:

> I guess that's the AMD 2200+ CPU?

No, it's a mobile Athlon 2500+ (they're still unlocked I believe) which
overclocks nicely to 2.4-5Ghz for some people. I can squeeze 2300 out of
mine, but to be honest there's no noticeable benefit. 2.2GHz seems like
more than enough to cope with anything I've run on the PC recently (apart
from Lomac, which always eats whatever CPU and vid power you throw at it).

> with a GeForce 3ti200 rFactor, with all settings low, 1024x786x32
> is a slideshow...

That a shame. I guess there must be some major DX9 hardware support used
in rFactor. The GF3's still a good card for many older sims, but maybe the
time's come to start thinking about something a little newer.

Since I had a GF3 in my games box (gave it away to a friend in need) I've
had a 2nd hand ti4200, a second hand 9700Pro, and now a new x800pro (it
was either that or start having driving lessons. So the British roads will
be safe for another year or three ;-)

The ti4200 wasn't a huge improvement over the GF3 in raw frame rate terms,
but it did allow me to run at higher resolutions with more fsaa. The
9700Pro was a very nice upgrade, giving me more of everything and that
increasingly important DX9 hardware support. I'd probably still be using
it if I hadn't been seduced by Doom3's amazing (IMO) use of hardware
lighting.

FWIW I just installed the demo on this email/work box which has an older
KT7a motherboard with 768Mb of pc133 and an Athlon1700+ running at
1680MHz. The vid card is a 9800se (which I bought for the AIW features and
the hope it'd flash to a 9800Pro... it didn't :-) and it handles rFactor
"ok". At 1024x768, auto visual settings, I can tell the frame rate's not
consistent, but it's certainly very drivable. At 800x600, auto, it's
smooth but ugly.

The 9800se is roughly equivalent to a 9600/9600Pro (not a particularly
good buy). I still think the 9800Pro represents excellent value for money.
The trick is raising the money :-)

> how the heck can you take off from a carrier in PF with a
> spitfire without a SPLOOSH sound?

If you look out of the front of the cockpit you'll see some things
sticking out the front of the plane. They're called "propeller blades". If
you can count them, that means the engine is what we pilots called "not
turned on". I advise consulting a trained technician who may be able to
show you how to make these blades spin fast enough to dry what hair you
have left and perhaps also assist in the takeoff process.

;-)

I have no problems taking off in PF. Plenty of throttle, lots of flaps,
just enough back pressure on the stick to take off without risking an
early bath, and it just happens. Landing is a different matter... still
waiting for my first successful trap. I can touch down without problem but
I appear to have aircraft equipped with rubber hooks!

Still, it's far more fun to crash land with the undercarriage up, coming
to a stop balanced on the front of the carrier. To be honest though I get
a far bigger kick out of just sitting on the moving deck with the graphics
in "Perfect" mode. The reflections of the nearby ships and the sense of
motion of the carrier are quite special. But there again, the vid card
helps the experience.

Andrew McP... in essay-writing mode, obviously.