In a precedent post, i explained that Flightbeam primarily based its performance tests on I7 core processor. Does this mean that an "old" Quadcore can not cope with this kind of scenery ? Here are some figures. You to decide. Remember, not only Flightbeam did a great depiction of the airport but its position on San Francisco bay is framerate challenging with Oakland etc.
FSDT Las Vegas. First state at gate A11, second at runway 25 R threshold and third one on final approach runway 25 R. Scores are :
At gate : 18 - 19 fps,
On runway : 19 - 20,
On final : 15 - 17,5
Flightbeam San Francisco KSFO (just released) : First test at gate A11, second on runway threshold 28 L and third one on final approach runway 28 L. Scores are ;
At gate : 18,5 - 19,5,
On runway : 18,5 - 19,5
On final : 14,5 - 17,5
My opinion ;
I really enjoy flying around McCarran intl despite the framerate challenging environment. Even at 14 fps on final approach, the landing always seems - to me - smooth enough and when it is a matter of gaining 3 or 4 fps, i can use some tweaks or tune my settings.
KSFO is as smooth as FSDT Vegas. Taking off at 18,5 fps, i really feel the aircraft acquiring its speed.
For these last test, i even reset my ATI Catalyst control center for a slight better image quality. One last remark, i did not install US Cities San Francisco because that would have totally ruined these scores.
Material and software : Quadcore 2,33 Ghz, Windows 7 fam.premium. 64 bits, FSX pro.SP2.
Resolution tested ; 1280 x 1024 x 32.
Unchanged conditions for time, weather, positions, aircraft (QW B-757 One world).
No AI traffic except road traffic value = 18
Test protocol as usual ; the PC is rebooted after each test.