FSX is CPU limited. I run dual 7900GTX's in SLi, (both GPU's set to render, not SLi AA) and when I run the Sli monitor that shows how much load each of the cards are under, it barely moves. With all sliders Maxd' I can get like 10-14 FPS max in dense areas. I know both cores are being used, cause I lose about 4FPS when I set the affinity to just one core. For other games (FarCry, FEAR, etc) I can run Maz settings, and still get over 80FPS in those games. My next upgrade will be dual 8800GTX's in quad SLi, and the new Quad Core Extreme. (Same price as the current core 2 extreme. Go figure?)

"I know both cores are being used, cause I lose about 4FPS when I set the affinity to just one core. "Nick,Which core 0 or 1 did you assign to FSX? You should deactivate 0 and fsx should only run on 1. If the affinity of FSX is set to 0, you could lose FPS.For me..I would say I got 3-4FPS jump. The total CPU utilization went up from 52% to 58%.Manny

>Well I went from 7 fps to 12 fps with this new video card in>my system. So I guess the next gen DX10 video cards aren't>enough either. I consider 30 fps minimum to be an acceptable>frame rate. >>Odd since the fill rates and poly counts are well beyond what>FSX tosses out at 1920 x 1200, so clearly FSX has got some>other performance issues going on and I hope the dev team find>the problem and resolve it ASAP.>>Some things that have helped get me to 12 fps>>1. AutoGen OFF >2. Blooming OFF>3. Airport & vehicle traffic set to minimal 10% >>Again, these low frame rates happen at airports like SFO,>Gatwick...Rob and Manny,Thank you very much for your contribution to this forum. I was headed along the hardware upgrade path and was moments from spending $2000-$3000 in the quest of higher FSX framerates. Your sobering experiences saved me A LOT of money.The performance you are experiencing in FSX is severely dissapointing to say the least. Honestly if I had just dropped two grand and STILL had sub 20 frames per second I would have been seriously ######. If this thing isn't happy with your 3.9Ghz Core 2 Extreme there is no hardware that will make it happy.Let's hope that Aces can work minor miracles with the DX10 upgrade - although with the current state of the sim I wouldn't be surprised at all if we don't see it until mid/late 2007.Just out of curiousity how do your rigs perform under FS9? Would a top-of-the-line rig at least maintain 30+ minimum FPS there? (I mean under the toughest circumstances - 100% AI, 3rd party add on airport, heavy cloud cover, megascenery - the works). I live near Seattle so I use Megascenery PacificNorthwest along with FlyTampa's Seattle add-on. What can your 3.9Ghz Extreme do for KSEA?Rob I agree with you totally - 30FPS is not too much to expect from the gear you have. Let's hope Aces comes through.Please keep us posted as you strive to improve your FSX simming experience.EG

>Well I went from 7 fps to 12 fps with this new video card in>my system. So I guess the next gen DX10 video cards aren't>enough either. I consider 30 fps minimum to be an acceptable>frame rate. Don't know how you come to 30fps as a minimum. I have my fps set to 20 and get very smooth performance. Try the Red Bull mission - you need smooth performance to fly and manourver in that mission - 20fps is more than smooth enough.Turn your fps counter off and enjoy the flying.Ray Keattch.

>Why do you folks say "there is something wrong with your>setup" because XYZ person can get MNO frame rates?>>To repeat for the 1000th time, ANYONE can turn down the>details to get better frame rates -- this is NOT new. >However, I personally want FSX to look better than FS9 at the>same frame rate, so far I've not been able to acheive that. >To get FSX to look at good as FS9 at 1920 x 1200, I've had to>turn up the FSX graphics settings -- when I do so, the frame>rates take a nose dive.You are looking at a different sim to me. I run at 1280x1024 and FSX looks a lot better than FS9. I have 10m mesh, 1m textures, autogen and complexity at normal, global texture at max.My fps is set at 20 and I get smooth performance and excellent views. For the 1000th time, you don't need fs set to 30 for smooth performance. Turn the fps counter off and stop worrying about it.Either that or go back to fs9.Ray Keattch.

>just goes to show how poorly coded MSFX is.I am amazed that fewer bring that issue to light. I for one, completely agree that the coding is a HUGE issue. BULK BULK BULK!I have it where I want it, and do not expect a huge performance jump with any new hardware, much less software. It will take over twice what I have now to get it running on the level that most people find acceptable. I do not see hardware like that coming down the pipe for quite some time.So I will just play with what I have, and maybe in a few years the gap will have closed a little and we will have the right hardware to plow through the bulkiness.d- -

>Oh please. Has anyone learned yet? Vista does not increase>game performance. Period. If you buy into the hype, you're>going to be severely disappointed.Yo genius, maybe Vista will not boost the FSX performance but it sure as #### will boost the video card performance as DX10 allows virtualized GPU memory.

>>Well I went from 7 fps to 12 fps with this new video card>in>>my system. So I guess the next gen DX10 video cards aren't>>enough either. I consider 30 fps minimum to be an>acceptable>>frame rate. >>>>Odd since the fill rates and poly counts are well beyond>what>>FSX tosses out at 1920 x 1200, so clearly FSX has got some>>other performance issues going on and I hope the dev team>find>>the problem and resolve it ASAP.>>>>Some things that have helped get me to 12 fps>>>>1. AutoGen OFF >>2. Blooming OFF>>3. Airport & vehicle traffic set to minimal 10% >>>>Again, these low frame rates happen at airports like SFO,>>Gatwick...>>Rob and Manny,>>Thank you very much for your contribution to this forum. I>was headed along the hardware upgrade path and was moments>from spending $2000-$3000 in the quest of higher FSX>framerates. Your sobering experiences saved me A LOT of>money.>>The performance you are experiencing in FSX is severely>dissapointing to say the least. Honestly if I had just>dropped two grand and STILL had sub 20 frames per second I>would have been seriously ######. If this thing isn't happy>with your 3.9Ghz Core 2 Extreme there is no hardware that will>make it happy.>>Let's hope that Aces can work minor miracles with the DX10>upgrade - although with the current state of the sim I>wouldn't be surprised at all if we don't see it until mid/late>2007.>>Just out of curiousity how do your rigs perform under FS9? >Would a top-of-the-line rig at least maintain 30+ minimum FPS>there? (I mean under the toughest circumstances - 100% AI,>3rd party add on airport, heavy cloud cover, megascenery - the>works). I live near Seattle so I use Megascenery>PacificNorthwest along with FlyTampa's Seattle add-on. What>can your 3.9Ghz Extreme do for KSEA?>>Rob I agree with you totally - 30FPS is not too much to expect>from the gear you have. Let's hope Aces comes through.>>Please keep us posted as you strive to improve your FSX>simming experience.>>EGTotally agree and you put it much better than I could!