How great the FPS are on FS9 with all the addons one could think of. Is this really true? I own FS9 I do not have all the addons, but to be honest when I used photoreal scenery or My PMDG 747 with FS9 maxed It would kill my FPS just like FSX can. Am I missing something about FS9 where you can have it all and amazing fps. I could never look out my 747's window into airport traffic with the cocpit in plain view and keep good FPS and thats without all the other addons.

yes it is really trueand yes this is silly.why posting this here?it's completely useless info :)if you are sick and tired of folks complaining in the fsx forum,just click the red cross or press alt + f4 :)cheersJP.

On my low-end system, FS9 with ActiveSky and UT Europe runs slower than FSX does, but FSX looks better than FS9 plus these add-ons (in my opinion).But a high-end system can run FS9 to its limits with ease, whereas it cannot do likewise with FSX. So their complaints do have substance (viewed from this narrow perspective).Martin

Thanks Martin. It seems the other poster just thought I was complaining. When I was asking a ? on how some people could make FS9 work for them with the 747 since it killed my FPS with just it.Guess I was not the only one that had FPS problems with it.

My system is as follows:Athalon FX 4200+ATI 1800ATI TV-WonderMiscellaneous network cardsSound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS2 gig corsair ram250 gb 7200 rpm sata hard drive.I find that it handles FS9 very smoothly even with add-ons and the visual settings I want.FSX runs ok on this system, and looks a little better then the FS9 (A little, the scenery is better, but the planes, not better than my add-on planes). The biggest problem with FSX for me right now is that it's already starting to slow down and I haven't put a single add-on into it (So, I don't have my RW traffic, that I just don't enjoy flying in empty skies, takes a large chunk of the fun of RW flying away, I don't have amazingly awesome add-on aircraft, and I don't have realistic weather, even if my weather does look better).Is FSX better than FS9? Only time (and tweakers) will tell. FSX in my opinion doesn't provide a lot of improvements over FS9, the developers praise its improvements on the side of what they can do with it, but to me it's all visual. I don't fly Flight Sim for the visual, though it's a nice addition, I'm looking for a realistic flight environment, both for practicing RW procedures (just not landing... not in the sim, just doesn't happen) and for enjoying parts of the flight envelope that I personally will never experience first hand (gate to gate, for example) so in my opinion, FSX was a step back in the area of what I look for because it has slowed down considerably in the areas I look for, and it has replaced that with eye candy that runs better.I wouldn't call the perspective of those of us who are upset about flight sims resource requirements narrow, we're the same ones who are looking at Windows Vista and going, IT NEEDS WHAT?! FOR AN OPERATING SYSTEM?! Oh yeah, and while I'm on the subject, Vista requires so much resources for its EYE CANDY (vector graphics used for, well, pretty much everything)-Brian

FXF3, I cannot do the heavies on my system in FS9. I have to turn down the sliders to do so. It has to do with the panels I think. My FRs drop to below 10 which, IMHO, is unflyable (not unlike FSX). I have settled on flying freeware addon aircraft or the default LJ45 with a better panel for my flights. My system is no slouch either (see specs below). I have no money for a new PC now so I am getting the most out of this one by just flying and not 'tweaking' anymore. My FSX sits on the HD and I am experimenting with it but thats about it. dolph

>I could never look out my 747's window into airport traffic>with the cocpit in plain view and keep good FPS and thats>without all the other addons. One can always come up with situations in which FS9 won't run to optimal fluidity, but it's only the most extreme of conditions it seems, most of which we probably don't fly in all that often, at least I don't. Most all situations perform well on my 4y/o system upgraded with a new CPU, video card, and ram 2 years into it. I'm looking forward to FSX, and hopefully can wait til DX10, Vista, and a new machine :().

in that case,my old AMD1800 is chugging along nicely on fs9,it would certainly turn into a smoking pile of junk if i tried fsx on it.as it is,i'm pretty happy with the fs9 settings now :)and to the original poster,my sincere apologies.i thought you were venting,instead of asking a legitimate question.will read twice next time :)cheersJP.

:-) JP NP I did not take any offense to it I was just not clear in my posting. I'm rebuilding my FS9 you no the long task in that if you uninstall it.You got to find refind all the downloads and Mesh. I do want to try out a few good addons now in FS9 with prices comming down some. And reload the 747 again see what happens.