You wonder why some get good performance and others not, well, that 20% may have something to do with it. So even though you may not like to have it at 100%, just try and you may be able to answer your own question.

My understanding is that an AI level of 20% when using MyTrafficX has approximately the same or more traffic than using default traffic at 100%. 100% with MyTrafficX has several times more traffic than the default AI at 100%. Perhaps that is where the confusion is stemming from?

My understanding is that an AI level of 20% when using MyTrafficX has approximately the same or more traffic than using default traffic at 100%. 100% with MyTrafficX has several times more traffic than the default AI at 100%. Perhaps that is where the confusion is stemming from?

HelloExactly correct, but there is no point in arguing with folk who have made their minds upIf you win the Ai argument then another will pipe up to tell you that if they cant run Autogen at 100% then they may as well run FS9.Explain that Autogen at sparse in FSX is equivalent to FS9 at dense and they will counter with "well addon X ran great in FS9 but brings FSX to its knees so FSX is rubbish.There is no end to it,So each to his own (by the way I run both sims and could not be happier with either of them)Things which will help towards a happier FSX experienceA good PC well set upNo config tweaksNo FS9 portoversTurn off animated jetwaysBalanced sliders that sets up FSX to prioritize properly.

Since I prefer the Trimble I cannot tell you how to replace it, but here

My understanding is that an AI level of 20% when using MyTrafficX has approximately the same or more traffic than using default traffic at 100%. 100% with MyTrafficX has several times more traffic than the default AI at 100%. Perhaps that is where the confusion is stemming from?

Compared to default stock MS traffic, you're absolutely right. But when people are talking about 100% AI traffic, I do not think they are referring to default AI traffic. But about custom AI, whether that is provided by a program like MyTrafficX, by World of AI packages, or by manual labor (no kidding ;D).Fact is, AI is a drain on any sim's resources. When you wonder why one man's sim is running considerably slower than another man's sim, while both are using comparable systems, one has to look at what may be different. 20% versus 100% of for example MyTrafficX AI makes a big difference and is part of the explanation.

but there is no point in arguing with folk who have made their minds up

Are you talking about yourself now? If you stop generalizing for moment, you might see that some of us are actually pretty reasonable. And polite. Folk.:(

Compared to default stock MS traffic, you're absolutely right. But when people are talking about 100% AI traffic, I do not think they are referring to default AI traffic. But about custom AI, whether that is provided by a program like MyTrafficX, by World of AI packages, or by manual labor (no kidding ;D).Fact is, AI is a drain on any sim's resources. When you wonder why one man's sim is running considerably slower than another man's sim, while both are using comparable systems, one has to look at what may be different. 20% versus 100% of for example MyTrafficX AI makes a big difference and is part of the explanation.Are you talking about yourself now? If you stop generalizing for moment, you might see that some of us are actually pretty reasonable. And polite. Folk.:(

MikeI have just loaded FSX and made my mind up , It really does run well on my machineI have also been flying FS9 every day since buying the Aerosoft Approaching Innsbruck, and it also runs wellHow is that for reasonable , Someone enjoying both Sims and buying loads of Payware for both :-)

Fact is, AI is a drain on any sim's resources. When you wonder why one man's sim is running considerably slower than another man's sim, while both are using comparable systems, one has to look at what may be different. 20% versus 100% of for example MyTrafficX AI makes a big difference and is part of the explanation.

Hear hear. Just refer to my example @ KLAS a few posts above. To me 100% AI is not just the slider to the right, to me 100% AI means all the traffic that visits a given airport. I strive to have every airline, GA, Business, Military - whatever - that visits an airport, reperesented in my FS world. I takes lots of time, but is a labour of love. FS9 can handle this. FSX cannot. No way. And that is the dealbreaker to me. I just cannot enjoy landing and departing at half-empty airports...But anyway, this really seems to be a pointless discussion about tastes now, and as we all know, there's no arguing about them :)

How is that for reasonable , Someone enjoying both Sims and buying loads of Payware for both :-)

Well, the most lucky guy in the whole simWorld! :( What else could you wish? Well, maybe a home built cockpit (unless you're a VC freak)...

Well, the most lucky guy in the whole simWorld! :( What else could you wish? Well, maybe a home built cockpit (unless you're a VC freak)...

Hellowell I am due to retire in a couple of years, So I will have to do something to fill the timeJust got to persuade th wife that we don't need a guest room.

I just cannot enjoy landing and departing at half-empty airports...But anyway, this really seems to be a pointless discussion about tastes now, and as we all know, there's no arguing about them :)

Indeed, it is all about tastes. For me, I cannot enjoy flying with AI traffic that wanders across the skies instead of following airways and proper flightplans...its better to have no traffic at all. To my knowledge (please correct me if I am wrong), only UT2 offers AI traffic with flightplans, and FSX is the only platform it runs on as the ability to assign flightplans to AI is an FSX-only feature. My point being that there really is no single metric of "better" and each has strengths and weaknesses. That said, I am very surprised you get such bad performance in FSX. I can run it reasonably well at 1920x1200 even with 100% commercial traffic in UT2, and my PC is over 3 years old. For example, I tested sitting on the active runway at KLAX with tons of traffic in view in PMDG's 747 (2D panel), I am getting ~25-35 FPS. Maybe its down to the fancy scenery, which I don't bother with...

Maybe its down to the fancy scenery, which I don't bother with...

I have a hunch this might have something to do with ;) This and 200+ AI planes on the ground and the immediate vicinity :)

Indeed, it is all about tastes. For me, I cannot enjoy flying with AI traffic that wanders across the skies instead of following airways and proper flightplans...its better to have no traffic at all. To my knowledge (please correct me if I am wrong), only UT2 offers AI traffic with flightplans, and FSX is the only platform it runs on as the ability to assign flightplans to AI is an FSX-only feature. My point being that there really is no single metric of "better" and each has strengths and weaknesses.

What the??? :( Ultimate Traffic for FS9, WOAI, Project AI, etc... :(I'm really starting to get surprised at how many uninformed FSX users are now cruising the FS9 forum...

I have a hunch this might have something to do with ;) This and 200+ AI planes on the ground and the immediate vicinity :)

Fair enough. Never personally saw much use for addon scenery when flying high altitude jets. My point though is that its not that FSX inherently runs poorly. As my setup shows, its quite possible to run FSX with good FPS on a medium spec PC when using lots of AI and complex aircraft. However, it appears that your specific setup does not work well (e.g., specific addon airports, every single possible AI aircraft etc).

What the??? :( Ultimate Traffic for FS9, WOAI, Project AI, etc... :(I'm really starting to get surprised at how many uninformed FSX users are now cruising the FS9 forum...

Les, I believe he's referring (correctly) to the fact that FS9 AI takes a direct route from airport A to airport B, rather than flying via actual flightplans and following real airways. Then again, it's 1am and I could be misinterpreting things ;)

Ultimate Traffic for FS9, WOAI, Project AI, etc... :( I'm really starting to get surprised at how many uninformed FSX users are now cruising the FS9 forum...

Yep Mackintosh, thats what I was referring to. Those packages offer real flight schedules, but NOT real flight plans as far as I know (e.g., the actual waypoint route that the aircraft travels, as opposed to great circle point-to-point routing). Again, happy to be proven wrong...

Les, I believe he's referring (correctly) to the fact that FS9 AI takes a direct route from airport A to airport B, rather than flying via actual flightplans and following real airways. Then again, it's 1am and I could be misinterpreting things ;)

I guess I didn't catch his meaning...Is there anyone here that follows AI point to point all the way to their destinations??? :(