Ultimate Traffic 2 Vs. Traffic X

[krishcanag 0]

Hi GuysI was wondering if there is a clear winner between these products in terms of impact on fps?If nothing much between them in fps, what about in overall add-on value to FSX?I have traffic X and it impacts FSX to about 35% on fps when traffic set at 69%

[jwenham 1]

Hi GuysI was wondering if there is a clear winner between these products in terms of impact on fps?If nothing much between them in fps, what about in overall add-on value to FSX?I have traffic X and it impacts FSX to about 35% on fps when traffic set at 69%

I have UT2 and here is the story. When UT2 first came out it had a few bugs most of which they ironed out. It was pretty good on the frames/performance except when approaching a larger airport which kinda defeats the purpose of getting a traffic package in the first place IMO. ANyways, they are now in beta testing on the first service pack for it. They more or less completly rewrote the software and it has some VERY promising aspects which included a HUGE performance boost. As an example I could only fly into KATL or KORD or Mega Airports Heathrow with nothing more than 20-30% AI level. With the service pack being tested now I can fly into those airports with 60- 70% with better performance than I was getting at 20% before. DO keep in mind though that it is still a work in progress but it is getting better and better by the moment and I firmly think that it will be the best AI package to have. They also added a feature which allows you to set a minimum FPS in the UT2 interface and it will adjust traffic so you maintain that level. That part is still buggy but they are to have a fix for it any day now.

[Ruthus 0]

Even with current released level of UT2 I can get the same frames as TrafficX but with around 5 times the AI aircraft (slider settings are meaningless, UT2 generates a LOT more AI).People talk about pauses while UT2 injects traffic, but I used to get a similar effect with traffic x when you get close to a field, was a non-issue for me in the end.Traffic does reset if you go "out" of fsx into say flight planner/load/map. Doesnt really worry me too much. I tend to jump into planner first, let AH/FSX load the plane then the traffic is consistent all the way through. However, having some plane in front of you "disappear" cos you went to the map can spoil some peoples immersion.On the up side, I love being able to flush all the AI away if I dont have the time to wait to take-off or land. Also the traffic density is easily adjusted on the fly to keep frames up in busy areas (usually for me Heathrow) or for heavy-fps planes.i7 860 stock, gtx9800, UK2000 heathrow (not the extreme one), ASX, GEX, UTX, 100% traffic. Pretty much anywhere in the UK I hold 25 fps with just about any add on. Last night approach to Heathrow with Duke was at 8fps which I would normally avoid or adjust traffic down. Taxiing around the terminals low 20s. Needless to say there was an awful lot of AI planes..) You would have to adjust traffic down just to get a landing/take-off slot..)I was worried that GA would not be good, but to be frank I rarely visit any field that doesnt have something going on. Had to wait for a lander and was thrid in queue at Blackpool the other day...Traffic X wins hands down if you want military traffic and charter/freight traffic. To get these using UT2 you would need to run another traffic program alongside. UK has a lot of military fields and they are sadly deserts with only UT2.Have not tried the beta SP yet.Overall, best traffic I have tried, the only ones I have no experience of is the new my traffic (2010?) and woai.

[Guest WarpAir]

- 1 - I was using Trafficx, then moved to UT2, then moved back to TrafficX, mainly cause when approaching even not so busy airports my plane virtually stops in the sky while ut2 injects traffic. - 2 - Also with ut2 , if you accesss fsx menu at any point in time all the traffic stops and is reset, another bad idea. This means if you should acess fsx menu while taxing in an airport with lots of ground trafic, it will be just your plane moving in that airport for some time after you taken off.- 3 - If they can sort out the issues with ut2 its got the best looking ai models. but ut2 also makes your plane pause in the sky.4OF YOU ONE TO GET A TRAFFIC PROGRAM TODAY, TRAFFICX IS THE BEST I KNOW. there is also ultimate trafic 2010 which just came

[Guest WarpAir]

to cut the long story short a things stand today Trafficx is a far better program than ut2, cause even though ut2 has better looking AI and more liveries, trafficx does not pause your plane in the sky when injecting traffic

[duckbilled 310]

I was worried about those pauses before I purchased but I'm really not seeing anything drastic with 100% Commercial and GA traffic. There is a pause but it is probably 1-2 seconds. I do get one long pause when the flight first loads but that is expected.

[Guest WarpAir]

I was worried about those pauses before I purchased but I'm really not seeing anything drastic with 100% Commercial and GA traffic. There is a pause but it is probably 1-2 seconds. I do get one long pause when the flight first loads but that is expected.

All i can say to that is this, if this was no problem with ut2 , there wount be talk around about the new ut2 patch containing 50% change in the original code. Nobody changes half thier original code unless the original code had a BIG BUG, a bug so big its half the entire code base.My i7920 running at 3.8Ghz at meduim sized airport with traffic at 30%, and my plane pauses in the sky randaomly on approach. Back to TrafficX and no such issues, plus traffic does not get reset when i need to go to fsx menu.I suspect folks running i7 at 4Ghz might not have ut2 pause problem, but most folks are not running at 4Ghz. But even at 3.8Ghz i still get the pauses that for instant you think fsx has crashed.For my money, i would go TrafficX or get a review on MyTraffic 2010.Edit::I am not talking about the ut2 pause you get when you first load a flight, that does not bother me one bit, its the pauses you get when you on approach to almost any airport that makes me think ut2 is crap. And the fact that traffic is reset when you acess fsx menu. UT2 code does not flow well with fsx , so the fps is all over the place.

[wardp 19]

I have tried Traffic X & My Traffic before I went to UT II which I am currently using without the beta service pack and I wouldn' go back to the others now. I run UT II at 100% airline traffic and can comfortably fly to and from EGLL, KORD and KJFK using Aerosoft and FSDT sceneries. I do get a slight pause on finals at about 10 miles out but only for half a second but that's no problem. I now have an i920 @ 3.9 GHz but even my Q9550 @ 3.5 GHz coped with UT II at 100% airline traffic.Try it, Flight One will refund you if you don't like it.

[krishcanag 0]

Reading the comments, I think UT2 will overtake traffic X, but for the moment I will stick with traffic X.thanks for the input, its always better to get opinons from people who have had both.regards

[wombat778 0]

All i can say to that is this, if this was no problem with ut2 , there wount be talk around about the new ut2 patch containing 50% change in the original code. Nobody changes half thier original code unless the original code had a BIG BUG, a bug so big its half the entire code base.

I don't think that is necessarily true at all. There are many times that I have had to rewrite almost an entire program because of a change in approach. That does not mean the original code has "a big bug" or is broken. The change in approach may only gain a small increase in performance, but may require a big code change to implement. In short, I don't think you can fairly read anything into the amount of rewriting that they have done with UT2.

[duckbilled 310]

All i can say to that is this, if this was no problem with ut2 , there wount be talk around about the new ut2 patch containing 50% change in the original code. Nobody changes half thier original code unless the original code had a BIG BUG, a bug so big its half the entire code base.My i7920 running at 3.8Ghz at meduim sized airport with traffic at 30%, and my plane pauses in the sky randaomly on approach. Back to TrafficX and no such issues, plus traffic does not get reset when i need to go to fsx menu.I suspect folks running i7 at 4Ghz might not have ut2 pause problem, but most folks are not running at 4Ghz. But even at 3.8Ghz i still get the pauses that for instant you think fsx has crashed.For my money, i would go TrafficX or get a review on MyTraffic 2010.Edit::I am not talking about the ut2 pause you get when you first load a flight, that does not bother me one bit, its the pauses you get when you on approach to almost any airport that makes me think ut2 is crap. And the fact that traffic is reset when you acess fsx menu. UT2 code does not flow well with fsx , so the fps is all over the place.

Yes, I don't deny that this is an issue for many users, just not me. I doubt the extra .2Ghz is making the difference so it must be something else. Maybe HD speed? Does it even read the HD when it injects traffic?It is great that they are trying to tackle the issue as UT2 needs to work well for the vast majority of users, not just some.

[Ruthus 0]

Yes, I don't deny that this is an issue for many users, just not me. I doubt the extra .2Ghz is making the difference so it must be something else. Maybe HD speed? Does it even read the HD when it injects traffic?It is great that they are trying to tackle the issue as UT2 needs to work well for the vast majority of users, not just some.

All I can say is that is virtually pause free for me (though the reset with some FSX menus is an irritant). I spent a lot of time with traffic x and while trying to sort the FSX stutters out there was a definite effect due to reaching a predetermined distance from an airport, then fsx having to add the ai and sort the jetways out. For me, this stuttering was far more noticable than the small hiccup from UT2, especially considering how little traffic I had then compared to now. But hey, its all YMMV with FSX.I miss the freight and military traffic. However, neither UT2 or traffic x is without issues. Just try messing with schedules, other aircraft and traffic density in TrafficX and a whole new can of worms will consume your days..) For me UT2 is the better compromise, and hopefully getting even better.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

I think that once UT2 get the new SP completely ironed out, it will be the package of choice. I have had it since it came out and like it a lot. I have not installed the beta SP1, because I dont like to be part of testing, but from what I have read on the registered users forum it seems to show great promise. There are still a few thigs they are working on, but once they get it all ironed out I will be on board again with the newest version.

[jfv 4]

I think that once UT2 get the new SP completely ironed out, it will be the package of choice. I have had it since it came out and like it a lot. I have not installed the beta SP1, because I dont like to be part of testing, but from what I have read on the registered users forum it seems to show great promise. There are still a few thigs they are working on, but once they get it all ironed out I will be on board again with the newest version.

Do you have a pointer to this beta SP? I own UT2 but have disabled it for these same performance reasons, I'dbe interested in testing what they are doing.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

Do you have a pointer to this beta SP? I own UT2 but have disabled it for these same performance reasons, I'dbe interested in testing what they are doing.

Yes, click here: http://ultimatetraffic.flight1.net/forums/and select the link "Product Support for Licensed Purchasers". Inside that link on the top you will find the UT2 Beta Forum where you can download the SP1 to try out. You must be a registered user of the product to gain admission to that forum.