I'd been resisting dropping my 2gr + VAT into this conversation, but what the hell, everyone else seems to have had their say in the matter.I like my skies filled with wondrous clouds, "real" simulated weather and AI aircraft seen through the windows of complex airliners. I want my airports extremely detailed, down to the grass and cracks and dirt on the runways and the taxiways. I want to fly to the monstrous uber-hubs of the airline world, such as Frankfrut or Amsterdam, Hong Kong and Atlanta and I want to land amidst the insanity that is 100% AI that serves the given airport (that's 300+ AI aircraft in some busy places). I can do just that with FS9 without cringing and swearing and breaking my joystick (it's happened with my old PC...). Unfortunately, I cannot get the same performance out of FSX, no matter how hard I try. 9-15fps on approach to a busy airport is simply not acceptable for me. That is the only reason I use FS9 and why I'll continue to do so, either until I invest in a liquid-nitrogen cooled rig or someone finally releases a sim that takes advantage of current technology the way it's supposed to.My specs are below, I'm sure they're fairly decent, even as far as FSX is concerned.

Exactly my thoughts, Mack. Word by word. People simply don't undertand that in they use to fly in country-side airports using G/A planes with 0%AI, it doesn't mean that FSX is acceptable for IFR flyers in big hubs.Mr. Tab from PMDG responded one day something like "who cares about AI-planes if they only create go-arounds and other issues". He pretend that he's not aware about AI Smooth, Radar Contact and other modern-day utilities that manage AI. That's the position of a person officially associated with PMDG and that's sad. I really keep my fingers cross that they will reconsider. As well as LevelD.

One thing I would like to point out is weather depiction. Fire up ASv6.5 and download the current weather, then take a high performance plane to KJFK in both sims and observe. The overall experience of climbing out of and diving into a major weather system with blowing snow is entirely better in FSX than FS9. I think someone earlier favored FS9 as an "IFR flyer". Well serious IFR flying is all about weather, not fancy jets. Shouldn't being a serious IFR flyer make one favor FSX instead? For years we simmers have been playing with cloud textures, because that's the only thing users can control. But the spectacular weather depiction is so much more than how HD or pretty the clouds are. This brings out my point. FSX was not revolutionary. Instead their development goals were realistic improvements on almost all fronts. Some didn't work out that well, most others like weather engine did, but unfortunately all at a terrible cost of performance. FSX failed my expectation and perhaps taste from the beginning. But the plain fact is FSX is indeed one generation younger and better than FS9. As a hardcore FS9er I do not hesitate to admit that fact. I fly FS9 because everything considered I enjoy it a lot more than FSX for now. When it makes sense for me to go to FSX without feeling that I have to give up great stuff (FPS and addons) I will gladly do so and enjoy all the improvements FSX has to offer.

Where is this poll, I would like to add another grain of sand to the reef.

You will find it in the AVSIM Specific Forums- 4th from the top of that category:"AVSIM User Surveys and Opinion Polls Forum"Simmers from all walks of life are invited to profess their faith! (But you can vote only once.)Alex Reid

One thing I would like to point out is weather depiction. Fire up ASv6.5 and download the current weather, then take a high performance plane to KJFK in both sims and observe. The overall experience of climbing out of and diving into a major weather system with blowing snow is entirely better in FSX than FS9. I think someone earlier favored FS9 as an "IFR flyer". Well serious IFR flying is all about weather, not fancy jets. Shouldn't being a serious IFR flyer make one favor FSX instead? For years we simmers have been playing with cloud textures, because that's the only thing users can control. But the spectacular weather depiction is so much more than how HD or pretty the clouds are. This brings out my point. FSX was not revolutionary. Instead their development goals were realistic improvements on almost all fronts. Some didn't work out that well, most others like weather engine did, but unfortunately all at a terrible cost of performance. FSX failed my expectation and perhaps taste from the beginning. But the plain fact is FSX is indeed one generation younger and better than FS9. As a hardcore FS9er I do not hesitate to admit that fact. I fly FS9 because everything considered I enjoy it a lot more than FSX for now. When it makes sense for me to go to FSX without feeling that I have to give up great stuff (FPS and addons) I will gladly do so and enjoy all the improvements FSX has to offer.

HelloI have always felt that the depiction of rain and snow was one area that ACES ruined in FSX, just having these weird javelinscoming towards me looks odd.With the aircraft on the ground the rain just falls as solid rods, just odd looking.That AS6.5 which was written primarily for FS9 can manipulate the weather in FSX tells me they did not change to much in the weather code

One thing I would like to point out is weather depiction. Fire up ASv6.5 and download the current weather, then take a high performance plane to KJFK in both sims and observe. The overall experience of climbing out of and diving into a major weather system with blowing snow is entirely better in FSX than FS9. I think someone earlier favored FS9 as an "IFR flyer". Well serious IFR flying is all about weather, not fancy jets. Shouldn't being a serious IFR flyer make one favor FSX instead? For years we simmers have been playing with cloud textures, because that's the only thing users can control. But the spectacular weather depiction is so much more than how HD or pretty the clouds are. This brings out my point. FSX was not revolutionary. Instead their development goals were realistic improvements on almost all fronts. Some didn't work out that well, most others like weather engine did, but unfortunately all at a terrible cost of performance. FSX failed my expectation and perhaps taste from the beginning. But the plain fact is FSX is indeed one generation younger and better than FS9. As a hardcore FS9er I do not hesitate to admit that fact. I fly FS9 because everything considered I enjoy it a lot more than FSX for now. When it makes sense for me to go to FSX without feeling that I have to give up great stuff (FPS and addons) I will gladly do so and enjoy all the improvements FSX has to offer.

I disagree. I have the ASA for FS9, and the new vertical air simulation is top notch. The new realistic up and downdrafts as well as thermals and ridge lifts are incredible including the new enchanced wake turbulance. The only thing that needs to be fixed is the sudden air speed change. From say 45 tail wings, it turns to 75 head winds and my aircraft loses sudden control and massive speed. But I'm sure the developers are working on a new service pack for that problem. With REX2004,ASA, GE Pro, FSGenesis, Ultimate Water Advanced and the HDR Bloom, I love my FS9 to the teeth.

What is HDR Bloom? Did I miss something?

What is HDR Bloom? Did I miss something?

It stands for high dynamic range rendering. It gives the environment a more dynamic and HD look. FSX has that feature and is now avaliable as an option install for FS9! Try it, you will love it, I included a tweak also: http://www.2shared.com/file/11691643/a13a8...ight_Bloom.html

One thing I would like to point out is weather depiction. Fire up ASv6.5 and download the current weather, then take a high performance plane to KJFK in both sims and observe. The overall experience of climbing out of and diving into a major weather system with blowing snow is entirely better in FSX than FS9. I think someone earlier favored FS9 as an "IFR flyer". Well serious IFR flying is all about weather, not fancy jets. Shouldn't being a serious IFR flyer make one favor FSX instead? For years we simmers have been playing with cloud textures, because that's the only thing users can control. But the spectacular weather depiction is so much more than how HD or pretty the clouds are. This brings out my point. FSX was not revolutionary. Instead their development goals were realistic improvements on almost all fronts. Some didn't work out that well, most others like weather engine did, but unfortunately all at a terrible cost of performance. FSX failed my expectation and perhaps taste from the beginning. But the plain fact is FSX is indeed one generation younger and better than FS9. As a hardcore FS9er I do not hesitate to admit that fact. I fly FS9 because everything considered I enjoy it a lot more than FSX for now. When it makes sense for me to go to FSX without feeling that I have to give up great stuff (FPS and addons) I will gladly do so and enjoy all the improvements FSX has to offer.

Hey WindyCloud. I would point you to the following thread where your point above is questioned and answered directly by Jim at Hifi...Do we give up on realsim by staying with FS9 JSkornaQUOTE (jfri @ Jan 30 2010, 11:12 AM) *Q. Would you go so far as to say that with ASA FS9 and FSX are equally realistic with regard to air mass simulation and turbulence?A. Yes, I would say that is true!!:(Cheers,-PaulAlso, for the wind shifts, go into FSUIPC wind smoothing options. There are 3 options with boxes right on top of each other, I don't remember what they are called right now.Edited Set the top to 5 The middle to 0 and the last to 8 This should make the wind changes very gradual... In fact when doing KEWR -EHAM right now I just had a full 180 degree wind shift and I would say it took almost 5 minutes to complete not affecting the AC at all other than engine fluctuations to accommodate.I have no problem with sudden shifts anymore at all so if I could just get ASA to use a suppression ceiling and get the cloud popping under control I would be very happy :)

It stands for high dynamic range rendering. It gives the environment a more dynamic and HD look. FSX has that feature and is now avaliable as an option install for FS9! Try it, you will love it, I included a tweak also: http://www.2shared.com/file/11691643/a13a8...ight_Bloom.html

Thanks a lot - I will try tonight. I thought that bloom used to be main FSX tool in terms of FPS killing.

"Also, for the wind shifts, go into FSUIPC wind smoothing options. There are 3 options with boxes right on top of each other, I don't remember what they are called right now.Set the top to 0 The middle to 5 and the last to 8 This should make the wind changes very gradual...I have no problem with sudden shifts anymore at all so if I could just get ASA to use a suppression ceiling and get the cloud popping under control I would be very happy :)" I will try that, thanks for the advise! and yes, that cloud popping is really awful, but I use REX for clouds and ASA for weather and Zinerteks new water and my FS9 looks ADMAZING!

"Also, for the wind shifts, go into FSUIPC wind smoothing options. There are 3 options with boxes right on top of each other, I don't remember what they are called right now.Set the top to 0 The middle to 5 and the last to 8 This should make the wind changes very gradual...I have no problem with sudden shifts anymore at all so if I could just get ASA to use a suppression ceiling and get the cloud popping under control I would be very happy :)" I will try that, thanks for the advise! and yes, that cloud popping is really awful, but I use REX for clouds and ASA for weather and Zinerteks new water and my FS9 looks ADMAZING!

Hey Josh, I Edited that to 5 in the top, 0 in the Middle and 8 in the bottom after I went and looked at my settings LOL :( Sorry about the original mix up,-Paul

Hey Josh, I Edited that to 5 in the top, 0 in the Middle and 8 in the bottom after I went and looked at my settings LOL :( Sorry about the original mix up,-Paul

Noted. Thank you.

Love it! .... you forgot "It's dead in the water" :(

Oh yes . . . thanks for the reminder :(

Sorry to bring this up again, but I thought I would end this once and for all. FS9 kills FSX for high flying and FSX kills FS9 for low flying. Here is a pic.

Sorry to bring this up again, but I thought I would end this once and for all. FS9 kills FSX for high flying and FSX kills FS9 for low flying. Here is a pic.

josh- Not sure I agree that "FSX kills FS9 for low flyimg." Here are two FS9 shots for comparison. (AMD XP2200, dual GeForce FX5200 GPUs.)Alex Reid