Hey everyone,i usually visit this forum and also the one from flightsim.com and one thing that keeps attracting my attention, is how many people are having performance issues with fsx. So,i asked myself why the hell then did they give up on fs2004 when u can get it to look as good as fsx without performance issues.here are a few screenshots to prove my point:

in my opinion, nothing beats fs2004 with proper addons. we might need to wait for next sim to come out to pull it out of our hearts

Your sim looks wonderful......but I do not like the title of your post. Some people obviously do prefer FSX and some prefer FS9.But what I'm sure we would would all like to see is an end to these FS9 versus FSX posts. :(

Hey everyone,i usually visit this forum and also the one from flightsim.com and one thing that keeps attracting my attention, is how many people are having performance issues with fsx. So,i asked myself why the hell then did they give up on fs2004 when u can get it to look as good as fsx without performance issues.here are a few screenshots to prove my point:

Very nice... and I quite agree, never even bothered to try FSX! But one question, if you're going to post this type of thread, please tell us your add-ons, specs and settings :)Geoff

Your sim looks wonderful......but I do not like the title of your post. Some people obviously do prefer FSX and some prefer FS9.But what I'm sure we would would all like to see is an end to these FS9 versus FSX posts. :(

thnxs for your comments ed. it just 'breaks' my heart sometimes to see how people keep spending huge sum of money for something that doesnt even work properly and the newbies being caught in that struggle. this can easily put them off and we might see a decrease of new flightsimmers in our community in the future. So my advice to all newbies around, is to do a good research on what can be achieved in fs2004 before thinking that fsx is the newest and it must be the 'best' as new ones can sometimes not be the best on the market.

Very nice... and I quite agree, never even bothered to try FSX! But one question, if you're going to post this type of thread, please tell us your add-ons, specs and settings :)Geoff

hi, thnxs for your commentsi'm currently installing fs2004 on my laptop and so far addons added are : fsglobal 2010, rex2004, zinertek advanced water, fscene x, ultimate terrain all series and i still need to add hundreds more addons mainly aircrafts and airports. it will take me up to wkend to finish everything.here are my specs:AMD Turion X2 Dual Core Mobile Technology RM-70 2.0Ghz16'' HD Cine Crystal LCDATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 with dedicated 512MB (Up to 1791MB with Hyper Memory)4GB Ram250GB SATA Hardrive in primary bay + 320GB SATA Hardrive in secondary bayBlu-ray DVD player all built-in3 USB 2.0 Ports, 1 E-SATA port ( Up to 3Gbits transfer rate which is equivalent to internal hardrives in terms of performance), HDMI Port, VGA Port and Expandable PCI Express Slot.Subwoofer featuring Virtual Surround SoundCrystal Clear built in WebcamFinger Print Technology for advanced securityWin7 64bitsFor the setting in fs2004, everything is maxed out. I used to use flight ground environment pro but then changed over to fscene x as the colours are more appealing and natural

Fly under 10,000 ft and you'll see the difference. FSX's use of autogen is the big difference. Towns and cities look real while in FS2004 they look cartoony.It also depends on how new is your computer. Newer ones with the i7 can now handle just about everything that FSX can throw at them with just a few slowdowns.But I still use both sims depending on what flight I'm doing and where I'm flying. The many scenery and airports addons available for FS9 is another reason I still use FS9.

Hi,Nice screenshots.Out of curiosity, and as a relative newcomer to FS9, I'd like to know what you have used specifically for the ground textures and autogen in those shots.I recognise Seattle more from my old favourite FU3 (I fly FS9 more around the UK & Europe). I could be wrong, but as I recall (I'm not currently at my PC) my FS9 Seattle doesn't look anything like as convincing as yours. I wouldn't mind making the area look that good on my installation, and it might give me some idea of what to add next in other regions.Kind regards,DP. S. it might be worth posting acontinuation in a new, more politically correct thread! :(

This type of post serves no purpose .I recommend you look at some of the Orbx PNW screenshots that have been posted recently, then you may want to reconsider your thread title at least .I suppose I better add that FS2004 is my sim of choice Somebody please bring the padlock before the usual prison riot breaks out :(

Hey great shots, could you post any tweaks you made in your cfg file (if any) like the [TERRAIN] portion.

I didn't give up on FS2004. And I'd never give up on FSX either.................at least until a better sim in the next five years comes out.As someone else mentioned, check out the new Pacific Northwest scenery for FSX & FSX only. Puts a lot of fun back into simming..GA wise.L.Adamson

Your sim looks wonderful......but I do not like the title of your post. Some people obviously do prefer FSX and some prefer FS9.But what I'm sure we would would all like to see is an end to these FS9 versus FSX posts. :(

I have to agree. Some of my friends prefer lager whereas I prefer real ale. Who cares? We're still friends.Very nice pictures though. :(

"Who needs fsx when u can get fs2004 to look like this?"ME!I also enjoy FS9 and fly it often thanks to third party birds and airports not available in FSX. , However, IMHO accross the board away from a local special third party scenery, at low altitudes there is no comparison between FS9 and FSX. Trees, Autogen and the like are much sharper in FSX. I enjoy the ground traffic as wellIn spite of all who say it is not so. I also can detect no significant difference in performance with a high powered system either. I concede the numbers are reduced relative to framerates, but both are equally smooth and without any problems I can see. Maybe those with sharper young eyesight can detect a difference, but these old eyes are incapable of telling the difference.Happy FlyingRTH

Out of curiosity, and as a relative newcomer to FS9, I'd like to know what you have used specifically for the ground textures and autogen in those shots.

Looks like FScene textures to me. Dave, also check out the Birdseye View textures available as I use them and they are excellent!

I agree with both Ed and Mark. Yet another FS9 versus FSX or FSX versus FS9, if you wish, is not really going to be productive. That said, what you have done with FS9 and how are both very productive and well worth sharing, thanks for that. I will be interested in the details.Best regards,MelP.S. I love my Jeep, but I wouldn't dare tell everyone to get rid of, or they don't need their '________________', ( fill in the blank ).