Hi, being a newcomer to FSX, I've read a lot of comments about DX9 and DX10. I've seen that some won't budge off of DX9 and others love DX10.Which do you use and why?What are the pros and cons of each?Don't some of the mods, like FPSLimiter and Marniftarr's HDR mod require DX9 only?I've been exclusively using DX10, but I"m open-minded. DX10 has a nasty, and apparently unfixable problem with very bad texture flickering on runways, usually where different surface types (concrete, asphalt etc) intersect. Any opinions or insight is most welcome. Thanks.

I use DX10, but occasionally switch back to DX9 to use the HDR effect, which I like a lot. However,I use DX10 more, because of the increased smoothness (at least on my system). The flickering taxiway/runway in DX10 is not a problem anymore. I just added a concreate slab to the default airports I use most and that got rid of the issue. Rob

I used DX10 for a while because initially it made FSX a lot smoother than DX9, but after a lot of tweaking I got DX9 running even better than DX10 (in the area's that I like to fly). DX10 has various problems (flickering textures (there is a solution for that, but you need to manually edit each and every airport), no Vsync (although it worked with specific drivers and nHancer), no progressive taxi, problems with certain addons (planes and scenery), etc.) and it won't work indeed with the HDR mod (which btw has nothing to do with Marniftar afaik) and the Limiter. I really love the HDR mod: it brings FSX to the next level imho. It's as if someone finally turned on the lights in FSX! So now I've got DX9 running better than DX10 makes the choice rather easy... :( To me DX10 has zero benefits right now and DX9 has it all!

Totally OT but someone send me a PM about my DX9 tweaks: please PM me again, because I somehow accidently deleted the message...! :( :(

I use DX9, both because I use nHancer and because some of my aircraft add-ons don't like DX10.

DX10 has various problems (flickering textures (there is a solution for that, but you need to manually edit each and every airport),

How can I go about doing airport edits? I could at least do the ones I fly at regularly.And along the same lines, why hasn't there been a collective effort to edit airports and then release something as one big fix? (perhaps this isn't possible?)

How can I go about doing airport edits? I could at least do the ones I fly at regularly.And along the same lines, why hasn't there been a collective effort to edit airports and then release something as one big fix? (perhaps this isn't possible?)

I think this was the topic:http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=267998Haven't tried it myself though.

I use both, it depends on what/where I am flying. I love how the extra shader support in DX10 makes deep ocean water look with the white caps and I love the shadows in the VC cockpit. I also get a performance increase and a smoother flight, but it's mainly due to AA only being at 2X instead of my normal 8X in DX9 I'm sure.I feel both have their pros and cons and hopefully since everyday the talented people in the community are finding new things that can be done with FSX, maybe we'll get to where it will be a viable option.

Definitely DX9 , because of bad AA in DX10, also most airport buildings aren't textured during nighttime (belongs to adapted FS9 airports and there are a lot...).There are also problems with aircrafts like PMDG 747 i.e. Navlights only work when you switch on winglights and much more :-(.Performance is better in DX10 for sure, but when I lower my AA in DX9 to such bad IQ like DX10 I also get fantastic frames in DX9.:-)

I'm kind of new to hardcore FSX, though I've owned FSX for years (with decent settings it ran like cold molasses on my old rig). When I finally upgraded to my new Windows 7 rig last year I found the DX10 preview a MAJOR dissappointment. Why? It simply looks ugly IMO compared to DX9: the DX10 AA is a cruel hoax and no way to enable vsync (which for trackIR is an absolute must IMO). Yes, the water is way way better and there are some improvements in FPS, but my creed is "eye candy is life" so for me DX10 preview is a fail.

Definitely DX9 , because of bad AA in DX10, also most airport buildings aren't textured during nighttime (belongs to adapted FS9 airports and there are a lot...).There are also problems with aircrafts like PMDG 747 i.e. Navlights only work when you switch on winglights and much more :-(.Performance is better in DX10 for sure, but when I lower my AA in DX9 to such bad IQ like DX10 I also get fantastic frames in DX9.:-)

Yup, exactly!

I'm perplexed. Some of you say DX9 is much better, some even call DX10 "ugly", which kind of befuddles me. For me, DX9 looks absolutely horrendous:here's a few shots:DX9 close up:http://img2.pict.com/1c/12/06/3258034/0/dx9close.jpgDX10 close up:http://img2.pict.com/de/0b/c5/3258036/0/dx10close.jpgThat DX9 shot is with Anistropic and AA checked, and apparently my ATI TrayTools has zero effect on the outcome. Obviously, filtering is not kicking in for me on DX9 for some reason.To really see DX10 in all it's glory on my rig, please view and maximize this image:http://img2.pict.com/5b/c0/a2/3105195/0/l39.jpgTHAT is what I'm reluctant to give up!My DX9 sky has 'rings' that go around it:http://www.pict.com/view/3258166/0/skydx9My DX10 sky:http://www.pict.com/view/3258168/0/skydx10 (no rings)Another example of a stunning DX10 shot:http://img2.pict.com/f0/96/e6/3105124/0/starktrike.jpgI put the pics in links for two reasons. 1, the forum rule for file size, and 2, a small version wouldn't do these justice. In fact when you click on them, please click your browser's magnifying glass thingy to make them go full size, if your browser auto-shrinks them.Clearly, my DX9 is broken. I also get double to even triple the framerate in DX10. My specs are in my sig. Do all of the DX9 people here use Nvidia cards?

I've been flying with DX10 these days and it really runs smoother than DX9 but I got suck with the textures flickering and some of my add on aircraft are not compatible with DX9. Also the nav lights are not showed properly with DX10.Just switched back to DX9.The graphics looks the same. I'm personally happy with FSX because I could save some money and build a good machine. We have good add-on available for FSX to buy. Bruno F Guimar

I'm perplexed. Some of you say DX9 is much better, some even call DX10 "ugly", which kind of befuddles me. For me, DX9 looks absolutely horrendous:Clearly, my DX9 is broken. I also get double to even triple the framerate in DX10. My specs are in my sig. Do all of the DX9 people here use Nvidia cards?

Right, Your DX9 setup is broken, so there is no reason to be perplexed.Try to get your DX9 set up correctly and you can go much further with image quality filtering than FSX-DX10 preview ever will.Plenty of ATI DX9 users here, but probably a good a majority are on NV.

Right, Your DX9 setup is broken, so there is no reason to be perplexed.Try to get your DX9 set up correctly and you can go much further with image quality filtering than FSX-DX10 preview ever will.Plenty of ATI DX9 users here, but probably a good a majority are on NV.

Any idea how to go about fixing it? This is fresh install, with GEX, REX, and UTX. Can some of you DX9 guys put up some screens of how good you can make it look?And shockwave, I know you said DX9 can go much further .... did you see that screen I posted above with the L39 ? That was DX10 and looks practically like a photo.