I'm thinking about buying an add-on like REX and I was wondering how much it impacts FPS. I'm not running a very fast system (E4400 2GHz @ 3 GHz, ATI 4650HD) and I was wondering whether this did in fact make sense - because I'm not a fan of slideshows and on airports like LHR I do already reach 10 FPS with 50% AI Traffic.Thanks and maybe you know some alternatives without a lot of FPS impact?Doc

If anything with my system I have noticed a gain in FPS with REX. Much better than the default clouds etc. With your system I would think you may have a difficult time running FSX at any even most low settings. Bob G.

I'm thinking about buying an add-on like REX and I was wondering how much it impacts FPS. I'm not running a very fast system (E4400 2GHz @ 3 GHz, ATI 4650HD) and I was wondering whether this did in fact make sense - because I'm not a fan of slideshows and on airports like LHR I do already reach 10 FPS with 50% AI Traffic.Thanks and maybe you know some alternatives without a lot of FPS impact?Doc

I did notice an effect on the graphics card as the textures on max are more complex than the defaultMS ones. Ie my graphics card became limiting after installing - so I reduced the textures from maxand then my fps returned to what it was before.

I'm thinking about buying an add-on like REX and I was wondering how much it impacts FPS. I'm not running a very fast system (E4400 2GHz @ 3 GHz, ATI 4650HD) and I was wondering whether this did in fact make sense - because I'm not a fan of slideshows and on airports like LHR I do already reach 10 FPS with 50% AI Traffic.Thanks and maybe you know some alternatives without a lot of FPS impact?Doc

There won't be an impact if you use the same kind of resolutions as the default textures. All REX does is replace the default textures with better looking ones: they aren't heavier or anything, unless you start using the high res options. Some sort of side effect might be that you might start using more clouds and heavier weather because REX makes it looks so good and obviously that will have an impact on fps... but that's not REX's fault, because you would also have lowe fps if you start using more clouds and heavier weather with the default textures.If FSX runs fine now, REX won't change that: it will only make things look a LOT better.

With your system I would think you may have a difficult time running FSX at any even most low settings.

Which do you think is the bottleneck on my system cos I've been thinking about upgrading a few parts to it. I've installed FSX on a separate hard drive but I'm running Vista 32 bit and 4GB of memory. I also think that maybe the ATI 4650HD is not that great?

Come on Man! It's been talked about for over 5 years. FSX is a CPU hog. Sorry for the negative reply, but there have been so many threads regarding this subject. :( It may be time I leave the forums. :( Bye.Bob G.

Come on Man! It's been talked about for over 5 years. FSX is a CPU hog. Sorry for the negative reply, but there have been so many threads regarding this subject. :(

I'm very sorry for my ignorance about this topic but I read reviews on Avsim and other websites with people that have 3GHz or slightly more and they seem to be getting considerably more FPS. I believe that considering this is it is very much appropriate to be asking myself whether maybe ANOTHER components limits my FPS. This is also because before I overclocked my CPU I got the same amount of FPS.Thank you!

Come on Man! It's been talked about for over 5 years. FSX is a CPU hog. Sorry for the negative reply, but there have been so many threads regarding this subject. :( It may be time I leave the forums. :( Bye.Bob G.

Chill out Bob, His question was about REX, be nice!!!Doc.......888888 have you had a look at FEX ?http://www.simforums...es_forum34.htmlI tried REX, it's ok, but I think FEX is better in FPS and visuals. Check it out. Rex is not the only one available, there is an alternative.