It is March, 2011...and I am still batting for FS2004. I have read several posts that people have written asking if they should switch to FSX or not. I have also read many of the answers to these posts. If you have not switched by now, you are probably like me. It is important to understand that many FSX and FS2004 users are not “simmers”…they are “gamers”. There is a difference. A gamer plays a game for the enjoyment purpose rather than the simulation experience. A gamer starts his plane on the runway, takes off, and does loops until he is sick of playing then turns it off, which is great for him/her if that’s what they want to do. A simmer, on the other hand, starts with the plane parked at a gate or ramp, uses real weather, real checklists, real charts, and most likely is flying an upgraded plane in which every system is fully simulated. It is not uncommon for a simmer to spend an hour on the ground before even making it to the runway. I bring up the difference so you (the user) can understand that there are two completely different philosophies with this program. Are you a gamer or a simmer? This software is great for either category...just know which one you are. If you are a gamer- either FS9 or FSX will work provided that your computer is adequate for it. If you are a simmer…read on. I can only tell you my level of experience and offer my advice. Some may disagree with me, but unless they have 15 years of “simming” and 9 years of actual flying like I do then they are likely wrong. I have Owned every MSFS since 1995- great software that continues to impress us serious simmers. I Have had FS2004 since 2004 and have nearly every "quality" upgrade available, over 140 (or $2,500) individual add-ons. My System:Windows 7 Pro 64-bit Q9650 3.0 Core 2 Quad Single Radeon HD 6870 1GB GDDR5 GPU 8Gb DDR3 RAM In FS2004, I have everything set as high as it can go. Traffic, weather, autogen….everything all the way up. On final to ORD in the 2010 Maddog Pro at it’s peak traffic time Im hitting 30+ FPS in FS2004 with everything cranked. With Ground Environment, Flight Environment, REX Extreme, Ultimate Traffic, and an awesome FS Dream Team KORD, the experience is truly very realistic- and that frame rate is certainly welcome given those settings. Wish I could say the same for FSX. I Bought the deluxe version (w/ acceleration pack) after procrastinating since it’s release and installed five upgrades immediately: Ultimate Terrain X Ultimate Traffic II Ground Environment X Imagine Sim KATL X 1 tile of Megascenery Earth I stopped right there. I’m not going to spend another dime. When I went from 30+ FPS in FS2004 on final to a very detailed KORD in a very detailed aircraft with everything cranked to less than 10 fps in FSX without max settings, it was obvious. I just wasted about $150 on FSX and the upgrades. Remember- I am a simmer....what matters to me is different than what matters to gamers. Those FPS are simply intolerable. I tried to make it work, honestly. I tweaked the cfg file, overclocked my CPU, and slashed the settings that didnt matter to me...still not good enough. Us serious simmers demand at least 18 fps at all times and even that’s low. We want the best. We don’t want to settle with 50% ai traffic, half the autogen, and crappy textures in order to get 9 fps. We want the best and the highest FPS right along with it. Sure, FSX has its pros. Animated animals, cars, and jetways along with wet runways are just a few. But if you are a "simmer", you probably dont care about those things. You care more about the hundreds (or thousands) of dollars you have invested in this hobby. This post is aimed at the long-time simmer who has yet to make the switch. Unless you have the best CPU, Main Board, RAM, and GPU (In that order!)...on top of the willingness to kick the majority of your add-ons to the curb- stick with FS2004.

I have read several posts that people have written asking if they should switch to FSX or not. .... This post is aimed at the long-time simmer who has yet to make the switch. Unless you have the best CPU, Main Board, RAM, and GPU (In that order!)...on top of the willingness to kick the majority of your add-ons to the curb- stick with FS2004.

Maybe this post would do more good in the FS2004 forum :(

Maybe this post would do more good in the FS2004 forum :(

He did there too... :Phttp://forum.avsim.net/topic/328883-my-opinion-on-fs9-vs-fsx/

It is March, 2011...and I am still batting for FS2004.

I dont know what to say except that I guess I am happy your happy with FS9.I dont know what type of responses you are hoping to get since this topic has been hashed out over, and over, and over again in the last few years. Some of us run only FS9, some FS9 and FSX, and some like me only FSX. What more is there to say, we all do what is best for each of us.Signed - Happy FSX "simmer"

It is true that if you spend 95% of your sim experience looking at the cockpit panels there is no reason to upgrade the software or hardware. For those who like the immersion factor to continue when looking outside the plane it's a no brainer; FS9 water and ground textures just don't cut it any longer (yuk - sorry!). Most PC gamers and simmers also recognise that hardware upgrades every 2 or 3 years are a harsh reality if we want to keep up with the software necessary for our hobby.

"Some may disagree with me, but unless they have 15 years of “simming” and 9 years of actual flying like I do then they are likely wrong"I have 40 years of actual flying and too many years of simming to count, and FSX has it all over FS9. Its obvious you dont have your system set up correctly, but by all means, enjoy FS9

i have your same pc but different gpu. FSX run great!!! overclocked cpu to 4.1ghz make huge diferent + the boyote + another trick.....with pmdg md11 on fsdreamteam honolulu im 28-30 fps with ut2 set on 40% gex utx rex. ive maximus formula II that is great on overclock

I can only tell you my level of experience and offer my advice. Some may disagree with me, but unless they have 15 years of “simming” and 9 years of actual flying like I do then they are likely wrong.

That gives us a good idea of how much your advice is worth

That gives us a good idea of how much your advice is worth

Exactly what I thought...And 15 years simming, he is practically new to it !!!G

I know this post is very 'troll-like, but it so smacked of condescension, mild arrogance and generalization, and so many points, that I just have to respond.

It is March, 2011...and I am still batting for FS2004.A simmer, on the other hand, starts with the plane parked at a gate or ramp, uses real weather, real checklists, real charts, and most likely is flying an upgraded plane in which every system is fully simulated. It is not uncommon for a simmer to spend an hour on the ground before even making it to the runway.

B) Why would I spend an hour in the cockpit of an A2A Spitfire, or a SibWings BirdDog, or an IRIS Christen Eagle? Does that mean I'm not a 'simmer'??? :( It takes me roughly fifteen minutes to get the LH Maddog ready to pushback. What one earth would warrant an hour on the ground??

I bring up the difference so you (the user) can understand that there are two completely different philosophies with this program. Are you a gamer or a simmer? This software is great for either category...just know which one you are. If you are a gamer- either FS9 or FSX will work provided that your computer is adequate for it. If you are a simmer…read on.

..so that I can understand?? Pretty condescending don't you think?

I can only tell you my level of experience and offer my advice. Some may disagree with me, but unless they have 15 years of “simming” and 9 years of actual flying like I do then they are likely wrong. I have Owned every MSFS since 1995- great software that continues to impress us serious simmers. I Have had FS2004 since 2004 and have nearly every "quality" upgrade available, over 140 (or $2,500) individual add-ons.

"Likely wrong"?? You may not realise it, but some of us have a whole lot more time flying r/w as well as a whole lot more time simming.

My System:Windows 7 Pro 64-bit Q9650 3.0 Core 2 Quad Single Radeon HD 6870 1GB GDDR5 GPU 8Gb DDR3 RAM

Mediocre.

Wish I could say the same for FSX. I Bought the deluxe version (w/ acceleration pack) after procrastinating since it’s release and installed five upgrades immediately: Ultimate Terrain X Ultimate Traffic II Ground Environment X Imagine Sim KATL X 1 tile of Megascenery Earth

Both Megascenery AND ImagineSim suck. Try some OrbX/FTX, FSDreamTeam & FlyTampa.

I stopped right there. I’m not going to spend another dime. When I went from 30+ FPS in FS2004 on final to a very detailed KORD in a very detailed aircraft with everything cranked to less than 10 fps in FSX without max settings, it was obvious. I just wasted about $150 on FSX and the upgrades. Remember- I am a simmer....what matters to me is different than what matters to gamers. Those FPS are simply intolerable. I tried to make it work, honestly. I tweaked the cfg file, overclocked my CPU, and slashed the settings that didnt matter to me...still not good enough.

You "tried"? You didn't try very hard, did you?

Us serious simmers demand at least 18 fps at all times and even that’s low. We want the best. We don’t want to settle with 50% ai traffic, half the autogen, and crappy textures in order to get 9 fps. We want the best and the highest FPS right along with it.

... and most 'serious' simmers get all of that, and a whole lot more!!! :(

Sure, FSX has its pros. Animated animals, cars, and jetways along with wet runways are just a few. But if you are a "simmer", you probably dont care about those things. You care more about the hundreds (or thousands) of dollars you have invested in this hobby.

Really? I would suggest you have this one fully backwards. B)

This post is aimed at the long-time simmer who has yet to make the switch. Unless you have the best CPU, Main Board, RAM, and GPU (In that order!)...on top of the willingness to kick the majority of your add-ons to the curb- stick with FS2004.

You're kind of late in saying that, considering how long FSX has been out. It may have been valid during the first year of FSX's life, but not now. Pretty poor post: bad taste and a very small minority opinion.Cheers! :(

It's always about the sliders.... :( It's important for any gamer, even the "serious gamer" to compare apples to apples. Slider-itis doesn't do this. Set FSX to 5m on textures, 38m on mesh, autogen and scenery objects to SPARSE and go see how the FPS are doing. That's FS9 levels to compare with. The FPS should be much better. And in making these changes to the settings you will avail yourself to the better aircraft that can be made for FSX and still get the performance you feel you are entitled to.In the end, we all sit down at a computer and play a game for enjoyment. As long as you enjoy what you are doing, not much else matters, does it? Calling one's self "serious" or a "simmer" in lieu of a gamer doesn't make things any different. I've been playing the game since it came on 5.25" disks, hooray for me. All that shows is that I have a lot more (LOTS MORE!) gray hair than brown... :(

I've been playing the game since it came on 5.25" disks, hooray for me. All that shows is that I have a lot more (LOTS MORE!) gray hair than brown... :(

You and me, too, Meshman! ... The scenario:- an XT, keyboard and a monochrome monitor (two-color, gold or blank) and the onboard speaker...Meigs an a 150. Man - this is great! I never thought we could fly on a computer!! WOW!! all with five guys over your shoulder - in awe! "Lemme try!

You and me, too, Meshman! ... The scenario:- an XT, keyboard and a monochrome monitor (two-color, gold or blank) and the onboard speaker...Meigs an a 150. Man - this is great! I never thought we could fly on a computer!! WOW!! all with five guys over your shoulder - in awe! "Lemme try!

F-4 Phantom on the Acorn Electron.. .. .. Went through about 5 simulators before I even got to a PC and flight sim !!!!!G

The usual...*sigh*A few negative posts about the OP in this thread, and positive answers in the FS9 thread... Surprise! :( I'm happy you enjoy FS9, nothin' wrong with that. The only thing that ####### me off is when you theorize that because you're a real pilot, (I'm a real pilot and air traffic controller) FS9 is the "real" sim. It may be real enough for you, but I prefer the (far superior) textures, incredible addon aircraft, and basic ground scenery at airports over Nine anyday. Good luck with your sim!

I was impressed, this is the first my version is better than your version post, ever!  OP keep these type of fresh posts coming. :(