Just looking for comments on FlyTampa Rebooted. How are the frame rates, the look, etc. My system specs are listed in my signature below, how do you think it would perform? Please advise and thanks!Mark

Just looking for comments on FlyTampa Rebooted. How are the frame rates, the look, etc. My system specs are listed in my signature below, how do you think it would perform? Please advise and thanks!Mark

As for most fly tampa products, I find them all frame rate friendly and this product stands the same.You should be able to have plenty of speed with your current system. :(

My system in my signature runs Tampa Reboot quite fine,with 100% AI. I have all my texture slides to max,autogen and dynamic,stuff like that at dense and normal.I am amazed by the way flytampa designs their airports. No matter how detail the airport is,the framerate still very nice :(

Thanks for the comments. The thing is that I've always had issues with KTPA version 1. I purchased it bundled with 3 other FlyTampa airports, (KSAN, KSFO, KMIA), and it has always been a frame rate killer. With the system I'm currently running and with a default KTPA install, I get around 12 frames a second. In fact, I'm currently conducting a re-install of FS9 and have very little in the way of anything installed in my system. I had to remove all of the recommended removals to improve frame rates which are mentioned in the user's manual. When I did this, my frame rates went from 12fps to my locked 30fps. I tested it with and without AI traffic and the AI made a 2-3fps difference.My NVidia settings are the recommended settings for 8SQ that we've been floating around in the forums here and on the web. So for some odd reason, I have not had much success with KTPA from FlyTampa. Not to mention the issues encountered with the bleeding ground textures at KSAN.Keeping in mind that both KTPA and KSAN are really old products and after seeing the shear quality of the KSFO legacy product, I have an open mind. I really love their version of KSFO but out of the 4 airport in the bundle, that is the only airport that I would call quality.The thing that still bugs me is that with my rig...13fps with version 1...yuck! So I do hope there is an improvement and hope for more comments :)Mark

Thanks for the comments. The thing is that I've always had issues with KTPA version 1. I purchased it bundled with 3 other FlyTampa airports, (KSAN, KSFO, KMIA), and it has always been a frame rate killer. With the system I'm currently running and with a default KTPA install, I get around 12 frames a second. In fact, I'm currently conducting a re-install of FS9 and have very little in the way of anything installed in my system. I had to remove all of the recommended removals to improve frame rates which are mentioned in the user's manual. When I did this, my frame rates went from 12fps to my locked 30fps. I tested it with and without AI traffic and the AI made a 2-3fps difference.My NVidia settings are the recommended settings for 8SQ that we've been floating around in the forums here and on the web. So for some odd reason, I have not had much success with KTPA from FlyTampa. Not to mention the issues encountered with the bleeding ground textures at KSAN.Keeping in mind that both KTPA and KSAN are really old products and after seeing the shear quality of the KSFO legacy product, I have an open mind. I really love their version of KSFO but out of the 4 airport in the bundle, that is the only airport that I would call quality.The thing that still bugs me is that with my rig...13fps with version 1...yuck! So I do hope there is an improvement and hope for more comments :)Mark

Mark, your frame rates are too low what aircraft were you using at the time? I have a feeling it could be your nvidia drivers. Ill check my installation and post fps I personally love my flytampa sceneries frame rates will be a little bit hard even on fs9 depending on what system you have and drivers mostly due to there detail. but also which aircraft you are using.

Mark,The original KTPA scenery also taxes my PC, but the new one does not. There are no guarantees with anything MS Flight Simulator. You get an idea of how it would perform on your PC, buy it, either are happy with it, or improve your PC. It's almost a never-ending cycle. Dave Vega

Mark, your frame rates are too low what aircraft were you using at the time? I have a feeling it could be your nvidia drivers. Ill check my installation and post fps I personally love my flytampa sceneries frame rates will be a little bit hard even on fs9 depending on what system you have and drivers mostly due to there detail. but also which aircraft you are using.

Thanks Ceasar. I've been experimenting with different drivers. The driver I had installed during the test was 266.44 WHQL - [r266_20-1]. I might just have some bad textures. I just don't know how to determine when a texture is bad unless there is some type of visual anomaly...something that I can see. To be honest, I wouldn't know what to do about it even if there was except to maybe remove it. There's always the possibility that I have a corrupted disk version of the product as well. I conducted the test with the default Cessna 172. I have also tried the Carenado C-182Q with a repaint by Urs Burkhardt titled "Cessna 182Q N2457P 1" from his "Six-Pack" download. No heavy iron yet as I'm sure my PMDG 737 will have an impact on performance. In all cases, really low frame rates which is why I'm considering a new purchase.Mark

Mark,The original KTPA scenery also taxes my PC, but the new one does not. There are no guarantees with anything MS Flight Simulator. You get an idea of how it would perform on your PC, buy it, either are happy with it, or improve your PC. It's almost a never-ending cycle. Dave Vega

Yeah, I do understand that. I once did a comprehensive analysis for a reason that FS9 was crashing at YAMB. It took a few hours but finally discovered that it was a single bad texture on an AI F-111 Aardvark parked at the military side of the airport. This one bad texture reeked havoc with FS9 causing stuttering, low frame rates, and an eventual CTD when I got close enough to the airport.Pretty interesting when you look at it from the perspective of all the hardware and software layers that actually have to be used to come to the point of providing an image for you to enjoy. One single bunk fuselage texture and it's lights out. The issue with KTPA is interesting as well. As I removed BGLs from the airport and started a flight, I could see the frame rates improve. The largest improvements came from removing the taxi signs and ground vehicles. The thing is that without taxi signs and ground vehicles, it's not as much fun. So when ever I see those fantastic looking screen shots on products for sale, I always wish that they would use the SHIFT-Z readout so I can see if the sim is really at it's knees or not :)Mark

Don't (yet) have the new scenery but every FlyTampa scenery I have ever purchased has had excellent performance and is outstanding in every way. I don't think they know how to produce a scenery that isn't absolutely top-notch. :( I seriously doubt the problem you've reported is because of the scenery. It might be nice if they had "try before you buy" like FSDT but in all my experience of their products, I have never been disappointed

Don't (yet) have the new scenery but every FlyTampa scenery I have ever purchased has had excellent performance and is outstanding in every way. I don't think they know how to produce a scenery that isn't absolutely top-notch. :( I seriously doubt the problem you've reported is because of the scenery. It might be nice if they had "try before you buy" like FSDT but in all my experience of their products, I have never been disappointed

Ah, interesting. What scenery have you purchased then...any of the old stuff? I seem to remember Seattle having it share of growing pains. Then there was San Diego and apparently, others have had issues with KTPA as well. So this might not just be an isolated incident. It's root cause could be something other then the scenery, the latest NVidia drivers maybe. The thing is that I've always have had issues with this scenery so maybe it's just in the executable build that I happened to get. What I do know so far is this, that as I removed scenery objects the frame rates improved, which stands to reason. The biggest improvement came when I removed the taxi signs and the ground vehicles, 10fps+. My system is fairly new but WinXP32 is fairly old. So could it be the drivers, could it be the same WinXP32 version that I've been using for years? I don't know yet but still, 12-13fps for a lower quality scenery is what I'm getting.Mark

Ah, interesting. What scenery have you purchased then...any of the old stuff? I seem to remember Seattle having it share of growing pains. Then there was San Diego and apparently, others have had issues with KTPA as well. So this might not just be an isolated incident. It's root cause could be something other then the scenery, the latest NVidia drivers maybe. The thing is that I've always have had issues with this scenery so maybe it's just in the executable build that I happened to get. What I do know so far is this, that as I removed scenery objects the frame rates improved, which stands to reason. The biggest improvement came when I removed the taxi signs and the ground vehicles, 10fps+. My system is fairly new but WinXP32 is fairly old. So could it be the drivers, could it be the same WinXP32 version that I've been using for years? I don't know yet but still, 12-13fps for a lower quality scenery is what I'm getting.Mark

Don't have the new or old KTPA and don't have KSAN so can't comment on those. But have never had the slightest problem with KSEA which I bought when it first came out or KSFO, LOWW, or KBUF and I have run them all on two different systems with both XP and Win7. As we both know, there's always anomolies with different setups etc but the reputation of FlyTampa is that they have astonishingly good FPS and overall quality and that's certainly been my experience. On my old system which was XP and a fairly old Dell, I still got excellent performance with them so I have to wonder if there is some conflict issue. If it was a driver, wouldn't that also impact your other addons? I'm truly not a computer expert by a long shot, so hopefully some of the real experts on here will see your thread and come to the rescue! :( Good luck with it

You have to remember that the old KTPA was one of FT first scenery's and is no where near as optimized as the new stuff.I can confirm the new FT scenery for FS9 is worlds better in looks and performance than the old version by a land slide. Keep in mind too that it does not have some of the features of the FSX version but is still a must have if you fly US routes...

You have to remember that the old KTPA was one of FT first scenery's and is no where near as optimized as the new stuff.I can confirm the new FT scenery for FS9 is worlds better in looks and performance than the old version by a land slide. Keep in mind too that it does not have some of the features of the FSX version but is still a must have if you fly US routes...

Cool...I'm glad that people are expressing your opinion. I realize that the version I'm running came out 6 or 7 years ago and it is evidenced by it's look and feel. Scenery design techniques have profoundly evolved as I have seen it in other scenery that I have. So sometimes it's can be a good thing to upgrade. That's why I'm not down on FlyTampa but wanted to hear from our user base what they think. So far, it's been fairly positive and it's what I like to hear...Florida is fun to fly.I still wish that scenery vendors would provide both the system and a SHIFT-Z readout on each one of their screen shots so we can tell if out lowly Core i990's will run them well (Big Smile Goes Here).Mark

I hear you Mark but the problem with that is some people fly POSKY planes for example, that are not hard on frames at all. While others fly say the PMDG 747 that can be tougher on frames. And then add in weather and AI traffic your using and the different combo's. So it would be hard to get a hard baseline test result.Over all coming on here as you did is what most do to get an idea how the sceney's are performing, but with a compnay like FT they always have the best looks/frame rate (anything since KMDW anyway).Others like FSDT have demos where you can try before you buy so it's hard to lose.I was running my E7500 I was getting great frames but I would get slow downs in bad weather (Active Sky with five cloud layers) at major places like KJFK and KORD for example. In all honesty I upgraded to my new system for FSX (in my sig) and found that I now have a KILLER FS9 rig! Anything I toss at it in FS9 runs smooth, thus the reason FS9 will always be my big iron sim. I do not imagine that with your rig you should have any problems.Keep in mind that KSFO although fantastic in my eyes too is considered a "legacy" product by Fly Tampa, anything they did after that is even more stunning and frame rate friendly. :(

I hear you Mark but the problem with that is some people fly POSKY planes for example, that are not hard on frames at all. While others fly say the PMDG 747 that can be tougher on frames. And then add in weather and AI traffic your using and the different combo's. So it would be hard to get a hard baseline test result.Over all coming on here as you did is what most do to get an idea how the sceney's are performing, but with a compnay like FT they always have the best looks/frame rate (anything since KMDW anyway).Others like FSDT have demos where you can try before you buy so it's hard to lose.I was running my E7500 I was getting great frames but I would get slow downs in bad weather (Active Sky with five cloud layers) at major places like KJFK and KORD for example. In all honesty I upgraded to my new system for FSX (in my sig) and found that I now have a KILLER FS9 rig! Anything I toss at it in FS9 runs smooth, thus the reason FS9 will always be my big iron sim. I do not imagine that with your rig you should have any problems.Keep in mind that KSFO although fantastic in my eyes too is considered a "legacy" product by Fly Tampa, anything they did after that is even more stunning and frame rate friendly. :(

I agree that FSDT have found the ideal solution - a full feature demo that is only limited by time. There are some other developers who have demos too but they are so screwed up by things intended to make the scenery unuseable that IMHO they do the product more harm than good as 'what you see' isn't 'what you get' and often it looks awful.