I have searched for recent reviews on the new versions of their scenery- with no luck.Is Fly Tampa easy on fps?I fly heavies so it's important to have relatively good performance.Is it comparable to orbx? Honestly I just want very good scenery that won't degrade my current performance. I've seen videos of their stuff and want to buy all of it but need some honest feedback on their performance/scenery.

FlyTampa makes the best airport addons bar none. You have the horses, and if you need you can push 4.2. Their products are worth having even if it means flying in fair weather only! Just setup using Nick's recomendations and mod you cfg with Bojote's auto tweak. If you want (it's a good idea) you can also kill your processes with Ken Salter's "Alacrity64", from Avsim's Library.

Fly Tampa has been good since they started. Their FS9 KMDW is a notable project. Another good one is their early BOS project (did they update KBOS recently)?Fly Tampa has my recommendation. Oh, TNCM is worth checking out too. Performance is about as good as you can expect. Probably not the best, but definitely not bad. Frames locked at 35 with minimal impact.Support is good too.

I have searched for recent reviews on the new versions of their scenery- with no luck.Is Fly Tampa easy on fps?I fly heavies so it's important to have relatively good performance.Is it comparable to orbx? Honestly I just want very good scenery that won't degrade my current performance. I've seen videos of their stuff and want to buy all of it but need some honest feedback on their performance/scenery.

BUY THEM ALL!

FT products are fantastic, and are easy on FPS, even on my slow rig. You never look back, and never regret, only enjoy their masterpieces.Good Luck, and when you purchase, enjoy.

BUY THEM ALL!

I agree, or at least the ones you want, lol.There are two developers who never let me down when it comes to good looking airports that are very easy on FPS, that would be FlyTampa and FSDreamteam. Although you could also now add Flightbeam to the list after their great KSFO. I just wish the three of them alone could populate the whole FSX world.

I agree, or at least the ones you want, lol.There are two developers who never let me down when it comes to good looking airports that are very easy on FPS, that would be FlyTampa and FSDreamteam. Although you could also now add Flightbeam to the list after their great KSFO. I just wish the three of them alone could populate the whole FSX world.

Wouldn't that be something.:( or at least most of it, as I still like a few others who deliver for their specific "Regions".

Love them. I have KBOS, KBUF, KTPA, TNCM, VHHX, and their Grenadines package. I also highly recommend FSDT (I have KJFK, KLAS, KORD, KFLL, KDFW,) and Flightbeam's KSFO.

... as I still like a few others who deliver for their specific "Regions".

Yeah, I like them also, but two of their larger airports in another country just dont perform as well as I would like, even when turning a bunch of the options off.

HOLD IT!There's one more company you need to add to the list FTX/Orbx.Their airports are excellent!

I love Orbx! See my sig, however for heavies I see a precipitous drop in weather using 2048 REX textures. For example in Orbx YMML I get between 20-28 fps at Vr. I am always looking for eye candy with minimal hit to fps.From the previous posts it seems that Fly Tampa and FS Dreamteam are much more friendly than Orbx. Please advise if I am incorrect.

From the previous posts it seems that Fly Tampa and FS Dreamteam are much more friendly than Orbx. Please advise if I am incorrect.

That's been my experience also with FSDT and FlyTampa airports being a lot easier on the FPS. YBBN and YMML perform ok on my rig during the day as far as FPS go, but not so good at night, and frankly I dont really like the way the ground textures are done compared to FSDT or FT. I know they do the ground textures like they do becuase they dont want any repeating texture tiles, but at the same time when I land at YMML it takes about 1 or 2 minutes for the taxiway lines to actually come into focus. At night, when I land I cant even really see where I am going unless I wait a few minutes for the lines to show up. Unfortunately YMML and YBBN are pretty much a write off for me for night use.In all fairness though, thats probably just because I only have 2gb of RAM which is pretty low by todays standards. None the less, I would still prefer ground textures like most other airports that stay in focus with the hardware I run. Aside from YBBN and YMML, most of their other airport work well on my rig. At least now I know and I will think twice before I purchase any more large hubs like that from ORBX until I upgrade my rig. It would be interesting to see how those two hubs would perform had FSDT done them. After seeing and using their KDFW which has almost no FPS hit, I would imagine they could have turned out a great looking YMML that got 25+ FPS without having to turn off a lot of the features/objects.They do say on their forum that YMML is designed for the best hardware of today and tomorrow, not hardware of a few years ago like I have. I am really looking forward to KPDX, but will have to wait and see what others say about the performance before I jump on that one when it comes out.

I was really surprised at the hit I took on YMML. I love orbx for GA. Heavies not so much. I thought I had the latest/ greatest but still not enough for Orbx airports.Unless you have a 2600k, I can guarantee that you will not be flying pmdg heavies into orbx airports with more than 20 fps (w/maximum settings).Well maybe higher with a bare bones fsx installation.

I once dared to complain about the bad fps at YMML and asked why this is not the case with e.g. Flytampa airports.The 'official' reply from Orbx was; you can't compare the rather primitive textures etc from Flytampa with ours.A rather strong statement and I do disagree with themConcering FSDT, I downloaded their Honolulu because I love the Hawaii megascenery, but the fps are unacceptable low. It's the same with Zurich. IMHO opinion Flytampa airports are second to noneExcept for Flytampa I think the trend in developing airports is heading into the wrong direction.FSX is a FLIGHT simulator and as such the fps e.g. during approach should be as high as possible.Worst are the airports where you start to get constant stutter on short final because the super detailed scenery needs to be loaded.Vauchez with his superb Flightscenery mentioned: As a pilot he knows that the runway and the close vicinity needs to be detailed as good as possible.And from a pilots POV that's exactly the point. I'd rather have less fuzzy runway marking textures at YMML than super detailed gates.

I once dared to complain about the bad fps at YMML and asked why this is not the case with e.g. Flytampa airports.The 'official' reply from Orbx was; you can't compare the rather primitive textures etc from Flytampa with ours.A rather strong statement and I do disagree with them

Yes, I saw a post that said about the same regarding the "primitive textures etc from Flytampa" and I disagree as well, although I wound never say so on their forum. It's fine to do ground textures like the way they do with the 7cm photoreal, but it doesn't do me any good to have to wait 2 minutes for them to come into focus when I land. Personally, after using FT and FSDT products for years, I really prefer the more FPS friendly approach, while it might not be as accurate as the ORBX method, I appreciate the FPS overhead it offers when flying more FPS hungry a/c.

Concering FSDT, I downloaded their Honolulu because I love the Hawaii megascenery, but the fps are unacceptable low. It's the same with Zurich. IMHO opinion Flytampa airports are second to none

I dont have PHNL, but I do have Zurich. It performs well on my rig. With UT2 traffic I get a solid 25 to 30 FPS at Zurich in eiher the LDS 767 or PMDG 747. Never flew into there in my JS4100 though. On my computer I find performance to be pretty similar between FSDT and FT, although I do find FT airports to be just a tad worse on FPS and overall performance than FSDT airport, but very, very close none the less. Probably the best FPS I get for any of my large airports is KDFW by FSDT. I actually get about 5 to 10 more FPS with the FSDT version than I do the stock version and thats with a lot more detail built into it that the stock FSX version has.