I don´t like XP9 - it´s a pain to install and adjust, but I look forward to XP-10 (If Austin has the Powers to finish it! ) and MS Flight, I sure hope they will perform better than FSX.

Hope is one of the strongest forces on the planet. :smile:But, just guessing, what would happen if the new engines don't offer some features for the very latest hardware? Looking at the previous products, new software titles always brought the stuff which later forms reasons for upgrading. I really doubt that this chain will be broken as it drives a complete industry and the (money) numbers included.

My intention with this post was to inform other users, that just because you upgrade like I did, and run a monster CPU @ 4.8 Ghz, everything is not all peaches and cream!

Well, the outcome of this thread could well be, that the simple upgrade won't help, but a combination of hardware and settings will do. I don't see a big difference towards other flight sim versions there, because all the later added stuff needed some tweaking and tuning to achieve this amazing, but well running and looking, impression one gets when using some nice scenery together with fancy birds in the sim.So far, I can't say that FSX builds an exception there or would be something to warn other guys about. While I would go for a warning towards very high hopes on upcoming, but not nearly finished, products. Be happy with what you have and get surprised about some maybe upcoming enhancements, but don't invest too much hope there as it often has no stable basis.

So many differences between PC's here. Setting ultra high doesnt mean the sliders are all maxed, and are you using nvidia inspector to increase your AA? There's so many combinations.Also SEA area might not look as good on your PC as it does on mine, and vice versa.

Actually... 'ultra high' is a selectable setting in FSX. I haven't touched the nVidia stock video settings. What we're talking about is whether the system has the horsepower to run FSX or not. And on my system, with absolutely zero tweaks of any kind... it runs just fine.

Actually... 'ultra high' is a selectable setting in FSX. I haven't touched the nVidia stock video settings. What we're talking about is whether the system has the horsepower to run FSX or not. And on my system, with absolutely zero tweaks of any kind... it runs just fine.

So it's seems that you use the default anisotropic and AA, "ugly", and you don't use demanding power sceneries or utilities, Just some add-on airplanes.I'm right ?All the add-ons I'm using were running like 50% less without tweaks.

I don't understand why you guys are so worried about having wonderful FPS while around really detailed airports. You know how much of your flight is at or near these airports? Maybe 5-10 minutes? Worry about your performance WHILE you're flying. I don't have one of them fancy i7 systems and I can get my locked value (35 fps) over the ORBX sceneries with almost all the planes in my hangar and UT2 running at nearly 100%. If you absolutely need a 200% smooth "taxiing and last 2 minutes of flight" simulator, then go back to FS9. I'll enjoy FLIGHT simulator X and everything it offers.Don't complain about FPS if you're using super detailed airports. If you want better FPS during <5% of your flight, uninstall them or disable your traffic and reduce autogen.The amount of performance questions in the FSX section on this forum is absurd. We either need to make a separate section of the forum for it or people need to learn how to use the SEARCH function. Or we could just make a bot that repeats all of the same things over and over again. It is SO repetitive...

@kiwikat: Or you could just - for that important peace of mind - not reply to all this garbage, right?It´s not about FPS, I tried with 20 - as the default CFG sets it to on my system, it was horrible!Same with unlimited, same with FPS Limiter, the best is 30 locked.It´s about smoothness and fluidity - a genuine Zen Experience - if you know what that is?FSX is cartoonish, a real PC Game, don´t forget this, a game!I want something else, and it´s not FS9, but just maybe later this year I´ll get it, right Austin?

I want something else, and it´s not FS9, but just maybe later this year I´ll get it, right Austin?

HelloI hope you find what you are looking for in XP10 but for me only having a few Ai aircraft flying, no detailed airports or ATC would spoil the illusion somewhat.

HelloI hope you find what you are looking for in XP10 but for me only having a few Ai aircraft flying, no detailed airports or ATC would spoil the illusion somewhat.

Personally I find using the default FSX atc to be more of an illusion spoiler than not using it at all. The default ATC isnt even capable of maintaining separation. And the AI planes keeps cutting you off when youre on the localizer like its in the rush traffic in Bejing. Its all in the eye of the beholder I guess.

Personally I find using the default FSX atc to be more of an illusion spoiler than not using it at all. The default ATC isnt even capable of maintaining separation. And the AI planes keeps cutting you off when youre on the localizer like its in the rush traffic in Bejing. Its all in the eye of the beholder I guess.

HelloThat is why most use 3rd party ATC , but that is another option that will not be available to XP10 users, still when the Ai aircraft are in single digits worldwide why would an XP10 user need ATC :(

I want something else, and it´s not FS9, but just maybe later this year I´ll get it, right Austin?

Why not save up several million dollars and purchase a custom Level D simulator? Sounds like what you're looking for.Flight Simulator is a game, you are correct.

I don't have one of them fancy i7 systems and I can get my locked value (35 fps) over the ORBX sceneries with almost all the planes in my hangar and UT2 running at nearly 100%.

- Did you tried on ORBX PNW KSEA, full option on ?We pay high price for quality no ? not to deactivate 2/3 of the options- Are you using a mix of REX textures, ASE weather and Radar contact 4 ?I can't fly without them...So my 1 year old top config that nearly cost me a kidney, have to be changed for maybe 20% more FPS ! I have two choices :- Play with standard FSX + 737 PMDG "the JS4100 is running at 20-25 FPS with no other addon"- Stop buying addon, wait for FS Flight and get one of those HD ready Cinemizer OLED.PS : with my actual config, a clean copy of FSX will run at 200-250 FPSPS2 : If you can run Manhattan X from aerosoft with an aircraft addon at more than 30 FPS, than you should take the place of Bojote

Why not save up several million dollars and purchase a custom Level D simulator? Sounds like what you're looking for.Flight Simulator is a game, you are correct.

Yep, I´ll do that, and probably have the money very soon, been Forex daytrading on the sinking USD and it´s a blast!Oh wait, why not buy an airplane instead...?Seriously, I will repeat my main problem with FSX:It´s not smooth and it´s not fluid.Look at the vids on YouTube, even with FRAPS, they need to record it at 1/3 speed and then they post their fancy ORBX vids so people get totally mindblown by them, and when they get their FSX rig they dunno why it not looks like them vids on the tube!It´s crazy, people are fed with lies and deception.Look here:

It´s deception, it´s candy, it´s dreaming, NOT FSX!

HelloThat is why most use 3rd party ATC , but that is another option that will not be available to XP10 users, still when the Ai aircraft are in single digits worldwide why would an XP10 user need ATC :(

I fly online to avoid that horrible default ATC / AI. Incidentally, XPlane is also capable of being used online, I believe it also has the capability to display online traffic, just like the MSFS series

Yep, I´ll do that, and probably have the money very soon, been Forex daytrading on the sinking USD and it´s a blast!Oh wait, why not buy an airplane instead...?Seriously, I will repeat my main problem with FSX:It´s not smooth and it´s not fluid.Look at the vids on YouTube, even with FRAPS, they need to record it at 1/3 speed and then they post their fancy ORBX vids so people get totally mindblown by them, and when they get their FSX rig they dunno why it not looks like them vids on the tube!It´s crazy, people are fed with lies and deception.Look here:

It´s deception, it´s candy, it´s dreaming, NOT FSX!

It's not deception because that's how it looks on my system with fps performance in the 30s and silky smooth.It takes more than expensive hardware to get FSX working smoothly. I feel like I have to repeat the same thing every week.

I always thought that the memory bus speed is what hinders FSX performance.

Look at the vids on YouTube, even with FRAPS, they need to record it at 1/3 speed and then they post their fancy ORBX vids so people get totally mindblown by them, and when they get their FSX rig they dunno why it not looks like them vids on the tube!It´s crazy, people are fed with lies and deception.Look here:

It´s deception, it´s candy, it´s dreaming, NOT FSX!

Well, if there's one post of yours showing the real nature of this very thread, I think it's this one, Sir.So we are all part of a big conspiracy then, while our systems are running fine, we only believe them to do so, right?And all those videos are done with cheats and all the companies like Orbx only sell their stuff because people believe the vids, correct?Now I've bought more than one product from them, mainly because the first one worked fine, looked impressive and was fun to fly. I did so at various other companies and now you are telling me and all the other confident customers that this was all a lie? I don't have any problems with people stating their opinions in some public-aware tone, but speaking about general lies, faked videos and, therefore, blind customers is a bit too much in my eyes. Where's the proof? Is it your system?As some other guys around already suggested, the look at your system setup would be the first one to offer some potential to solve your problems. And, if you are so convinced by other flight sim engines, really start using them since I believe that all further FSX engagement of yours runs the risk of getting even deeper in that conspiracy thingy.The blind believe in upcoming products (with only small clips or advertising texts being available) also seems like a risky thing here, don't you think? Just wondering.I'm still happy with FSX on my end and it seems like some other guys are on their's, so some more or less confident user basis seems to be present, running different systems and installations. Best proof for a working product in my eyes.What if you're inside those 1-5% which never gets happy with the thing?