Wow, I'm amazed you guys still reply to the OP. A typical case of "There is no worse deaf person than the one who does not want to hear" unless it's just trolling...Whatever proof you'll provide, it's perfectly clear by now he's not going to believe you anyway or pretend so, so why bother ?

HelloAnd the funniest part is that he is all over the hardware forum "advising" on hardware setups. :(

Funny eh?Theres been too many posters for too long time bragging about their i7 and i5´s and what not and the "stellar" performance they get.You´re only #### because the onlookers are now catching up with the same hardware, revealing that most of the bragging is exactly that - hot air!Show the Sim with a good measure of AI Traffic, Cars and Boats, and on a regular 23 or 24" screen with 1980 x 1020 resolution.Not this Vatsim stuff with sliders all down, and small screen resolution.You hear Bojote??

I've experimented with every tweak in the book over the years, but not now.I have an 17 920 running at 4GHz, 6gb RAM, and an EVGA GTX 580. [Awesome card] No tweaks, not a single one. I do use nVidia Inspector.Most settings high, smooth as silk, don't think I've seen it drop below 40 frames per second in a long time.Seems to me that "tweaks" cause problems rather than eliminating them for many. Not to mention individuals that aren't aware that settings like bloom, and tons of vehicles are a bad idea.

I failed to see any traffic except on picture nr3 but I believe you there is 50% UT2, so my bad.

Yeah, the UT2 models combined with the smallpartreject tweak makes some of the models disappear rather quickly after you get some distance from them, then if you move back to them the pop back in. Plus landing on that runway you cant see much traffic since its far from the first set of gate. Landing on 4R is probably the best runway to see a lot of traffic on while approaching.Frankly, the only reason I run it at 50% in that area is not so much becuase they cause an FPS hit, but more to do with UT2 trying to inject traffic into JFK, Newark, and Laguardia all around the same time, and if I keep it at 100% I get a pause that is too long while it injects. Fortunately that is about the only area in which I fly that has 3 big hubs so near to each other and causes that. Most everywhere else I run it at 100% and have no problem with injection pauses.

Whatever proof you'll provide, it's perfectly clear by now he's not going to believe you anyway or pretend so, so why bother ?

Yes, your probably right. I had a feeling once this thread started that would be the case. Frankly I just put a few shots as well as Word Not Allowed did just to make a point that with my mid range rig and his hig end rig it can run well. But in many cases no matter what you say or show, some will still not believe it, as is the case with a few of the responses.Anyways, I think that I have provided sufficient proof of what I can do with an old computer and will leave it to the others to agrue back an fourth. :(

You hear Bojote??

Dude, really? Why are you pointing fingers at *******? If it hasn't worked out for you, why is it anyone's fault? For starters I think his premise about his tweaks is that "your mileage may vary" and this is compounded by the countless hardware permutations. I think ******* has done a great service to the community by shedding a lot of light into the workings of FSX. In my case the rare occasions my sim crashed was fixed by the Highmemfix tweak. For that I personally owe him a lof of hours spent enjoying my hobby without the frustration caused by the occasional unexplainable crash.So it might be advisable to take a chill pill, and try to resolve your issues in a systematic fashion and hopefully your expectations from the hardware you bought will be met.Regards.

This guy is over in the hardware forum calling people amateurs now. There's an agenda here, but I'm not sure what it is.

This guy is over in the hardware forum calling people amateurs now. There's an agenda here, but I'm not sure what it is.

In several of the OP's posts in this thread... there's mention of X-Plane and how it's going to be the 'savior' of the OP's troubles. That might be part of the agenda.

What I would like to know is, why is AI so important? At 40%, I see plenty of traffic and ATC doesn't stop talking!You guys are right FSX is broken. :(

Or maybe he should try one of these... Should run fairly well...

Should run fairly well...

Yeah - it looks aerobatic.... well, at least, it should do a barrel roll...

Or maybe he should try one of these... Should run fairly well...

I wonder if XP10 will have one of these? Can the OP tells us?

I've stopped using REX and my other weather software because I'm in the low teens in Seattle with even basic airplanes. And I've got an i7 920 ocd to 4ghz, a good motherboard, a good video card.

Since you referenced basic planes (I assume you meant default), I was just flying near KSEA yesterday, I use Orbx scenery (very fps intense), autogen was set to very dense with a lod radius of 6.5 (default max within fsx is 4.5), no ai traffic, water 2x low, high clouds with a multiple rw wx layers, and the rest of the scenery was maxed out and in the C172 VC I was getting about 25 with a few stutters. In the Eaglesoft Citation X VC I was getting about 18-22 with some blurry textures as I flew the ILS 16L approach at 200 kts.KSEA is the hardest place on earth on my PC, especially with the Orbx scenery. I'd say that's pretty darn good for the settings I run. Oh, forgot to mention, running 1920x1080 resolution with 8xSQ AA and 16x AF in Inspector.edit: Since you guys are ######ing about AI traffic I went back and test with 100% airplanes (no cars because disabled in UTX) with default c172 - I get about the same performance, around 23-25 fps in SEA. I use default traffic.If you're seriously wanting to run UT2/MTX etc with max traffic just forget it, you're not going to get that magic number. FSX is dated code, and parts were poorly programmed IMO, so we need to cut corners with certain settings. And yes, I fly on vatsim.With all this said, you're either going to believe that you can ENJOY fsx, or not! Good luck

LOl, I guess I should quit wondering also. I just noticed that you and I both had out setup done by the same firm. I attribute my success to them as well, probably the best money I ever spent on FS frankly.

Exactly! While others tweak, we fly. I usually check the forums while at cruise, since I get bored after about 30 minutes of looking out the window

Exactly! While others tweak, we fly. I usually check the forums while at cruise, since I get bored after about 30 minutes of looking out the window

That's why you need to fly GA hehe!

Here's my 1080p screenie with full traffic (planes, airport vehicles, and boats, just not cars), some blurries if I'm going faster than 200 kts but fine in the cessna. Considering in my last rig I'd get about 8 fps and muddy textures, I'd say 25 is quite the improvement.Also for kicks and giggles I maxed all settings (including cars back on, but cloud draw to 60mi, no ground shadows) and clearly car traffic destroys FPS (nothing new here, Phil Taylor wrote that it would since the dawn of FSX)