I would say that if we're getting only ~30 frames per second in a 5 year old title then yes, there must be something very wrong with this title. Other 5 year old titles I often get 200 frames ++++. Clearly there's something weird going on under the hood of FSX. That said, its still the best sim available for consumers, and its perfectly usable as well

I would say that if we're getting only ~30 frames per second in a 5 year old title then yes, there must be something very wrong with this title. Other 5 year old titles I often get 200 frames ++++. Clearly there's something weird going on under the hood of FSX. That said, its still the best sim available for consumers, and its perfectly usable as well

I'd say that using current scenery products needs current hardware. Vanilla FSX runs well above 60+ on my old Laptop, so the simple equation of FSX is a 5 year old product, so it has to work fast is a bit too simple in my eyes.Using some of the 2010 and 2011 products and their enhanced density and detail will taxi your system. Ever saw some pimped game engine working at the same framerates as the vanilla thing? Tune Crysis and see a very current system struggle, tune FSX and experience the same. Surprising?A fresh install of FSX on a fairly current i7 will kick you in the fps spheres you've mentioned I think. But does this make you confident then?The thread starter spoke about vanilla X-Plane being so smooth and seemed to follow that wrong thinking too. As said, the very basic FSX stuff performs well on every old dualcore, the addon titles add the load then. Any heavy ones around for XP by the way?

Tor, I understand, to a degree, your great frustration with FSX given your rig's spec and the cost. I say 'to a degree' because you are no newbie and you know the nature of the beast, both the genre and this product, and you obviously know your hardware, software and OS's. You might well have a good point, yes, we may have reached the limit of improvement for this software, but that was always the way wasn't it, software engineering is no different from anything generated by the human intellect, it's always no better than the talent we have right now. I wonder why MS took the Aces Team apart and yet not long afterwards announced a new product - Flight. With X-Plane 10 much anticipated, we're all in for a treat one day, and your new rig may well be just the job for either of them.However, I note your apparent lack of regard for one of our number, Bojote, who has done you no harm and done more than most to improve things for some of us and to whom we are grateful. I see nothing of value in those comments and I would say that people tend to behave a bit more kindly to one another here, thank goodness.I just fly Cessnas around Regional airports on VATSIM which is scary enough for me, and I love it all, sliders maxed except autogen, with its 20 fps and occasional micro-pause.

I would say that if we're getting only ~30 frames per second in a 5 year old title then yes, there must be something very wrong with this title. Other 5 year old titles I often get 200 frames ++++. Clearly there's something weird going on under the hood of FSX. That said, its still the best sim available for consumers, and its perfectly usable as well

This isn't the best example though.... I take it you're talking about games like Counterstrike, or other shooters/RTS/MMORPG's etcNot many games have come down the pipeline as massive in scope as the MSFS series.

Hey guys,Perhaps those who are responding to Tor's provocations and incitements should take a few minutes and read his various posts in different threads. As mentioned by others, there does appear to be an agenda of ridiculing and mocking those who have worked to improve FSX and help others, of both individuals like Bojote and developers like ORBX, except for Nick Needham. Nick would have no part in something like what Tor is doing, so the motive seems to be nothing more than an obvious attempt to sew confusion and division in the FSX camp. Since we are typically such individualists, it is not hard to do.What can Tor gain by such manipulation? Fun, and attention! What does he lose? Nothing, since long term encouraging and building the FSX community by improving flight simulation is not something very near and dear to him. Whatever else he may be, Tor is a troll sewing discouragement, ridicule, insult and mockery among us. It only takes a few people like him to make a place like AVSIM a lot less hospitable, entertaining and helpful a destination to spend time at. I am going to be careful not to be infected by his particularly toxic brand of cynical criticism. Attitudes like his are contagious and destructive.Just my opinion, that's all.Kind regards,

I am going to be careful not to be infected by his particularly toxic brand of cynical criticism. Attitudes like his are contagious and distructive.

Well said, Stephen. I penned a reply earlier in the thread and deleted it again,since all this poster seems to want to do is dump his frustrationwith FSX on all of us.I'll go back to flying on my "classic" Q6600 machine which is holding upsurprisingly well after all these years (albeit OC'd at 3.2 and with a new video card).

Thanks, Stephen, well said and really worth a read. Didn't know about the overall attitude of this guy, only your text made me click on some other "interesting" topics of him.I fully agree with your viewpoint there.The people and companies around can surely take some critics, most of the time. But placing critical things in forums just for the fun of it and triggering reactions is very much troll-ish, as you've said.Lets leave him alone and wait for the next thing then. But, as a positive outcome of this thread, tons of interesting and useful things were posted by some other guys.Bert is right, lets go flying (or return to the cruise). :(

@Word Not Allowed:Yep, FSX is broken, and you have hardware problems that needs attention, right?Nice pictures, still pictures!But is it smooooth, fluid, magic, no humps and bumps, ya know what I mean?Posting nice pictures makes no sense to me whatsoever, sorry...BTW: Any particular reason for keeping your monitor at these settings:Samsung 245B LCD Monitor @ 1600x1200 for FS9&FSX ?

Fluid is as it fluid gets at locked 35fps. I have no real stutters, but there are what I call "35fps stutters". They are caused by the framerate that is lower than 60fps. Same thing with FS9. Even in FS9 I can't keep 60fps locked, as it mostly drops in VC + heavy airport.Magic? I would call it OK. Nothing better nor worse than FS9 @ 40fps locked.Humps, bumps? Not really...I don't really know what you mean, sorry... Also don't know how to "show" it for you, video won't do it, as FRAPSing and FSXing is not CPU possible.Resolution: yeah, aspect ratio. 2D panels are still not all wide. Until then 4:3. I don't like streched 2D panels. I use VC only for "flying", clicking is all done in 2D.

I though I read something you wrote not to long ago in the FS9 forum that you were back to using FS9? You back to FSX again?Are we both running the same airport by FSDT in our shots, because yours looks like it has different colored textures to is, almost like a shade blue? Maybe its just my monitor though.

I'm doing both, but when iFly releases their 737 for FSX, I'll probably go FSX all the way. Right now my beloved 737 is in FS9...But with the new computer, FSX is looking way too friendly.Nothing changed with FSDT. As it comes from FSDT. Also no ENB installed...

An explanation, and a sincere apology to everybody!First the hardware:I turned the CPU overclock down to 4.6 Ghz.I used the suggestions in Bojotes Tweak Tool, wasn´t aware that the BP=0 was "old school" already...There were a few other changes which I incorporated.I now have a near perfect fluid MS Flight Sim X experience, believe it or not, but it´s true.Second: The personal stuff...I have and suffer from Bipolar Affective Disorder, and it´s hell sometimes, especially when I get excited about something, and I am very, very excited about FSX!Time to take a break from this forum, but again, I´m very, very sorry about the harsh posts and the cynical views (Thanks SpiritFlyer for reminding me...) See you...

I'm doing both, but when iFly releases their 737 for FSX, I'll probably go FSX all the way. Right now my beloved 737 is in FS9...But with the new computer, FSX is looking way too friendly.Nothing changed with FSDT. As it comes from FSDT. Also no ENB installed...

I think its the ENB that caused the difference in the color now that I think about it. I have never hit Shift-F12 at that airport to see the difference.Glad your enjoying FSX on your new rig! I can't wait until we get a 737 for FSX as well, that's the only plane I have missed for 3 years now in FSX.

Tor, I was about to close this thread but your last post really impressed me.You show your maturity, your honesty and you apologize courageously explaining the reason of your passionate comments.Bravo.You'll always be welcome here. :(

Tor, I was about to close this thread but your last post really impressed me.You show your maturity, your honesty and you apologize courageously explaining the reason of your passionate comments.Bravo.You'll always be welcome here. :(

I agree! All is well in our FSX world.

Reading the last statement, I have to revise my "troll-ish" statement too. Sorry about that. Seems like your thread attitude around here triggered something I first was very sure of and gained further confidence after reading the thoughts of others towards your statements. Apologies. :(

I agree! All is well in our FSX world.

Yes Jose, thanks to nice guys like you and the folks here :(

I'm doing both, but when iFly releases their 737 for FSX, I'll probably go FSX all the way. Right now my beloved 737 is in FS9...But with the new computer, FSX is looking way too friendly.Nothing changed with FSDT. As it comes from FSDT. Also no ENB installed...

Word Not Allowed, I'm in the same boat. I'm waiting for the iFly and the PMDG 737's to be released, then I'll probably migrate to FSX completely.