Hi. Ever since I bought and installed the NGX I've been kind of disappointed with the performance. I had single digit FPS (9-10) for the first time since upgrading to an i7, in FSX. This was when going through FL100 in the Netherlands approaching Amsterdam Schiphol. I prematurely blamed the NGX for this. But one thing I hadn't thought of was that one more thing that changed with my FSX setup when installing the NGX was that I increased the Texture_Max_Load setting in the CFG to 4096, from a previous 1024. With REX 2.0 installed and it configured to use HD 4096 textures it, imho, contributed to killing my performance. Anyway, I decreased the texture resolution in REX to 1024, and also decreased water quality to High 1.0 (because I read from Ryan that the sparkling water texture was decreasing performance. Can't remember it all sorry but it had something to do with the textures being in the "wrong" format. I could be a little off on that one though) Firing up the FSX I was greeted with a pretty steady 50 (!) FPS in the VC at Scansim's Copenhagen Airport. Pretty good for a complex aerodrome! I switched to Runway 18C at EHAM and my FPS had increased with at least 5 fps (from 15-18 to 20-25). Much more playable. I'm not 100% sure that it all came from the lower Cloud/water quality, but with 40+ FPS at EKCH and over 20FPS at Aerosofts notorious framerate hog, I'm quite pleased nonetheless. Hope this helps.

scansims ekch is a fps killer

I think we've all been pigging out on HD textures over the last couple of years when in reality I thought 4096 clouds were overrated. I might drop back down to 1024 myself and see if it makes a difference. I always thought they looked great in the pre HD days.