+1 Thanks Sam for this great Tip. I got fed up waiting to try out Lower Rez Textures, so I spent 20 minutes and resized mine( the longer, better method,) Best 20 minutes I have spent since getting the plane. My frame frame has gone up from 8 - 10 fps, and the very slightly perceived losses in display quality, due to the lower Rez Textures is hardly noticable, and after a while, you don't even remember the difference. Memory requirements are significantly lower as well, so that also helps with any potential OOM issues, when the sim is heavily loaded with other addons. Geoff

Glad you got it done Geoff. It's a pretty good adjustment for those like me running 32bit OS's and lacking RAM. BTW, it's Sean not Sam :-)Take it easy and enjoy your new bird.Sean Campbell

wow

I've resized my VC textures as per this thread and I can confim that the VC is smoother.Check my specs below. I was already getting good frames, but this really has smoothed out the panning.Ive not touched the exterior as I have no problem at all with that. Many thanks for the instructions.

what format I need to save the panel after the resize using DSS plugin for photoshop. Thanks .

Don't be arrogant. Alot of us are real world pilots. Youre thread was bound to provoque this kind of reaction.It's like buying a Ferrari and asking to replace the engine with a 100hp 4 banger because you feel the car is to powerfull..I guess what people are trying to say is, PMDG has put an inordinate amount of work to produce THE most advance add-on on the market for FSX, and here you are, asking them to spend more precious time to downgrade it to suit your computer. In other words, they are (i am) saying, buy something that is less demanding for your rig, but leave the 737 NGX alone.

Well said. I agree completely. There are so many dumb down versions available out there, why ask to dumb down this beautiful aircraft. Give me a break!

what format I need to save the panel after the resize using DSS plugin for photoshop. Thanks .

Save it in the same compression as the original, meaning if you did an interior VC texture that was DXT1 then save the resized version as DXT1. The VC's were DXT1 and the exterior were DXT5 from what I remember. Although if yo do the exterior you can save them as DXT5 and include mip maps, but mips aren't needed for the VC.Sean Campbell

Well said. I agree completely. There are so many dumb down versions available out there, why ask to dumb down this beautiful aircraft. Give me a break!

Bob, I am not sure why you brought this up again. As you stated and then later acknowledged on page 2 of this thread, we are NOT talking about changing the functionality or model of the a/c, just taking the existing hi-res 4096 textures and resizing them to something a bit smaller to work a bit better for those of us with older systems or systems with less RAM. Of course, changing the size of the textures isn't going to adversly effect how the a/c performs, functions, or even really looks, mearly it will just improve performance a touch. By all means, if you're happy with the larger textures, then run those, but please dont make it sound that we are tryng to dumb down the a/c by reducing the size of the textures. That isn't the intent of the topic at all. Regards,Sean Campbell

Well said. I agree completely. There are so many dumb down versions available out there, why ask to dumb down this beautiful aircraft. Give me a break!

It's not actually dumbing down, just resizing textures, which doesn't even take away the visuals, or handling characteristics.It's not taking anything away from the aircraft, just scaling it down.Comparison shotsThanks to Sean

• Improves performance
• Improves Texture loading
• Improves Over-all customer satisfaction
• More available Memory

It's real useful, especially for the less fortunate.Like myself.

It's not actually dumbing down, just resizing textures, which doesn't even take away the visuals, or handling characteristics.It's not taking anything away from the aircraft, just scaling it down.Comparison shotsThanks to Sean

• Improves performance
• Improves Texture loading
• Improves Over-all customer satisfaction
• More available Memory

It's real useful, especially for the less fortunate.Like myself.

Nobody is against resizing textures to improve performance. As far as I remember, the original poster also considered easing the systems simulation which is a no-no.

It's not actually dumbing down, just resizing textures, which doesn't even take away the visuals, or handling characteristics.It's not taking anything away from the aircraft, just scaling it down.Comparison shotsThanks to Sean

• Improves performance
• Improves Texture loading
• Improves Over-all customer satisfaction
• More available Memory

It's real useful, especially for the less fortunate.Like myself.

Sorry, I misunderstood. There is someone else that asked for a "Lite" version of the NGX.I can't see not upgrading a computer to handle the NGX with all its detail. Why would I want to fly in a fuzzy cockpit?

I see two possible paths, at least: use all the tweaks mentioned, reducing FPS for the instruments, shut down Copilot instruments, move sliders to the left, most will give you some improvement, but some may be not relevant. The other option is to get a new hardware. A not so expensive one can do the job (I mean, below US$1k). I do agree it makes no sense to remove details from this aircraft and if you need a simpler one there are several available, including running FS2004.

I can't see not upgrading a computer to handle the NGX with all its detail. Why would I want to fly in a fuzzy cockpit?

Going and spending 500-1500 on components or a new computer to make a 70 dollar add on work as advertised is not financially feasable. If it can be made to perform by making changes in texture size, that option must be explored first. $1,500 would buy me or a computer to make this one add on run, or I could buy 21.5 weeks worth of FOOD for that amount. I'm pleased that for some of you, spending 1000 is something doable for you, but please understand, not all of us are as well off.

The only stupid question is the one not asked. For those of you blasting the person who started it.. Who made you computer Gods???? People get computers that fit their budgets, not everyone can keep up with all the latest trends and still want the quality that PMDG put forth in this aircraft but with fewer high end things... If PMDG can work it then great and they capture a market they didn't have with the those people. They have already captured it with a high quality plane, and customer service. Keep asking questions.... Only ones that have anything to loose by those asking is the companies who ignore their customers. And from my view, PMDG hasn't ignored their customers by the release of the Hotfixes within days after issues were identified. Don

Going and spending 500-1500 on components or a new computer to make a 70 dollar add on work as advertised is not financially feasable. If it can be made to perform by making changes in texture size, that option must be explored first. $1,500 would buy me or a computer to make this one add on run, or I could buy 21.5 weeks worth of FOOD for that amount. I'm pleased that for some of you, spending 1000 is something doable for you, but please understand, not all of us are as well off.

I can see your point, but as you can see, the statement completely refers to myself. Why would "I" want to fly a fuzzy cockpit. "I" can't see not upgrading for the NGX.For me, it's not about a $70 simulation of a 737, it's about flying the ultimate simulation of a 737NG.You can approach it how ever you feel is necessary, I have my computer for one reason and one reason only. To fly in FSX and now, to fly the NGX.I mis-took what was said, and thought that they were asking for a "Lite" "CLS type" version of the NGX, not just a fuzzy version.Honestly, I believe that PMDG has optimized this software so much that you wouldn't gain a whole lot with a fuzzy version that you can't already get from turning down the settings. I believe most of the processing load comes from the highly simulated systems within the software.

I can see your point, but as you can see, the statement completely refers to myself. Why would "I" want to fly a fuzzy cockpit. "I" can't see not upgrading for the NGX.For me, it's not about a $70 simulation of a 737, it's about flying the ultimate simulation of a 737NG.You can approach it how ever you feel is necessary, I have my computer for one reason and one reason only. To fly in FSX and now, to fly the NGX.I mis-took what was said, and thought that they were asking for a "Lite" "CLS type" version of the NGX, not just a fuzzy version.Honestly, I believe that PMDG has optimized this software so much that you wouldn't gain a whole lot with a fuzzy version that you can't already get from turning down the settings. I believe most of the processing load comes from the highly simulated systems within the software.

We lower end users have been seeing improved performance with reduced vc cockpit textures. I gained around 10 fps and a lot of smoothness without a visible difference. I've wondered if going through the process of reducing ALL of the VC textures and not just the largest ones would bring an overall increase. I believe PMDG is trying to accommodate us in those regards. It truly is the best ever add on. It's very addictive. I keep doubling the time I should be taking for preflight because I get lost looking at the details! I wouldnt be for a "lite" version as far as functionality. Its already scalable enough for the nOOb to use, I think.