From what I remember, when the development of FSX was underway, the scenario went something like this: CPUs were single core and about 2 to 3Ghz. The expectation at the time was that they would continue to rise and FSX was modeled toward 7 to 8 Ghz computers of the future (or whatever number of Ghz they envisioned). In reality, CPUs got around 3Ghz, they about hit their limit with very slow increments past the 3 Ghz (We have only increased about 2Ghz in the past 10 years – or something like that). So, CPU designers began to go mult-core at about the time FSX was in final development (too late to go backward to fix it for true multi-core support). When MS realized that they had a very single core program on their hands (FSX) and that CPUs were going multi-core instead of making great strides in clock speed which CPUs had done up to that point, they put together a little patch to enable a very limited multi-core support and here we are 5 years after FSX’s release with hardware only now beginning to get caught up with (5Ghz computers and great videocards). My question is, how do you guys think Flight will differ from FSX and what improvements can we expect? If, for example, Flight uses the same basic engine as FSX (with perhaps another little patch to help improve multi-core support), but with full implementation of Direct 10 or 11 or whatever is curret, what kinds of improvements will we see? What sort of functions can be given to the graphics card that is currently run only by the CPU? Maybe you guys can help me refine my questions… I am just hoping with Flight we are finally to have a program that we don’t have to wait years to run properly because of lack of good hardware and will run near max straight away. Thanks Guys

What sort of functions can be given to the graphics card that is currently run only by the CPU?

What's actually left?- Virtual gauge textures (GPS,2D flight gauges, and the like) I'm not sure if that has any implications…Like for XML gauge developers.There must have been some strings attached otherwise it wouldn’t have been left out.

My question is, how do you guys think Flight will differ from FSX and what improvements can we expect?

Flight will have to work with the current middle range microprocessors, without the benefit of any overclocking. Microsoft has said that they are going to appeal to a wider audience; which means people who don't have the latest bleeding edge computers running high end video cards and large overclock speeds. This will represent a great challenge to Microsoft; I really do hope that they can accomplish this task!

One way to please both (high-end and low-end {ie me}) is to include performance sliders.With an algorithm that configured the software according to our PC's system spec's And if MS electrified the mouse, they could zap us if we tried to run right of their recommended

what i would just like to see Microsoft do is allow flight to be run at good fps on both a low end system and a high end system, so having the performace sliders like in FSX etc would be useful; also, it would be helpful if Microsoft could make flight more a flying game rather than a game to find the best performance. Nathan Green

What will full implimention of DX10 or DX11 do for Flight (or what could it do for FSX) that we don't have to improve performance? RH

I´m no developer and I´m no IT genius but regarding developement of cpd und gpu within the last 6 years I´m pretty sure that it is possible to lift Flight to the level of FSX+REX+GEX+UTX with improved performance/fps as well. If they are serious about a more "user friendly" sim and a wider audience, Flight at least has to run well @medium-high settings on an i5+gtx460+4GB-System. Regarding the large addon-scene (whitch ms is obviously fully aware of) I think it would make sense for ms to reduce graphic-options within Flight and to focus on a good look and good performance for midrange hardware/average customer. Addons then will allow to max out highend-hardware and ms will benefit via the Flight - "marketplace".The question is, if ms is willing to invest the money to develop a true multicore graphics and physics-engine and a solution for shifting workload to the gpu. We don´t know yet.