If only..

[A380 0]

But Prepar3D IS, essentially, FSX so I don't get why people are going down the road of buying it now when Flight hasn't been released yet.

[ErichB 3,651]

But Prepar3D IS, essentially, FSX so I don't get why people are going down the road of buying it now when Flight hasn't been released yet.

Significant performance improvements might be a reason for some.

[Attila 2]

Significant performance improvements might be a reason for some.

It would be, but there is really no evidence of this. There are many reports of better and worse performance, but the median consensus seems to be that there isn't much difference. If you read the P3D release notes, there is nothing in there that would result in major performance increases.

[cmpbellsjc 2,963]

Actually this is not quite the same. It would be closer to the P3D model if they charged you $65 even if you didn't play golf on a Sunday morning.

When I wrote that I should have expected that comment to get dissected. Yeah, your right, but the point that I was trying to make was that whether it's your monthly golf dues, hanger rent, or any fee that you pay to enjoy a hobby you like, everyone will have a different financial threshold to what they are comfortable paying. Although I am not wiping my butt with the green stuff so to speak, for someone in my position that uses the sim VERY frequently, $10 a month is really a non-issue, IF, and its a big if, the performance gains are worth it and I can use the majority of my addons. I can't speak to stability improvemtents in P3D since FSX has pretty much been rock solid for me, aside from a problem caused by a rogue addon or me doing something stupid.

[simmerhead 885]

It would be, but there is really no evidence of this. There are many reports of better and worse performance, but the median consensus seems to be that there isn't much difference. If you read the P3D release notes, there is nothing in there that would result in major performance increases.

Can you please provide me with some links to the many reports on worse performance?

[Attila 2]

My time is as valuable as yours. I am making a statement based on reading posts on this topic in this forum and others for the last two weeks. If you want to ascertain the validity of my statement, do the same.

[mmann 72]

Can you please provide me with some links to the many reports on worse performance?

The worse performance will come about if you try to add certain FSX addons. REX for example has ground textures and water settings which are not optimized for Prepar3D and can cause it to give performance up to 50% worse than FSX.

[simmerhead 885]

Well, I've been paying close attention as well and have not seen many reports on worse performance. In fact, I've seen none. REX is not developed for use with P3D yet, so I don't understand this problem. Is the performance of P3D going to be judged by using addons which aren't compatible with it?

[mmann 72]

The problem is with perception. Many here are under the impression that Prepar3D can run all their existing FSX addons without problems. I am just pointing out that this is not the case and that the true cost of Prepar3D is beyond the $499.00 or $9.95 a month fee for the program itself.

[Coral Sea 0]

Hi. We have tested Prepar3d. The smoothness and frame rates results when comparing to FSX were so impressive and positive to us, that we decided on the spot to make all our 33 FSX sceneries Prepar3d compatibles.First one will be Porto/LPPR, very very soon to be followed by all the other FSX sceneries we have done so far. We have already tested almost all them on Prepar3d.The lag free simulation on a visually FSX ambient with sliders generously pointing to the right is an amazing sensation. Other developers are making their products compatible as well, for what we have seen. We have posted some pictures of Porto/LPPR on our site and forum.Of course that all our sceneries will continue to be offered on 3 versions: FS9, FSX and Prepar3d. User chooses wich to use or uses them all :-) My best regards,Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com

[Coral Sea 0]

Hi again, Something I forgot to mention:- all our users, that already have our FSX sceneries, you will see a free Prepar3d download option in your account, for each compability we announce. My best regards,Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com

[mmann 72]

Hi again, Something I forgot to mention:- all our users, that already have our FSX sceneries, you will see a free Prepar3d download option in your account, for each compability we announce. My best regards,Carlos Pereira.www.tropicalsim.com

Hi Carlos; it is very refreshing to see a developer making their FSX addons compatible with Prepar3D without seeing this as an opportunity to charge more money! Kudos to both you and your company for taking the high road in this situation.

[Jean-Paul 167]

My time is as valuable as yours. I am making a statement based on reading posts on this topic in this forum and others for the last two weeks. If you want to ascertain the validity of my statement, do the same.

Attila, Please read this thread. Word Not Allowed actually took the time to benchmark P3D. I dowloaded P3D as well and see the same performance increase (higher FPS, less stutters)

[Christopher Low 5,390]

Well, I've been paying close attention as well and have not seen many reports on worse performance. In fact, I've seen none. REX is not developed for use with P3D yet, so I don't understand this problem. Is the performance of P3D going to be judged by using addons which aren't compatible with it?

If no FSX addons are compatible with it, then what's the point of buying it? If I had to make do with default FSX scenery and planes, then I wouldn't be using that either!

[Attila 2]

Attila, Please read this thread. Word Not Allowed actually took the time to benchmark P3D. I dowloaded P3D as well and see the same performance increase (higher FPS, less stutters)

I saw what Word Not Allowed wrote - the first time and then the second time. The first time he was very disappointed, then he saw what he did wrong and now he is very pleased. Now don't take this the wrong way, but I see a lot of people here who have no idea about how to benchmark a system properly AND even if they do, there are many possible reasons why the result cannot be trusted (good or bad). I know what Mathijs of Aerosoft said about their trials. At best, no improvement, at worst a serious fps drop when some scenery is not changed for P3D. So, this means that P3D is already not compatible with FSX in certain ways and any products you may have for which there will be no P3D versions may suffer as a result. Furthermore, the values for the sliders in FSX no longer match P3D. We do not know what the exact changes are, some subjective out-the-window view is all we have. Since most people who have been testing P3D have a lot of stuff installed in FSX and they cannot possibly have all of them installed in P3D, we are not comparing apples to apples. All I know is that no ground-breaking improvements to how the data is processed and then rendered have been implemented in P3D. Consequently I have a hard time believing the reported gains in fps, especially given the subjective nature of the data. The only thing I am certain of is that we need to spend more time investigating just what we are looking at in P3D as compared to FSX.