KSEA is the absolute worst performing airport in the FSX world - start with KSFO or KTPA for a start!

why is that KSEA is so bad? I always fly out of KORD but it is a FSDT Ohare X maybe i should use that as my test bed?

Microsoft overdid it I guess..Wanted to show off their home town..But really - get it all to work nicely first, then go into more demanding situations andassess the impact they have..

I just tested it at KSFO and pretty smooth, no major stutters just little bit of lag occuring. The FPS are 15-22 which is pretty good id say. I dont know what would be the next tweaks that would help.

Download CPUID HW Monitor ( freeware ) and install it.First clock back your cpu a little to be sure it is not throttling. Try with 4.2.Fire up FSX in windowed mode, run CPUID and make a flight.Look at the temps for your cores.They must not exceed 75 C ( 70C even better ) under heavy load.If they are up to 90 C you can expect throttling.Make sure that your memory settings are ok.Start with everything set to auto , but speed to 1800.Like I wrote before your harddisk needs to be fast too.A slow 5400 rpm drive with 8 mb cache won't do the trick.Finally , your graphics card isn't that fast.It is a newer type , but slower than a GTX470 ,GTX480 or a HD6850.Extreme high resolutions are very high AA settings can also be to much.Just start with the above.

I have a system that is quite similar to yours (i5 2500K @ 4.5, P8Z68-V, 8 GB Ram but I have an GTX580). I have the graphic settings maxed out (extremely dense etc.), only water one notch down. All other settings are also one or two notches higher than you have them. I use the old external frame limiter and have it set at 30 (see EDIT below).With all this fps in FSX is 30 on average, it only goes down to 25 or 26 when flying above PNW Seattle or Portland. Performance (which is something else then fps) is smooth, I only have some random microstutters do to having vsync on (forced through the driver) I have to add though that I only fly the Katana 4x: I think fps would go down more with the 737NGX for instance. However, the Katana isn't a 'light' airplane either.I only use these performance tweaks:[bUFFERPOOLS]PoolSize=0[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14[GRAPHICS]HIGHMEMFIX=1[MAIN]DisablePreload=1That's it and that's all. They are quite different from other posted tweaks, I see, but other people seem to use low autogen settings (in game or by using tweaks) and (just like you) I didn't buy my new PC to use low autogen settings. Anyway, since you are trying all kinds of tweaks, you also might give my settings a try. Imho they are the best for someone who likes to have a lot off sliders full right. So delete your cfg again and only add my tweaks and just see what happens. I hope you are in for a surprise.BTW I am using the latest official nVidia driver, which is great!IMPORTANT EDITWhen I started my computer this I was planning to test how FSX performed without the limiter because I've read here and there that the limiter isn't good for texture loading and I do sometimes have late loading textures. However, I first visited this forum and posted what I posted above. After that I did my tests with and without the limiter and I found out that my 'texture loading testflight' (flying full speed into an Orbx addon airport) clearly showed that textures load a LOT faster without the limiter. And by a LOT I mean 50% faster! That's quite something! That's the difference between landing with high res textures not loaded yet (at all) and high res textures loaded completely.Of course, using the ingame limiter gives a lower average fps and maybe a bit less smooth performance every now and then, but having the textures loading in time is a big plus...! WHen it comes to FSX you always have to make compromises, but as it is right now I will fly for some time without the limiter. Stutters are annoying but so are late loading textures.

I have a system that is quite similar to yours (i5 2500K @ 4.5, P8Z68-V, 8 GB Ram but I have an GTX580). I have the graphic settings maxed out (extremely dense etc.), only water one notch down. All other settings are also one or two notches higher than you have them. I use the old external frame limiter and have it set at 30 (see EDIT below).With all this fps in FSX is 30 on average, it only goes down to 25 or 26 when flying above PNW Seattle or Portland. Performance (which is something else then fps) is smooth, I only have some random microstutters do to having vsync on (forced through the driver) I have to add though that I only fly the Katana 4x: I think fps would go down more with the 737NGX for instance. However, the Katana isn't a 'light' airplane either.I only use these performance tweaks:[bUFFERPOOLS]PoolSize=0[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14[GRAPHICS]HIGHMEMFIX=1[MAIN]DisablePreload=1That's it and that's all. They are quite different from other posted tweaks, I see, but other people seem to use low autogen settings (in game or by using tweaks) and (just like you) I didn't buy my new PC to use low autogen settings. Anyway, since you are trying all kinds of tweaks, you also might give my settings a try. Imho they are the best for someone who likes to have a lot off sliders full right. So delete your cfg again and only add my tweaks and just see what happens. I hope you are in for a surprise.BTW I am using the latest official nVidia driver, which is great!IMPORTANT EDITWhen I started my computer this I was planning to test how FSX performed without the limiter because I've read here and there that the limiter isn't good for texture loading and I do sometimes have late loading textures. However, I first visited this forum and posted what I posted above. After that I did my tests with and without the limiter and I found out that my 'texture loading testflight' (flying full speed into an Orbx addon airport) clearly showed that textures load a LOT faster without the limiter. And by a LOT I mean 50% faster! That's quite something! That's the difference between landing with high res textures not loaded yet (at all) and high res textures loaded completely.Of course, using the ingame limiter gives a lower average fps and maybe a bit less smooth performance every now and then, but having the textures loading in time is a big plus...! WHen it comes to FSX you always have to make compromises, but as it is right now I will fly for some time without the limiter. Stutters are annoying but so are late loading textures.

Jeroen,I completely agree with you. I built this PC so that I can prove to myself that yes Intel does outperform AMD, and granted I already am able to run higher settings which is a plus. I do know that you have to make compromises with FSX as its coding is just retarded. I have a feeling Flight is going to be like playing Modern Warfare 3, all fluid and much more realistic. But I will try those settings and see. I usually fly either the Airbus X or the iFly 737NG as the PMDG just kills FPS and i dont have the patience to always tweak for it.

Download CPUID HW Monitor ( freeware ) and install it.First clock back your cpu a little to be sure it is not throttling. Try with 4.2.Fire up FSX in windowed mode, run CPUID and make a flight.Look at the temps for your cores.They must not exceed 75 C ( 70C even better ) under heavy load.If they are up to 90 C you can expect throttling.Make sure that your memory settings are ok.Start with everything set to auto , but speed to 1800.Like I wrote before your harddisk needs to be fast too.A slow 5400 rpm drive with 8 mb cache won't do the trick.Finally , your graphics card isn't that fast.It is a newer type , but slower than a GTX470 ,GTX480 or a HD6850.Extreme high resolutions are very high AA settings can also be to much.Just start with the above.

Gerard,I will try your settings and see where i end up. I believe i did this test already once with CPU-z just dont remember, because i ran 14 hrs of prime 95 and all passed. I have a Seagate 500GB Barracuda 7200RPM and it worked fine previously.

Gerard,just ran FSX windowed for 20 mins, with CPU-Z and CPUID Hardware Monitor Pro running, the highest any core went up in temp is 53C and maintained around 44 C, @ 4.6GHz, i think the CPU is ok. As for the GPU i replaced 3 GPUs already and 560 Ti should pull it weight.

Jeroen,Used your settings at KBOS Fly Tampa Aiport with default CRJ-700 and had constant 22FPS VC and external only dropped down to 18 couple of times no stutterring at all. KORD i believe is something caused by FSDreamTeam because I cant get over 10 FPS and at KJFK I am at 20-22 constant. I just was curious, what are your actual Terrain and Water settings/values?thanksArslan

I just was curious, what are your actual Terrain and Water settings/values?

Mesh is at 2 because Orbx's Twin Starks's needs it, otherwise it would be at 5. No need for 1 because afaik there isn't mesh at 1 (?). Water isn't at the hightest level because the reflections of EVERY single object (autogen, etc.) really brings down fps too much. At High 2.x you get reflections of the clouds and the ground, which is good enough for me. Well, no, it isn't, but I just have to live with that compromise...

Jeroen,thanks for posting your settings. What addons do you have? I dont even know if my system can even run such high settings

Jeroen,thanks for posting your settings. What addons do you have? I dont even know if my system can even run such high settings

FTX. REX, ASE, EZDOK, TrackIR. Resolution is 1080i. The only (main) difference between our systems is the GPU: you have a 560GTX and I have a 580GTX. But as I said, I mainly fly the Katana above rural area's, although I do sometimes pass over Seattle or Portland (FTX PNW) without any huge problems (average fps may drop a little to >25).

Torkermax,What are you referring to?

Torkermax,What are you referring to?

I think he read your topic title, saw the screenshots of my settings and came to a wrong conclusion...