Hey everyone, I received my x plane 10 DVDs today and I finished installing it.The problem here is still with beta 10.0.3 still performance issue I get slow fps 14-17 Fps without HDR and fairly Low, medium, and hight settings. I have i790 OC 4.0 and 480 GTX and 12 gigs or DDRAM3 and the sim stutters and run worse than the demo I've tried with beta 2. I have a mac pro with12 cores with 16 gigs of ram and ATI 5870 and it doesn't run any better.As far as scenery, yes it's plausible but don't look like real life yet. I have tried KLAX and KWHP which is my home airport that I fly from in real life and man there are no airport building in any airport yet ????? not even a TOWER and I saw a 777 taking off from KWHP which is small GA airport barely C172 can takeoff from there. This is a flight sim people where are the airport details with buildings. also no major downtown buildings in LA. I haven't tried somewhere else yet.X plane people need to dumb most of x plane default aircraft, as far of flying physics it doesn't feel very real to me "YET", some airplanes either bank to far left or far right with no wind. I use PFC top notch hardware and everything is calibrated. I've tried to change the turbulence setting to medium and the airplane go out of control. I will need to get a good pay ware airplane and see how it responds.I'm not trying to bash x plane or something, but for now it's not as good compared to my FSX with the add ons . I want x plane 10 to get better and succeed on a big scale but for now I'm a bit disappointed.The only thing I find FSX not capable of doing is the night lighting, where X plane 10 is superior.Still a lot of bugs so far with x plane 10 and I'm sure they will work to fix it. I've noticed freeways on top of each other, flying into electric posts, some tress won't crash or damage the airplane. Also Airports needs to blend well with the surrounding areas, every airport looks light brown in color on top of green area, they need to improve the colors and the way airport blends with the scenery.

Hey everyone, I received my x plane 10 DVDs today and I finished installing it.The problem here is still with beta 10.0.3 still performance issue I get slow fps 14-17 Fps without HDR and fairly Low, medium, and hight settings. I have i790 OC 4.0 and 480 GTX and 12 gigs or DDRAM3 and the sim stutters and run worse than the demo I've tried with beta 2. I have a mac pro with12 cores with 16 gigs of ram and ATI 5870 and it doesn't run any better.As far as scenery, yes it's plausible but don't look like real life yet. I have tried KLAX and KWHP which is my home airport that I fly from in real life and man there are no airport building in any airport yet ????? not even a TOWER and I saw a 777 taking off from KWHP which is small GA airport barely C172 can takeoff from there. This is a flight sim people where are the airport details with buildings. also no major downtown buildings in LA. I haven't tried somewhere else yet.X plane people need to dumb most of x plane default aircraft, as far of flying physics it doesn't feel very real to me "YET", some airplanes either bank to far left or far right with no wind. I use PFC top notch hardware and everything is calibrated. I've tried to change the turbulence setting to medium and the airplane go out of control. I will need to get a good pay ware airplane and see how it responds.I'm not trying to bash x plane or something, but for now it's not as good compared to my FSX with the add ons . I want x plane 10 to get better and succeed on a big scale but for now I'm a bit disappointed.The only thing I find FSX not capable of doing is the night lighting, where X plane 10 is superior.Still a lot of bugs so far with x plane 10 and I'm sure they will work to fix it. I've noticed freeways on top of each other, flying into electric posts, some tress won't crash or damage the airplane. Also Airports needs to blend well with the surrounding areas, every airport looks light brown in color on top of green area, they need to improve the colors and the way airport blends with the scenery.

Are you saying its worse then the Demo ? Because the demo is pretty amazing !Post some photos !I was getting 25 to 30 FPS with the update. I ran out of time and rebooted and my frames drop back down to 10. Strange.....

So apart from night lighting you noticed nothing good. I don't think the fact you don't crash when you hit trees and eletric poles is a serious problem either.Have you read any of the posts here? The airport buildings or lack of them has been a subject that regularly gets flogged to death.If you try looking for the positives a little bit I'm sure you might find something.Pete

Yes It's worse than the demo, on my system.

So apart from night lighting you noticed nothing good. I don't think the fact you don't crash when you hit trees and eletric poles is a serious problem either.Have you read any of the posts here? The airport buildings or lack of them has been a subject that regularly gets flogged to death.If you try looking for the positives a little bit I'm sure you might find something.Pete

No I haven't noticed the thread you're talking about and yes I'm on AVSIM 24/7 reading about anything has to do with flightsim. A valid link would be appreciated. Yes so far nothing better than night lighting. I have a top FSX add ons and I don't think I will be impressed with these XPX poor defaults airplanes.

Yes It's worse than the demo, on my system.No I haven't noticed the thread you're talking about and yes I'm on AVSIM 24/7 reading about anything has to do with flightsim. A valid link would be appreciated. Yes so far nothing better than night lighting. I have a top FSX add ons and I don't think I will be impressed with these XPX poor defaults airplanes.

So I rebooted and i'm back to 25 -35 FPS in the clouds with most of the slider maxed out ! Its almost like the video card runs out of steam.I was flying around in FSX with FTX PNW ADD-ON today and there is no way it looks better then the demo. I will post some pics tomorrow.Your machine is a tad faster then mine. I have an I7 at 3.6, Nvidia 480.I also fly out KWHP !

Yes It's worse than the demo, on my system.No I haven't noticed the thread you're talking about and yes I'm on AVSIM 24/7 reading about anything has to do with flightsim. A valid link would be appreciated. Yes so far nothing better than night lighting. I have a top FSX add ons and I don't think I will be impressed with these XPX poor defaults airplanes.

You might want to read this."Official answer (if you accept from me): there are no seasonal textures at the moment""... as we haven't even finished the summer textures (on a planetary scale). The current texturing in XP10 is far from finished (which is true for other artwork too - nu surprise). We are working trough different climate zones, and as you might have guessed, areas like around Seattle (but also Alpine, and usually the more temperate and cold climates) are already at a quite good level. But many other places couldn't get the same treatment - until now - because we only have a limited number of hands. So, in those places, you see much more of the "older" X-Plane 9 textures (I reused them, to have an acceptable start for the entire planet ... even if its not perfect). Because of that, we didn't begin to bother with seasons too as we would need to re-do them every time we update one of the summer textures. And, we not only update, but also constantly add new textures as we get them finished (because there are far more terrain types encoded in the base scenery, than we have different textures ... we often reuse the same texture in more than one place). All of this will slowly - but steadily - come to you via the usual updates.""And if you want to understand better, how the whole texture-scenery-relationship works, wait until Simmo W releases the interview ... there I tried to shed some light on some of the technical aspects (it will be partly a quite technical write up, but the ones who are really interested will learn from it some bit believe)."

Ps; I am running XPX on a Dell 30" so it's a huge frame killer.

So I rebooted and i'm back to 25 -35 FPS in the clouds with most of the slider maxed out ! Its almost like the video card runs out of steam.I think this has to do with memory leak, If you rebooted and got back your FPS then this should be fixed I guess !!!! I was flying around in FSX with FTX PNW ADD-ON today and there is no way it looks better then the demo. I will post some pics tomorrow.Your machine is a tad faster then mine. I have an I7 at 3.6, Nvidia 480.I also fly out KWHP !COOL.You might want to read this."Official answer (if you accept from me): there are no seasonal textures at the moment""... as we haven't even finished the summer textures (on a planetary scale). The current texturing in XP10 is far from finished (which is true for other artwork too - nu surprise). We are working trough different climate zones, and as you might have guessed, areas like around Seattle (but also Alpine, and usually the more temperate and cold climates) are already at a quite good level. But many other places couldn't get the same treatment - until now - because we only have a limited number of hands. So, in those places, you see much more of the "older" X-Plane 9 textures (I reused them, to have an acceptable start for the entire planet ... even if its not perfect). Because of that, we didn't begin to bother with seasons too as we would need to re-do them every time we update one of the summer textures. And, we not only update, but also constantly add new textures as we get them finished (because there are far more terrain types encoded in the base scenery, than we have different textures ... we often reuse the same texture in more than one place). All of this will slowly - but steadily - come to you via the usual updates.""And if you want to understand better, how the whole texture-scenery-relationship works, wait until Simmo W releases the interview ... there I tried to shed some light on some of the technical aspects (it will be partly a quite technical write up, but the ones who are really interested will learn from it some bit believe)."

Thanks. I red about the seasonal textures that It will come, but my concern was the building in general like major cities downtown areas, airport buildings... etc

There is already over a dozen posts about this why start up another thread ?By the way, it's only suppose to look plausible not like real life.

The problem here is still with beta 10.0.3 still performance issue I get slow fps 14-17 Fps without HDR and fairly Low, medium, and hight settings. I have i790 OC 4.0 and 480 GTX and 12 gigs or DDRAM3 and the sim stutters and run worse than the demo I've tried with beta 2. I have a mac pro with 12 cores with 16 gigs of ram and ATI 5870 and it doesn't run any better.

The advice for tuning performance is to start with everything on low and then raise one slider at a time while carefully monitoring frame rates. This procedure should allow you to identify which settings are the performance killers for your particular set-up. For instance, I found that water reflections tanked my frame rates while global shadows had a negligible impact. The sweet spot is different for everybody.

I agree with the original poster to some extend. XP10 is a great leap forwards and I enjoyed the new eye candy in the demo. However, the default planes are still a years behind of what we already saw in FS2004/FSX. The default Cessna, the most popular trainer, seems to be unchanged and doesn't look (or fly) anything like the real deal. The scenery is greatly improved, but apart from that what else is new? Burkhard from MyTraffic wrote a lengthy post about the differences of AI traffic compared to MSFS and XP10 has virtually no advanced in this department. A limit of 10-20 AI planes is not realistic by any means, apart from the fact that there are no AI models available that might make this possible sometime in the future. I cannot comment really about ATC, it seems to be an improvement, but nowhere up to the standards of popular addons, like RC, PFE or VoxATC.Yes, great scenery, great eye-candy - MS Flight will probably shine in those aspects as well. But what about the rest, the "immersion factor" that enables us to fly in a dynamic, living and breathing environment? I am missing this completely in the new release.Thank you,Pat

I agree with the original poster to some extend. XP10 is a great leap forwards and I enjoyed the new eye candy in the demo. However, the default planes are still a years behind of what we already saw in FS2004/FSX. The default Cessna, the most popular trainer, seems to be unchanged and doesn't look (or fly) anything like the real deal. The scenery is greatly improved, but apart from that what else is new? Burkhard from MyTraffic wrote a lengthy post about the differences of AI traffic compared to MSFS and XP10 has virtually no advanced in this department. A limit of 10-20 AI planes is not realistic by any means, apart from the fact that there are no AI models available that might make this possible sometime in the future. I cannot comment really about ATC, it seems to be an improvement, but nowhere up to the standards of popular addons, like RC, PFE or VoxATC.Yes, great scenery, great eye-candy - MS Flight will probably shine in those aspects as well. But what about the rest, the "immersion factor" that enables us to fly in a dynamic, living and breathing environment? I am missing this completely in the new release.Thank you,Pat

Have you actually downloaded and tried the demo?The HDR lighting and shadows.3D particle based volumetric clouds.The non-urban areas (mountainous regions)Night lighting.Come on Pat. No offense, but It's ok to criticize, but criticize realistically.And comparing it to a sim that isn't even out yet is just pure speculation.What we KNOW about Flight.It's not even in beta yet.We have ONLY seen Hawaii.10GB initial install. Whether that's a SERIOUSLY detailed Hawaii or low detailed "rest of the world" is still up in the air.Will be a Windows LIVE product.Only 1 aircraft has been shown so far in at least a year, maybe more. Where are the other aircraft?Based on these facts of what we know for sure so far, you're saying X Plane 10 is falling behind?It's obvious people are losing touch of what flight simulation is all about.How much realism is enough? I saw in another forum that X Plane is being challenged in its navigational fidelity with regards to specific landmarks somewhere in the back of Idaho.Really.Where's the line? When you can fly down the vegas strip and see the Bellagio water fountain spray water to Andrea Bocelli's "Time to say Goodbye"?It's an $80 flight sim. Time for a little perspective.[/end rant]

(edited for spelling) ;)Yep, I have the demo and I am also a real-life pilot (single-engine, IFR, sea). The things are you mentioned are eye-candy, none of what you listed what I would describe as revolutionary. To some extent, I could fly VFR already with XP9 and yes, XP10 looks very, very nice, but I am still chugging around in the same Cessna from 3 years ago. I am not expecting all of those additional points to be developed by Laminar Research. For me it is the C152 from Carenado for XP, that round up the picture a little more. But in terms of AI, I unfortunately foresee that nothing is going to change much in XP10. AI is a fundamental cornerstone of piloting and flying a plane from startup to shutdown.I have no clue what MS Flight will look like, but what we're all sure about that it is all about the eye-candy again, which is great, wonderful and exciting (just like XP10). I am just missing functionality, frameworks and ideas APART from eye candy, like AI planes, marshallers and airport buildings, realistic ATC - anything that enables me, the arm-chair pilot, to get immersed in the simulation. Eye-candy is part of it, not all of it. I don't care, if Boccelli is blaring on the strip, but what I do care is that ATC doesn't vector me in a mountain.What I am concerned about is that XP10 doesn't even have a framework to enable developers, for example, to start a realistic AI project (see Burkhard from MyTraffic's response over at SF forums, quote: "It is completely impossible to create only a small part of what MyTraffic has today using the possibilities of X-Plane.", reference on bottom). Realistically, I can use now maybe 10 instead of 4 AI planes in XP10? I don't see much progress here.Pathttp://forum.simflig...and-x-plane-10/

(edited for spelling) ;)Yep, I have the demo and I am also a real-life pilot (single-engine, IFR, sea). The things are you mentioned are eye-candy, none of what you listed what I would describe as revolutionary. To some extent, I could fly VFR already with XP9 and yes, XP10 looks very, very nice, but I am still chugging around in the same Cessna from 3 years ago. I am not expecting all of those additional points to be developed by Laminar Research. For me it is the C152 from Carenado for XP, that round up the picture a little more. But in terms of AI, I unfortunately foresee that nothing is going to change much in XP10. AI is a fundamental cornerstone of piloting and flying a plane from startup to shutdown.I have no clue what MS Flight will look like, but what we're all sure about that it is all about the eye-candy again, which is great, wonderful and exciting (just like XP10). I am just missing functionality, frameworks and ideas APART from eye candy, like AI planes, marshallers and airport buildings, realistic ATC - anything that enables me, the arm-chair pilot, to get immersed in the simulation. Eye-candy is part of it, not all of it. I don't care, if Boccelli is blaring on the strip, but what I do care is that ATC doesn't vector me in a mountain.What I am concerned about is that XP10 doesn't even have a framework to enable developers, for example, to start a realistic AI project (see Burkhard from MyTraffic's response over at SF forums, quote: "It is completely impossible to create only a small part of what MyTraffic has today using the possibilities of X-Plane.", reference on bottom). Realistically, I can use now maybe 10 instead of 4 AI planes in XP10? I don't see much progress here.Pathttp://forum.simflig...and-x-plane-10/

PatI'm not doubting some of your observations. You have some very valid points that can be justifiable criticisms. It's the part where you are saying what Flight would "probably" have compared to what X Plane 10 DOES have.The AI is still in its very early infancy stages. Whether there will be an SDK for it remains to be seen. I for one, would love to see real world AI and ATC with timetables. You may think none of what I mentioned is revolutionary, but then what is? I consider the HDR, 3D volumetric clouds and night lighting revolutionary. but that's just my own personal opinion. I haven't seen anything revolutionary in Flight so far. I've seen "new" stuff since FSX. But that's about all.I can understand peoples frustration with the default Cessna. I've seen it in droves. People want NEW ultra realistic, default aircraft. Developers aren't going to make ultra high quality default aircraft. It takes time. In saying that, there is literally 1000's of freeware aircraft at x-plane.org. Some of which would be considered high quality. You're definitely right that eye candy is part of it. And I am definitely happy that XP10 is an open canvas for scenery because I plan to exploit that until I'm blue in the face. I love immersion too. As I'm sure many others do. But I think you'll agree, the degree of immersion for each individual is purely subjective. What's good enough for one is not always good enough for another. I definitely appreciate and respect your opinions when they are backed up with facts, but when people say "Flight will probably have this and X Plane won't", that's when things start to go funky.For the record, I am also a PPL holder and rated on single engine and twin engine GA's. I didn't mean to sound aggressive in my previous post. It was just a bit of a vent.

I have to agree with most of the points the op made. I also tried xplane out of lax yesterday-an area I've flown over many times. This area is simply not believable. The textures are the wrong color, it doesn't look like a city-nothing like La, and the airports look like desert wastelands. Ditto San Francisco....I also agree about the default planes...and it seems these complaints have been going on for years.I am a fan of xplane10 but I sure want to see these short coming addressed rather than rationalize they don't exist. Besides the night lighting, the rw weather effects, and the wonderful feeling of flight on some aircraft, and the beauty of the non urban areas are stellar.

It's obvious people are losing touch of what flight simulation is all about.How much realism is enough? I saw in another forum that X Plane is being challenged in its navigational fidelity with regards to specific landmarks somewhere in the back of Idaho.Really.Where's the line? When you can fly down the vegas strip and see the Bellagio water fountain spray water to Andrea Bocelli's "Time to say Goodbye"?It's an $80 flight sim. Time for a little perspective.

I'd like to see that thread for specifics. Idaho DOES have some of the best backcountry flying areas in the whole USA, which makes it tough to dimiss. It's very popular, rugged, and well worth the view out the windscreen. I'll assume that X-Plane 10 has the terrain............but's missing a barn, fence line, or something....