Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

IAF747

iFly737NG vs PMDG 737NGX?

Recommended Posts

I have the PMDG 737 FS2004 version (I know it is a totally different and older build) and was wondering about the 737 from iFly and PMDG's new NGX.Having recently got the PMDG 747-400, I love the flight characteristics and sounds (very well made sounds-just like the real thing) but there are several issues about it (small petty ones) that are strange.Anyhow I am very happy with the FS2004 PMDG 747. So can anyone tell me their reviews of these great products? Is the iFly easier on frames? Does the iFly have great sounds, or would I have to go looking for better engineered sounds in the library? (The FS2004 PMDG 737NG didn't have the greatest sounds for me, and then downloading the sounds from the library I get that awful d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d stuttering...)ThanksDaniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ifly 737 is the most advanced FS9 airplane to date and currently they have a Feature Pack coming out around the corner that will add alot more features. If you have hardware they have just released a tool to allow cockpit builders full access to use their gear. For FS9 the ifly737 is a nobrainer. Oh btw this is the FSX forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy. Get the PMDG one.They are both very good, but in pretty much all areas, PMDG has the edge over iFly.System indepth simulation; PMDG wins. Modeling; PMDG wins (although only by little). Attention to details; PMDG wins. This last one plays an incredible large part in getting the sense you're actually in a real aircraft.The only area where iFly wins with a hugh margin, is pricing. With iFly, you'll get everything for US$55. With PMDG, you'll have to buy the base pack at US$70. This contains the -800 and -900 versions. If you also want the 600/700 expansion pack, it'll cost you another US$25.BBJ and military versions are not yet released, but count on also US$25 for each expansion pack.In my opinion, the PMDG version is far enough ahead of the iFly to justify the price difference.So in the end, it's basically a question on how much are you willing or able to spend....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Ifly 737 is the most advanced FS9 airplane to date and currently they have a Feature Pack coming out around the corner that will add alot more features. If you have hardware they have just released a tool to allow cockpit builders full access to use their gear. For FS9 the ifly737 is a nobrainer. Oh btw this is the FSX forum.
Yes it is. I was talking about the FSX versions. Sorry I should have specified.Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Easy. Get the PMDG one.They are both very good, but in pretty much all areas, PMDG has the edge over iFly.System indepth simulation; PMDG wins. Modeling; PMDG wins (although only by little). Attention to details; PMDG wins. This last one plays an incredible large part in getting the sense you're actually in a real aircraft.The only area where iFly wins with a hugh margin, is pricing. With iFly, you'll get everything for US$55. With PMDG, you'll have to buy the base pack at US$70. This contains the -800 and -900 versions. If you also want the 600/700 expansion pack, it'll cost you another US$25.BBJ and military versions are not yet released, but count on also US$25 for each expansion pack.In my opinion, the PMDG version is far enough ahead of the iFly to justify the price difference.So in the end, it's basically a question on how much are you willing or able to spend....
Frank,Would the iFly be higher FPS? And the sound in the iFly, is it matching the PMDG?Thanks for the advice on the PMDG, I wasn't disappointed with their 747-400. The model of the 747 is brilliant!!!I will need to get a sandy bridge to run the 747X or NGX though.....Daniel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting what new features Ifly's Feature Pack will bring, it's being touted as ver 2.0. They already have by far the best hardware support of any payware A/C and the most complex FS2crew integration to my knowledge, heck they even offer a cockpit builder version. Unless Pmdg ever opens up to hardware manufacturers I will always give the edge to someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank,Would the iFly be higher FPS? And the sound in the iFly, is it matching the PMDG?Thanks for the advice on the PMDG, I wasn't disappointed with their 747-400. The model of the 747 is brilliant!!!I will need to get a sandy bridge to run the 747X or NGX though.....Daniel
Hi Daniel,I don't know what your processor is, but you definitely don't need a Sandy Bridge for the PMDG NGX. The 747X is quite heavy on frames, though that one also does not require a Sandy Bridge unless you want to land it at OrbX YMML with 100% AI traffic.Compared to iFly, the fps of the PMDG is about the same. I didn't notice a difference. Both are remarkably fps-friendly considering what you get and what you're looking at.Looking at sound, iFly is far behind PMDG. iFly's is good compared to the general standard in FSX, but PMDG is so much better. For me it's in the category "Attention to detail". It's all the little sounds that make the experience so real. One example; after retracting the gear after takeoff, the nosegear touches the brakepads in the wheelwell. This gives a sound that's very distinct and noticeable. This sound is in the PMDG aircraft; it's not in the iFly. And to further show how far PMDG went in detailing; the sound only occurs after a takeoff and not after a go-around (where the wheels don't turn).Concerning the mentioned iFly upcoming featurepack. I've not heard of it, but I can not imagine it could raise the iFly above the level of the PMDG. It might reduce the gap, but it will not close it. Imho it would require an entire rebuild of the iFly, which I'm sure they will not do.So again; the PMDG is worth the additional cost, but I can not speak on behalf of your wallet :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Daniel..See my specs below.You do not need Sandy Bridge for the NGX.My Core 2 Duo gives me good performance with the NGX.I consider that PMDG have done a superb job.I'm getting 18-20 fps in the air with the VC. I'm getting down to 7-10 fps on theapproach to EHAM in the tutorial. All sounds are brilliant. I'm also running the FS Commander moving map on a secondmonitor on this same system.It also runs very well with using the UK2000 Manchester and Liverpool Xtreme airports - again without any major problems. I did suffer CTD's on startup until I installed the patches.Make sure that you are using ******* Bogote's FSX.cfg util - it made one huge difference on this system. I got about 5-7 more fps after the cfg file was processed.Best of luck...but be prepared to spend LOTS of time on that bird. You will love it.RegardsBill Cusick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And with the new patch around the corner for the NGX, they will be improving performance even further and i have very seldom heard anyone complain about perf as it is!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You gotta wonder just how anyone could possibly raise the bar from the NGX. Even PMDG:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm getting 18-20 fps in the air with the VC. I'm getting down to 7-10 fps on theapproach to EHAM in the tutorial.
Is that really flyable? I find anything under 20 is really awful. I'd rather turn off all the autogen than "fly" with frames that low! Especially on approach, there's no way you can land anything properly at 10fps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do a forum search, this has been beat to death
A forum what? Who would do such nasty things? Just kidding, I hear you, Jay.http://forum.avsim.n...age__p__2202697http://forum.avsim.n...vs-pmdg-737-ngxhttp://forum.avsim.n...age__p__2147190http://forum.avsim.n...s-and-questionshttp://forum.avsim.n...737-frame-rateshttp://forum.avsim.n...g-base-packwhatEdited. I must apologize for just posting examples. I had threee pages to choose from. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that really flyable? I find anything under 20 is really awful. I'd rather turn off all the autogen than "fly" with frames that low! Especially on approach, there's no way you can land anything properly at 10fps.

 

I usually cruise at around 15 FPS, and landings and takeoffs are at about 9 FPS on my computer... I find no problem with it... but that's if you are used to bad FPS, which I am with FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...