The three first is on my list for interesting in buying but I'm corncerned about performence. The fourth I already have and I think I have issues with performence with it.

1) Digital Aviation's Fokker 70-100

2) A2A B377 + COTS

3) PMDG 737NGX

4) Leonardo Maddog Pro

I would be particulary interested in hearing from people who have used these planes on a system similary to mine, which is

AMD Phenom II X4 3.4 GHz (OC 4 GHz)

4 Gb PC6400 RAM

NVIDIA GTS250 1 Gb

Win 7 x64 Home Premium

The A2A Boeing 377 Stratocruiser with the Captain of the Ship add-on runs like greased lightning. That's probably because when all is said and done, it does not actually have very complicated avionics, and so it doesn't have a lot of complex gauges which have to display all that stuff. It has a lot of complicated engine parameters modeled for sure, but most of the COTS stuff is the odd audio file manifesting itself as a comment from your virtual crew, and the rest is either monitoring flight parameters to gauge your performance when in the career mode, or having the virtual crew run things for you, which is effectively autopilot functions for the engine settings, so in spite of its complexity as a simulation, it's actually very good on FPS.

 

PMDG's 737 NG is a bit of a system hog, although it's not as demanding as some would have you believe, so in spite of that it doesn't get bad FPS actually. The problems that might (and I do mean might, not will) occur, are that with with a small amount of RAM, if you run a lot of additional add-ons, such as FS2Crew, Radar Contact and the like, then the amount of resources the PMDG bird uses will begin to make themselves known as other things start vying for attention from the your computer, but then again, the same is true of any flashy FSX aeroplane, so it is perhaps unfaor to single the PMDG NG out for that, although you would find that the iFly NG would be a bit less demanding.

 

Since you already have the Leonardo MD, you will doubtless be aware that it is still something of a port from FS9 in a few ways, and that means it is never going to run blisteringly fast on FSX, but that probably means you'd be no worse off than someone with an I7 processor when it came to running it. So don't let its age fool you into thinking it would necessarily run faster FPS than the PMDG NG, or like greased lightning on anyone's system for that matter. Thus you might in fact get better FPS out of the PMDG NG.

 

With regards to the other Fokker (you can't pass up those kind of comedy opportunities), I don't actually own the Digital Aviation F70, so I've no idea where that one is concerned.

 

Al

FPS actually. The problems that might (and I do mean might, not will) occur, are that with with a small amount of RAM, if you run a lot of additional add-ons, such as FS2Crew, Radar Contact and the like, then the amount of resources the PMDG bird uses will begin to make themselves known as other things start vying for attention from the your computer, but then again, the same is true of any flashy FSX aeroplane, so it is perhaps unfaor to single the PMDG NG out for that, although you would find that the iFly NG would be a bit less demanding.

 

Since you already have the Leonardo MD, you will doubtless be aware that it is still something of a port from FS9 in a few ways, and that means it is never going to run blisteringly fast on FSX, but that probably means you'd be no worse off than someone with an I7 processor when it came to running it. So don't let its age fool you into thinking it would necessarily run faster FPS than the PMDG NG, or like greased lightning on anyone's system for that matter. Thus you might in fact get better FPS out of the PMDG NG.

 

With regards to the other Fokker (you can't pass up those kind of comedy opportunities), I don't actually own the Digital Aviation F70, so I've no idea where that one is concerned.

 

Al

 

I usually do use RC when flying airliners and I did use fs2crew during my last flight with the maddog (could that have made things worse). I also consider getting AS2012 or reinstall ASE on my main FS computer. I have heard that running additional program has very little effect on performence.

Well, as with all things, you don't very often get something for nothing, and that's certainly true with computer programs which are running on your system. All those bits of information whizzing around the buses in your PC are using up processing power and memory.

 

It is true that it normally only becomes an issue if you don't have masses of RAM and run a lot of them though, for example, I've been known to run FSX, Track IR, Air Hauler, Radar Contact, MCE, FSCrew, EFB, REX, ASE and a flashy FS airliner at a flashy payware airport all at the same time, and it came as no surprise to find my computer not being very happy with that LOL

 

Al

Well, as with all things, you don't very often get something for nothing, and that's certainly true with computer programs which are running on your system. All those bits of information whizzing around the buses in your PC are using up processing power and memory.

 

It is true that it normally only becomes an issue if you don't have masses of RAM and run a lot of them though, for example, I've been known to run FSX, Track IR, Air Hauler, Radar Contact, MCE, FSCrew, EFB, REX, ASE and a flashy FS airliner at a flashy payware airport all at the same time, and it came as no surprise to find my computer not being very happy with that LOL

 

Al

 

Well that was a very lot of stuff running. And how much is masses of RAM?

The Fokker runs extremely well on my modest setup.

As you may be aware, it does not have a VC.

It does have a very nice photorealistic 2d panel.

Well that was a very lot of stuff running. And how much is masses of RAM?

 

These days, masses of RAM for a home PC, is anything over 12 gigs.

 

Al

If you can run the Leonardo nothing on that list should be a problem. For me the ngx runs better then the maddog.

 

Lee

 

 

 

 

Sent using Tapatalk

If you can run the Leonardo nothing on that list should be a problem. For me the ngx runs better then the maddog.

 

I would like to ask on which system you experience the NGX being faster than the Maddog?

hello

 

my specs are:

 

Win 7 64-bit

I5-2500k at 3.3ghz (not OC)

8GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD6450

 

lee

hello

 

my specs are:

 

Win 7 64-bit

I5-2500k at 3.3ghz (not OC)

8GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD6450

 

lee

 

And from what I understand that is significantly more powerful than my system which is

AMD Phenom II X4 3.54 GHz (OC 3.8 GHz)

4 Gb 800 MHz RAM

NVIDIA gts250 1 G

Win 7 x64

Wonder if 737NGX will be faster than the Maddog also on my system?

yeah the I5 is beter and also your video card isnt as powerful ,even though its 1G like mine. Its just older.

 

how does the maddog run for you now?

 

lee

yeah the I5 is beter and also your video card isnt as powerful ,even though its 1G like mine. Its just older.

 

how does the maddog run for you now?

 

lee

 

Accepatable in default scenery Europe 15-30 fps. But it does not take much to get it to stutter. If 737NGX performs better it would be a strong argument to get it. Performing equal is ok but worse performence I think would put me off.

i think that the ngx would perform better....

 

might try going down to the NGX forum and asking though, i know the maddog is not an excellent performer in terms of fps and performance and I think the NGX would be better.

 

lee