Look up Flight Sim Labs, they will bring out a Pro version of their Airbus for P3D. There are others but would have to look them up.

 

On the same note, there is no reason other than licensing for some developers not to support it, since as you put it, performance is the same at base level, the difference is that P3D is still being developed, FSX is not.

Just wondering if some of you can give me a real comparison between these two versions of the same sim.

 

1. Performance - Is there any difference?

2. Scenery - has there been improvements in P3d's default world?

3. Add-on compatibility - In the case of aircraft can FSX add-ons work in P3d or is in most cases special development needed? Does FSX add-on scenery work without issue in P3d?

 

I'm thinking about getting a new PC and an i7 9xx series (Sandy Bridge) with 16gigs of ram is what I would get for FSX. It's a shame after all these years that's the machine I feel confident will run FSX well (a $3,000 Alienware machine). I learned with Flight this shouldn't be needed especially with software over 6 years old. Does P3d have optimized code that exploits current hardware better? I know some will argue about the need of such a robust machine is not needed, I for one don't have time for the endless tweaking game. Does P3d cure allot of the headache in getting a functional sim where one can just fly?

 

Thanks for any and all feedback.

 

Back to more basic answer. In deciding on a PC, there is no significant factor in determining what you need that is dependent on the choice of FSX or P3D. A given PC will run FSX or P3D just as well.

 

$3000 for an Alienware computer is quite an over expense.!!

You could build a PC that is optimized for High Performance with FSX/P3D for about half that, and be assured of getting the expected performance.

 

Looking ahead, when you still have this new PC, hopefully, during it's lifetime, P3D will advance to 2.0+ and be at least be able to run DX11 graphics. A 64 bit version of P3D still seems to be some way away. Like all new features of P3D, you will find out what they are, when the new version is released -- very little advance information is forthcoming.

 

Windows 7 or Windows 8 is an important consideration.

Windows 8 still has numerous "issues" with both FSX and P3D, but over time, hopefully there will be resolved. ( there is always DUAL-Boot !!)

 

The cost of FSX or P3D is so small in comparison with other hardware and addon costs, that you can easily keep running both, and decide which one, at any time, now or in the future, best meets your needs.

 

Most addons are now being made to be P3D compatible, or have P3D versions.

There is still the possibility that some addon developers will purposely prevent their Consumer version of an addon, from running on the Commercial P3D simulator. This is still an unknown "mess".

 

Basically, until P3D Version 2.0+ is released, there is not a lot of difference, between the two, for the average simmer. After the release of 2.0, things may well favor P3D .. but that's a guess for the future -- just like those elusive 6 digit Mega Lottery Numbers !@!@

Look up Flight Sim Labs, they will bring out a Pro version of their Airbus for P3D.

I think that assumed Pro version might very much reflect that P3D isn't a commercial sim, nothing else. License stuff, surely coming at a price. Lets hope it offers some more features though. Would make sense, but doesn't mean that those aren't possible in FSX. Where did you read that? :huh:

 

There are others but would have to look them up.

Please do so if you like.

 

Will, there is no exclusive P3D feature over the old FSX. No polygon limits increased, no path reflecting real-time gains and no magic bullet suddenly rendering old FSX quirks to be solved. Same code basis, different license model and small fixes plus a bunch of new quirks. P3D in a nutshell.

 

the difference is that P3D is still being developed, FSX is not.

Thats true. But don't forget to ask 'what did it help so far'? Version 1.4 means that two years of development went into the 'new' sim. The sim without a start screen, the same old weather bugs, same old engine models, funny mixture behaviour and the same CPU dependant performance. Should I go on?

 

So while I'd love to applaud to any real gains resulting from that development, I actually wonder what happened with those 4 big updates? :mellow:

Try it and find out.

 

The knockers of P3D are usually those who don't use it.

 

The improvements may not be written in black and white but I as well as many others have stability, better performance, much crisper graphics and the promise of further improvements yet to come. My FSX was very stable don't get me wrong, but now I have a sim with no hidden gremlins.

bleh... nm

To be clear, of course I've tried it. I think I've wrote that before. :mellow:

 

I'm pretty excited about a possible 2.0 version of P3D, if it ever arrives. But 1.x may indeed be summed up as FSX in another box. Sometimes worse when e.g. some license or module prevents your previous purchases to run.

 

And 1.x comes, if you don't pull that magic 'I'm an academic' card, at the cost of 199 Dollars. Plenty of academics around these days by the way. ^_^

Now able to set LOD and max texture in graphics menu, no need for that max texture load app used in fsx again.

no need for some of the fixes in the fsx guides.

 

The sim no longer launches and then minimises itself so that i can never maximise it again. And other similar signs showing incompatibility with current windows.

 

 

Also no more endless clicking to say you trust a dll on startup after installing new addon. This is a sign that P3d platform is several improvments on fsx. Under the hood so much more must have been fixed, and it feels like that.

 

 

Generally FSX was acting like it does not really belong in today's windows software , and rightly so for a complex 2006 product.

 

Yes there are tweaks needed to install some stuff, but FsxToP3dMigration tool does away with most of that.

 

Just been setting up my first p3d install, and all i can say is

 

1. If your current fsx is smooth keep it, but start migrating to p3d slowly, its the future of fsx.

 

2. If your FSX is broken and needs a reinstall, move to P3D now!!!

 

3. If you are not sure, go P3D.

 

As far as i can see, its not just performance, it also ease of use, stability, support. FSX is no longer an option if P3D is accesible for you.

 

From what i see it works in windows 7 better than fsx did for me. Fsx is old, P3D 1.4 is descently improved version of what is still an old product.

 

Get on the P3d boat now and you get the goodies that come from the updates.

 

made no flights yet in p3d, just tweaking and traffic watching for the time being. as i complete the install

Get on the P3d boat now and you get the goodies that come from the updates.

Sounds like from the brochure.

 

made no flights yet in p3d, just tweaking and traffic watching for the time being. as i complete the install

Funny seeing this as the last sentence in a text already summarizing all the benefits. But.. let us know how it works out. :smile: Which license did you buy by the way?

Now able to set LOD and max texture in graphics menu, no need for that max texture load app used in fsx again.

no need for some of the fixes in the fsx guides.

 

The sim no longer launches and then minimises itself so that i can never maximise it again. And other similar signs showing incompatibility with current windows.

 

 

Also no more endless clicking to say you trust a dll on startup after installing new addon. This is a sign that P3d platform is several improvments on fsx. Under the hood so much more must have been fixed, and it feels like that.

 

 

Generally FSX was acting like it does not really belong in today's windows software , and rightly so for a complex 2006 product.

 

Yes there are tweaks needed to install some stuff, but FsxToP3dMigration tool does away with most of that.

 

Just been setting up my first p3d install, and all i can say is

 

1. If your current fsx is smooth keep it, but start migrating to p3d slowly, its the future of fsx.

 

2. If your FSX is broken and needs a reinstall, move to P3D now!!!

 

3. If you are not sure, go P3D.

 

As far as i can see, its not just performance, it also ease of use, stability, support. FSX is no longer an option if P3D is accesible for you.

 

From what i see it works in windows 7 better than fsx did for me. Fsx is old, P3D 1.4 is descently improved version of what is still an old product.

 

Get on the P3d boat now and you get the goodies that come from the updates.

 

made no flights yet in p3d, just tweaking and traffic watching for the time being. as i complete the install

 

I got the academic version for $40 on LM website.

 

Been installing addons for last few days, and usaully by such time is when the querks in FSX start to show, but so far so good with P3d.

Any instability or compatibility problems with FSX is all user error. I went through my FSX install and found the problems and it's as stable as a rock. Running win7 64bit. With any and every addon for FSX including Reality Xp and PMDG.

 

If P3D starts patching the code to make it perform better and take advantage of modern graphics cards, then it will be worthwhile.

Any instability or compatibility problems with FSX is all user error. I went through my FSX install and found the problems and it's as stable as a rock. Running win7 64bit. With any and every addon for FSX including Reality Xp and PMDG.

 

If P3D starts patching the code to make it perform better and take advantage of modern graphics cards, then it will be worthwhile.

As i understand this is already the case for shaders used in p3d

 

ability to set lod 6.5 and control max texture load was enough to win me over

Those Shaders are 3.0. You can get them for FSX too, a free download that is. Unfortunately, it doesn't help the performance by design or change anything on the CPU dependency of the sim.

 

ability to set lod 6.5 and control max texture load was enough to win me over

You aware that you can set that in FSX too, without a restart? :mellow:

 

By the way, when combining those tweaked settings with dense scenery and some fancy airliner addon, you may be asking for out of memory errors. Since the engine wasn't changed, that's just like in FSX. :unsure:

 

I'm still hoping that you get what you want from P3D.

Word Not Allowed did some interesting performance comparison tests with FSX and P3D.

There is a compability list to.

 

Look here:

 

http://#####...nce-comparison/

Scott, nobody is passing on P3D due to performance, it is due to licensing, so it is a different issue altogether.

 

Sure Will - never said otherwise. From my perspective, however, as a Flight 1 customer and a heavy user of RealityXP what matters most is the support, not the reasons behind it. And note, I'm not "knocking" P3D, just bringing up issues which may (do in my case) or may not matter to others evaluating.

 

Any instability or compatibility problems with FSX is all user error. I went through my FSX install and found the problems and it's as stable as a rock. Running win7 64bit. With any and every addon for FSX including Reality Xp and PMDG.

 

User error? There are real problems and incompatibilities in FSX. Just because we've found fixes doesn't change the original situation. I realize there are fixes for most problems I know of in FSX - except for maybe OOM stuff, and that's a limitation both products still share - but they're still problems, and some of them have been addressed in P3D. That is a valid point in favor of the product.

 

See, as I said before - I'm not anti-P3D At all. But I've currently decided that it's not for me, at least not yet and I believe I've done so for valid reasons.

 

If P3D starts patching the code to make it perform better and take advantage of modern graphics cards, then it will be worthwhile.

 

I would agree - that would definitely raise the value proposition. But at the same time, it would also likely begin breaking more and more compatibility which, of course, means developer buy-in becomes even more critical.

 

Tradeoffs. Life is ALWAYS about tradeoffs.

 

Scott

I'm thinking about getting a new PC and an i7 9xx series (Sandy Bridge) with 16gigs of ram is what I would get for FSX. It's a shame after all these years that's the machine I feel confident will run FSX well (a $3,000 Alienware machine). I learned with Flight this shouldn't be needed especially with software over 6 years old. Does P3d have optimized code that exploits current hardware better? I know some will argue about the need of such a robust machine is not needed, I for one don't have time for the endless tweaking game. Does P3d cure allot of the headache in getting a functional sim where one can just fly?

 

To me P3D isn't worth the trouble. First of all FSX is running fine on my 2 year old pc (which certainly did NOT cost 3000 dollars) so there is no real need for me to switch. Besides that I don't like the fact various addons simply won't work. You also still have to tweak! I really don't know what I would gain with P3D: I will only lose things. And yes, I did give it a try.

 

BTW About Dx11: it seems everyone is expecting wonders from it...! Have you played any DX11 games recently? I have and I always ended up switching back to DX9 if possible because all those great new features eat up fps, at least in the few games I tried it with... I wouldn't expect a wonderous increase in performance: DX11 has more possibilities but all those possibilities will cost performance and in the end you will gain nothing. But that's just my very pessimistic view on it all... ^_^