Hey guys,

 

Just curious which slider in FSX settings has the most impact?

 

If I was to turn down only one which should I start with.

 

Thanks

Cars.

 

Very good question....

Cars definitely since autogen is not such a big deal on better PCs.

Autogen (especially if you're using addons with increased autogen placement like Orbx FTX regions), Water above Low or Mid 2.x, Light Bloom, Ground Scenery Shadows - those are the usual suspects.

Don't want to sound rude here... and don't get it the wrong way - but:

 

1. You got to turn anything down with the PC-beast you've got?

2. Isn't that something you can find by your own very fast? E.g. Monitor your FPS in different situations (airport, heavy clouds...) and either have all maxed out and set only one slider to 0 or all to zero and one maxed out. The amount of sliders is pretty limited in FSX...

 

However - i would suggest AI, cloud drawing distance and water effects. Stuff without sliders you can try would be shadows, lens flare and light bloom...

 

Nico

 

Nico

Autogen, every time I tested, cars showed very little frame rate hit. I'm guessing it depends where you fly, woods or city.

As VeryBumpy says, it depends where you fly and in what conditions, so it's hard to name the one (and I guess the science isn't there since nobody has ever bothered to test every combination of settings).

 

In general though these will kill fps:

- Lightbloom;

- Autogen shadows;

- Any kind of traffic - if in an area where there is actual traffic;

- Clouds;

- Autogen.

AUTOGEN, and Traffic. (Airline, Cars, Boats)

 

 

1. You got to turn anything down with the PC-beast you've got?

 

Yes, you do. Even with a computer send down from god himself can't expect to run FSX with EVERY slider maxed, and not run into problems. I have a better computer, and I have my sliders LOW. Ai traffic at 17%, and Autogen at Normal.

 

It's not the COMPUTER, it's FSX. FSX isn't a program that can handle it. The problem is, FSX keeps getting older and older, and our computers keep getting faster and faster

 

With the 4 GB limitation, if you expect to run FSX on max settings, than you better be happy flying with the default cessna over a desert, otherwise cranking your sliders to max and trying to run the NGX, REX, UTX, REX, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP is the most ignorant thing you could ever do.

Sorry Summer, it is the computer.

FSX uses the processor to handle it's graphics. The faster the processor the better the graphics.

 

I run with most of my sliders maxed out and I manage to hold 29 to 30 FPS except over big cities with their buildings like Seattle.

 

I run an i7-290 overclocked to 3.2 Ghz and everything runs well with very little stuttering. I really do not care about FPS as much as I do about smoothness.

 

Back to the original subject --- Weather and cloud detail have a heavy hit along with heavy traffic.

Each machine is different and it requires a balance of what you want to see and what you are willing to give up.

Move the sliders one at a time, test, and then go on to the next adjustment until you max out what your machine can handle.

After you get it running right you will then load a new airplane with a high poly count and everything will go to crap again.

 

A great starting point is to read Word Not Allowed's blog.

 

~~Gypsy~~

Summer1 - i don't agree. Got a worse PC-base (2600k at 4.2GHz with GTX560Ti, WIn7 Index 7.8) - no problem running FSX smooth with the NGX, 100% AI (WoAI complete) at FSDT KLAX with HD WX graphics from Active Sky 2012 and ground environment X. SInce i upgraded my PC like a year ago - i am very happy with FSX. Even my most demanding add-on, my Maddog is finally a joy to fly.

 

I dont have everything maxed out - but only Autogen and Scenery Complexity on very dense. Dont use shadows, since they interact with my Aerosoft sceneries. I had stuttering in the beginning, but upgraded to a dedicated SSD. Since then even that is gone. So it works for me...

 

Nico

 

... I find that having no pension plan or health insurance much more ignorant than trying to max. out your FSX installation, but maybe thats just my perspective... :wink:

scenary complexity, orbx usually suggests leaving it at very dense, however, I found it hurts fps a lot on my machine, more impact than autogen...

AI traffic, ground shadows, bloom, autogen, water, cars.

Have to agree with Summer. I have an OC to 4.8 and I have to be realistic with my sliders and options. Any of us can get double or triple digits in sparse areas, but IMO the true test are the big urban areas on Approach. If your style of flying is in the bush then it shouldn't matter too much. If you want performance with complex scenery and addons, then we still have to be realistic.

 

On topic I'd say The traffic tabs have the most frame hits. Particularly the planes and cars. Autogen is next.

With the 4 GB limitation, if you expect to run FSX on max settings, than you better be happy flying with the default cessna over a desert, otherwise cranking your sliders to max and trying to run the NGX, REX, UTX, REX, ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOP is the most ignorant thing you could ever do.

 

Yeah, I couldn't agree with you more!! Here's a shot I took while blasting out of FlyTampa's St-Maaten with 26FPS and smooth as silk performance. REX. AS2012, FlyTampa St-Maarten, and FSX bloom settings.

 

To answer the original question, most systems can't handle the FSX bloom settings so start with that. Road and boat traffic are negligible however, large amounts of AI aircraft could knock your frames down but that would mainly be at larger airports during take-off/landing.