Something must be wrong with my FSX installation: After a 16 hour flight I need to go to sleep ...   :rolleyes:

Working great. Never crashes. Just recently rebuilt and moved to DX10 mode too. No probs there either.

 

I think the i7 CPU's a few years ago were the catch up point for FSX performance and the great overclocks you could get. Now my rig would be bare minimum for FSX I think but it runs superb.

Something must be wrong with my FSX installation: After a 16 hour flight I need to go to sleep ...   :rolleyes:

Never said i didn't sleep through them

I put option 3. Most of my crashes are a classic case of PEBKAC. But some are related to high end payware gauges now and again.

 

Ironically I have about as many CTDs in FSX as I do in XPX.

Where's the "I'm still using FS9 because it performs better and looks just as good as the FSX settings I have to run at" option? :lol:

Where's the "I'm still using FS9 because it performs better and looks just as good as the FSX settings I have to run at" option? :lol:

 

I didn't intend the poll to be about performance so much as stability. In my mind a drop in framerate now and then doesn't significantly affect my enjoyment while not being able to complete a flight due to CTDs does. As I said in the opening post "running fine" doesn't necessarily mean 30 fps etc, just working good enough to be enjoyable. If you leave FS9 out of the equation I'm sure you can find an option that works for you.

 

Also I don't want this to turn into yet another FSX vs FS9 thread. There are plenty of those around for those of you who feel like banging your heads against a wall for a while.

There is a missing reply: I left FSX altogether for other sim.  Which would apply to me, I went to Prepar3D and never look back, although there are several costly add-ons I can no longer use, those that I can use work flawlessly.  I used to fight CTD and spent more time tweaking than flying,  not anymore.  

In a few years maybe Prepar3d will be as compatible as widely as FSX.

 

I'm not holding my breath. Big companies that rely heavily on federal subsidy for their continued existence rarely move quickly, or effectively. Prepar3D is not high on LM's priority list, I am sure. Which means less and slower progress than the original development of FSX.

 

Less and slower perhaps, but it'll be a damn sight more aviation and realism oriented than Microsoft did. Case in point: Microsoft Flight, reusing FSX material to make Train Simulator 2012 (that never made it to the shelves even though it was ready to sell), ...
And even if it's slower, there's still progress. I remember people wondering what the hubbub was when Prepar3D just released. Now all I hear about it is praise for its stability and under the hood improvements.

J van E, on 24 May 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

I can't believe so many people vote 1...! FSX was utter crap until SP2...! It's even utter crap now on a brand new PC unless you install SP1. Imho...

The key here is the "imho" part. I dumped FS9 and all my payware when FSX was released and while the SPs did make things better, I was happy with what I had before them. I have never had an OOM error or a BSD at any time on two systems. FSX has been stable. If anything, it's addons that have issues, not the sim. I tweaked my sim early on and have not compromised that for any addon. if the addon didn't meet my performance window, it was gone.

<p>The poll is about FSX not FS9 or Preprar3ed.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Most who use and love FSX do so because they have zero problems</p>

<p> </p>

I finally gave up on this hobby! After months of frustration, I finally did it. Sold my PC, yoke, pedals, software  and even anything that remotely relate to FSX :-).

 

The upside of this, now i have time to complete my MBA :-).

 

 

I finally gave up on this hobby! After months of frustration, I finally did it. Sold my PC, yoke, pedals, software  and even anything that remotely relate to FSX :-).

 

The upside of this, now i have time to complete my MBA :-).

I don't blame you.  Two years and thousands of dollar spent, I was about to do the same as you until I moved to P3D. No crash no fuss no tweaks, finally I can concentrate on the aircraft and flying.  LM is working on version 2.0 and it will be much better than the current version.  To be fair to the survey, the question was asked about current users of FSX.  So I will now hold my peace.

Less and slower perhaps, but it'll be a damn sight more aviation and realism oriented than Microsoft did. Case in point: Microsoft Flight, reusing FSX material to make Train Simulator 2012 (that never made it to the shelves even though it was ready to sell), ...

 

And even if it's slower, there's still progress. I remember people wondering what the hubbub was when Prepar3D just released. Now all I hear about it is praise for its stability and under the hood improvements.

 

Sunaru I do agree that if the team can have the sustained funding and quiet support needed to continue to move forward deliberately, good things will come of it (already have).

 

I'd much rather have an actively-supported version of FSX than the corpse MS made.

 

Time will tell; I just don't trust big companies to do anything right. I mean, look: wrecked world economy. A bunch of independent small startups didn't cause that.

I finally gave up on this hobby! After months of frustration, I finally did it. Sold my PC, yoke, pedals, software and even anything that remotely relate to FSX :-).

Since you're still posting here on the FSX forum looks like you didn't give everything up.

 

From day one back in Nov. 2006, all the runtime issues with FSX I've had were due to one or more categories of 'user error'. Not to say that things weren't bad at times; it's more a matter of knowing what works and what doesn't, and being content with what does.