I've been using FSX DX10 preview since it was available, if you've not seen much of a difference then you probably never got DX10 going properly. I've not been too worried about the few airports and planes not supporting DX10 properly. I've also not been worried about the flickering runways and so on. There is an app that converts addons with only DX9 textures to DX10 but that's not the purpose of Steve's app. Steve's app helps you install the modifications to stop the runway flicker and repair the taxi arrows, and then there's an improvement to the resolution of in-cockpit shadows, and also the umbrella effect rain fix, and more. These are all very nice improvements to FSX and makes it almost like a new sim.

You have to put a line into FSX.CFG to get 8xAA in DX10 mode. So doing that and enabling 2 or 4xSGSS Transparancy in nvidia inspector will be just as sharp as DX9.

 

C.

 

And your performance will then be the same or worse then DX9, at least it was when I tried to do it.

 

That 4xSGSS is just a killer.

if you've not seen much of a difference then you probably never got DX10 going properly

 

Curious what you mean by 'properly'... It's on or it's off so there isn't much you can do wrong, is there. ^_^ As I said I don't see much of a difference: maybe you do because you never got DX9 going properly...! B)

 

Still looking forward to a screenshot that shows me the visual improvements! ^_^

Properly, means there's more to it than just setting it to on, but yeah I'm exaggerating a little maybe, there's just one checkbox in FSX and really most out of the box PC's should run it up without hassle, all mine do. There's more to DX10 than just immersive views though. With DX10 running, more stuff's computed on the GPU, and the CPU is unloaded.

Properly, means there's more to it than just setting it to on, but yeah I'm exaggerating a little maybe, there's just one checkbox in FSX and really most out of the box PC's should run it up without hassle, all mine do. There's more to DX10 than just immersive views though. With DX10 running, more stuff's computed on the GPU, and the CPU is unloaded.

 

I'm gonna wait for Steve's tool before trying again.

 

Hopefully it's soon.

 

 

Anyone who scoffs at DX10 at this point, is sadly uneducated. Granted there are some add-on scenery problems...

 

Or maybe educated and not willing for whatever reason to put up with those add-on scenery problems.  It's fine if you don't own, rely on or care about a particular add-on, but if you do and if DX10 ruins your immersion, then that might be a reason to stay away.  I'm sure it's great for many people and for many purposes, but at the same time I read a lot of accounts that say, essentially, DX10 is great and I don't mind the flickering runways or the missing textures or this or that other compromise.  Maybe the people who stick with DX9 have a good-running install and don't want to destabilize it.  I hope we can all manage to coexist without scoffing at each other.

DX9 and DX10 exist separately on a system so there's never any worries when experimenting with DX10.

DX9 and DX10 exist separately on a system so there's never any worries when experimenting with DX10.

 

True, no doubt.  But last time I tried it, last fall, I wound up with seriously compromised performance - had a stutter related to AI that I couldn't get rid of.  I'm sure it was operator error, though I was also left wondering if DX10 settings don't play well with NickN's tuning, which I use.  Might also have been a coincidence.  I'll be happy to try again, probably when Steve's new installer comes out.  My only point is that a lot of the DX10 advocates are willing to live with a variety of texture-related compromises.  Right now I have a smooth-running DX9 setup and I'm reluctant to put time into experimentation.  

 

Although... I did just get an OOM with FTX Global and the Twin Otter Extended, so maybe...

 

...and so the cycle begins again...   B)

Well, I have no preference at all when it comes to DX9 or DX10: I simply use the one that works best. ^_^ Right now that's still DX9 (and I don't think Steve's tool will change that) but if someday something makes DX10 perform better than DX9 on my PC I will switch to DX10 without any problems. I think it's like this for most FSX users. I don't see anyone scoff at DX10 itself really: it's just that on some computers DX9 runs better. I still don't understand why some DX10 users feel that DX9 users are scoffing DX10 (if that's how you say it: I had to look up the word in an online dictionary. ^_^ )

Well, I have no preference at all when it comes to DX9 or DX10: I simply use the one that works best. ^_^ Right now that's still DX9 (and I don't think Steve's tool will change that) but if someday something makes DX10 perform better than DX9 on my PC I will switch to DX10 without any problems. I think it's like this for most FSX users. I don't see anyone scoff at DX10 itself really: it's just that on some computers DX9 runs better. I still don't understand why some DX10 users feel that DX9 users are scoffing DX10 (if that's how you say it: I had to look up the word in an online dictionary. ^_^ )

 

Qualify statement.... Works best for YOU. And there ain't nothing wrong with that brother. I get equally good results from both it seems at least "visually" in screenshots. But when actually in motion, I  get three improvements from DX10.

 

1. I get slightly less "shimmer" on distant airport objects from DX10 4xSSAA than I do from DX9 4xSSAA.

2. I prefer FSX's default DX10 water over ALL other water themes I have tried. I have REXE too.

3. Most importantly I SEEM to get slightly smoother flying even though both are at 30 locked. Panning with TrackIR is a tick smoother. Placebo? not sure.

 

You asked for compares. I have them in spades.... And yes. You can safely switch back and fourth DX10 and DX9 without changing anything. At least I don't seem to have to. But I don't have a cfg file full of tweaks.

 

 

As an experiment I switched between DX9 and DX10 for a simple case of the default C172 on the runway at the default Edinburgh airport in 2-D cockpit.  I used GPU-Z to get the GPU Load and Task Manager to get the Average CPU for FSX. 

 

DX9 - GPU Load 59-61%, Average CPU 25-26%, FPS 22-23 (limited to 30)

 

DX10 - GPU Load 52-57%, Average CPU 31-32%, FPS 24-25 (limited to 30)

 

I couldn't see any visual difference.

 

It would be interesting to see a similar comparison with more complex aircraft and scenery.

 

 

You asked for compares. I have them in spades

 

Thanks!!! Much appreciated! So now I know I wasn't missing something indeed. I DID read about better colors and so on with DX10 and that's why I wondered about it but your screenshots show the colors are the same. (They also show something I noticed on my PC: that with DX9 you get slightly darker area's/shadows on the ground. The different is very little but I did notice it on my own comparison screenshots and also on yours.)

 

Shimmering (or the lack of) seems the same with DX9 and DX10 on my system and obviously also depends on the GPU driver settings. Water may be nicer but not so much that I want to switch to DX10, specially since performance on average (!) is better with DX9 on my PC, and that's the most important part for me. I would like to see VC shadows but the RealAir Legacy doesn't seem to have any anyway, so that's another problem solved. ^_^

Thanks!!! Much appreciated! So now I know I wasn't missing something indeed. I DID read about better colors and so on with DX10 and that's why I wondered about it but your screenshots show the colors are the same. (They also show something I noticed on my PC: that with DX9 you get slightly darker area's/shadows on the ground. The different is very little but I did notice it on my own comparison screenshots and also on yours.)

 

Shimmering (or the lack of) seems the same with DX9 and DX10 on my system and obviously also depends on the GPU driver settings. Water may be nicer but not so much that I want to switch to DX10, specially since performance on average (!) is better with DX9 on my PC, and that's the most important part for me. I would like to see VC shadows but the RealAir Legacy doesn't seem to have any anyway, so that's another problem solved. ^_^

What's with the smug smiles all the time. Anyway.... Its smoother in DX10 for me as I said. Duke VC looks better for me. I mean the gauge outlines specifically. a lot of small benefits that if all DX10 issues were resolved, I'd pay money to switch full time.

 

C.

 

 

I read a lot of accounts that say, essentially, DX10 is great and I don't mind the flickering runways or the missing textures or this or that other compromise.

 

And thats what I mean by uneducated.. There is a dedicated forum section to this, and allot of people have worked on DX10. There is a dload in the Lib

that is free and fixes all of the above. With a little reading and installing, people can enjoy DX10 right now. The up coming payware will incorporate everything learned, and

hopefully will be a simple point, click, and fly.

 

FS11 was always in there... it just needed some TLC from the ridiculously talented people working on it... sometimes for no other reason then shear curiosity. Which believe it or not,

was pretty much how this all got started.

 

It took allot of work for most people to shoe horn FSX into their computers... and allot of money too. If D9 is working great, I would advise all in that boat to stick with it until the payware

fix is out. But if you don't mind a little reading and tweeking, you can have a near perfect DX10 up and running in no time at all. The best part is, it wont even mess with your D9.

So if I apply the payware fix, all my Fly Tampa airports will work, and all the aircraft lights will be OK?