Where FS9 beats FSX

[mmann 72]

After setting up a number of flights and screenshots in FSX in preparation for comparing FTX Global with Ground Environment X, I really missed the lightning fast FS9 load times. I spent 99% of my FSX time looking at the load screen; B O R I N G. :Waiting:

[Hirdy2013 104]

My FSX load times are quick as.  N O T  B O R I N G.

[jetsflier 87]

How long does that really take though? Like, less than a minute.

 

Plus, what do you use flight simulation for?

Do you go on to be bored by the loading screen or do you go to fly?

 

Sorry but the load times should be the least of your worries!

[JSkorna 137]

It all depends on planes installed and your system.

[WingZ 547]

Beats me... since my fat bloated FS9.5 takes about 10 minutes to load!

But the thread is doomed,

I thought we had grown up about this stuff.

Let's send it completely out of control, and eventually the mods will make it go away.

[PittsS2B 33]

Do you have FSX installed on an SSD, Mike?  Makes a big difference in load times.  Of course, I have FS9 installed on my SSD and FSX on the main HDD, so you can see where my priorities are....

 

Still on the fence about spending gobs of money on FSX at this point, since I still enjoy the visual world of FS9 a great deal, with its more muted colors and better rain effects.  And I'm usually more concerned with flying the plane than admiring the sharper scenery, just like in real life.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

Loading is temporary, flying is eternal (well, nearly eternal ...).

[mmann 72]

 

 

Do you have FSX installed on an SSD, Mike?

 

Unfortunately both FSX and FS9 reside on a conventional hard drive. I can see now why everyone is saying that SSD is the way to go.

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

Love fs9 fly back in the 1960s era retro up fs2004. Load no difference between fsx or fs9 the sliver wings scenery and old era airports keep fs2004 on the hard drive.

[scianoir 610]

Do you have FSX installed on an SSD, Mike?  Makes a big difference in load times.  Of course, I have FS9 installed on my SSD and FSX on the main HDD, so you can see where my priorities are....

 

Still on the fence about spending gobs of money on FSX at this point, since I still enjoy the visual world of FS9 a great deal, with its more muted colors and better rain effects.  And I'm usually more concerned with flying the plane than admiring the sharper scenery, just like in real life.

 

Unfortunately my SSD is not big enough to take either my FS9 or FSX setups which have grown to become obese, but, although FS9 performs absolutley brilliantly on the rig which I just bought this year, even FSX manages a credible 30FPS (my upper limit for both sims) with most aircraft and scenery addons, providing I don't max out the scenery autogen. My FS9 load times however remain quite long often taking about 10 minutes or more, but I have many more aircraft installed there than on FSX and, as Jim says, this seems to be one of the main determinants of startup time.

 

I had previously just populated FSX with aircraft and scenery addons that came bundled for both sims when I purchased them for FS9, as, like John, having spent a shedful of money on FS9 to get it to '9.5' level, I didn't want to start spending even more on FSX. However I recently made the mistake of allowing myself to be tempted into buying some Orbx scenery (it is so good that it is now difficult to stop myself buying more!) for FSX and, detailed and all as it is, it stills runs with respectable frame rates. I am however being much more selective in the aircraft I add to FSX so loading times are still fast, unlike FS9 where I have examples of most available aircraft addons, which is great, as depending on my mood I can find almost anything I want to fly that day - I just go off and occupy myself doing something else while it's loading and look forward to the nice flight to come!

 

Bill

[FIVE-BY-FIVE 453]

get Prepar3D :ph34r: