FSX-MS Frame rate friendly airports

[doublebubble 20]

Can anyone advise on experience of which is is best frame rate friendly airport addons?

 

Cheers Rod.

 

[tonywob 4,769]

Depends where you want to fly. I find the UK2000 regional airports (Not London) frame-rate friendly. I'm also a big fan of Drzwiecki Design's Polish airports, which produce excellent frame-rates and look great.

 

I have a few in Australia, mainly OrbX, but found most of them to be killers, especially Melbourne.

[fwerff 70]

FlyTampa airports also score excellent in the FPS area!

 

[IAF747 8]

Flytampa is the best if you are seeking good frame rates. Quality made Addons and expert developers. Their newest OMDB Dubai with the city is astounding! And so good on frames.

[Mo45 32]

FlyTampa airports are the best.

 

Mo

[machine2035 176]

I have a few in Australia, mainly OrbX, but found most of them to be killers, especially Melbourne.

Yeah unfortunately most of the Australian airports made by Orbx where during their first few years of producing scenery and therefore where before their developers developed their skills and techniques for making efficient scenery. Brisbane and Melbourne are probably their two worst products in regards to performance (Brisbane is visually stunning).

 

However, if you look at Broome, which was released only earlier this year (in lieu to Melbourne which was released I think 3 or 4 years ago), it runs as smooth as silk. It obviously also helps that Broome is pretty much in the middle of nowhere and a relatively small aerodrome.

 

Can anyone advise on experience of which is is best frame rate friendly airport addons?

 

Cheers Rod.

Back to the OP's question;

 

Probably contrary to many peoples experiences, I find FSDT and FlightBeam scenery to be exceptionally good on performance. I have no issues maintaining 40fps in the NGX VC with displays full of information (route, range rings, VOR course lines etc.) at LAX and IAD. It is amazing considering the amount of detail which are in these sceneries.

 

You will also probably find that scenery which aren't using custom 3D ground polygons and/or photoreal imagery around the airport will run a whole lot better than those that do. Really its just a balancing game of visuals vs performance. I am happy to sacrifice a small percentage of fps if the visual gain is quite high, however this changes among the FS demographics.

[doublebubble 20]

Thanks guy's as I do own a few UK2000, Orbx, Aerosoft ones and find them not to bad on frames as I do fly the heavies and mostly long haul so will definately try Fly Tampa, big bold and beautiful is what I like.

 

Cheers Rod.

[tonywob 4,769]

I might also add that Aerosoft's airports seem pretty light on frames, at least for me. Another great package is their German Airports. They look and work great on my system

[Q_flyer 766]

Some Aerosoft titles are definitely not light on frames though;  Mega Airport's; Amsterdam, Paris CDG and Heathrow come to mind!

 

FlyTampa are the best for detail vs performance, in my experience. 

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

I might also add that Aerosoft's airports seem pretty light on frames, at least for me. Another great package is their German Airports. They look and work great on my System

 

 

By and large, yes.

 

Pls. be aware that A/Ps like LEMD, LHBP and EHAM (maybe also LPPT, but that one runs fine for me) are also Aerosoft Mega Airports, quite some system burdens, actually ...  

 

 

 

EDIT: Hi, Dave, quite some good catches, as well!  

Edited August 8, 2013 by olli4740

[zmak 331]

Pacific simulations , nearly zero hit in the PMDG and some exotic locations

[tonywob 4,769]

Some Aerosoft titles are definitely not light on frames though;  Mega Airport's; Amsterdam, Paris CDG and Heathrow come to mind

Actually, you are right there. I have Paris, and it's a killer for me. Most of the others, e.g. Nice, work fantastic for me though

[Rocky_53 1,579]

I agree with what most has been said, Fly Tampa airports run really well in my experience. Worst is FSDT and some of the big Aerosoft airports... eg, Barcelona, Madrid, CDG, Amsterdam, Heathrow etc.  Come to think of it, I'll download another Fly Tampa airport as I type!

[FloG 148]

 

 

Worst is FSDT

That may well be true for most of their releases and is probably at least to a certain extent due to the location of those airports (e.g. Vancouver, JFK, LAX), but some others run quite nicely IMO, for example McCarran KLAS or Geneva LSGG. I'd recommend to try the demo before buying FSDT airports, though.

[Airbus Commander 563]

I've always loved Eiresim airports, easy on the frames and Irish too... 

 

Fly Tampa is great too, particularly their Dubai, Montreal and Athens

 

Aerosoft Nice, Ibiza, Madeira and Innsbruck are great too, but Aerosoft can be hit and miss as they have a lot of airports from different developers.

 

FSDT Geneva is easy on the frames, but their JFK and YVR are a bit heavier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWU0PTIJ_Dw

 

Regards,

Ró

 

Edit: Anyone know why the last 3 videos aren't displaying a preview? I put the same [*youtube][*/youtube] codes around them and everything...

Edited August 8, 2013 by Rónán O Cadhain