Our jouney through life with FSX is a little like the evolution of life itself :lol: .... and we're pretty early on in our DX10 evolution so I am sure that, as a community, we'll discover and crack a number of principals on how we use DX10.

 

Although my button is currently switched to DX9  while I enjoy my heavies I certainly don't regret buying the utility; it's still a great hassle free way of getting set up for DX10.

 

Although I can't back it up with any evidence at present, I intuitively feel that the reason for somewhat disappointing DX10 performance with complex or resource heavier aircraft add-ons on my rig, is more to do with the AA / AF and vsync configuration, how it is set-up and how it is constrained into requiring the RadeonPro tool, for ATI users.      

 

I'm sure the answer lies in there somewhere.

 

Just to agree with Charles on the measurement  of performance - I'm not a frame rate chaser either; and viewing the numbers comes secondary to simply measuring the visible smoothness in the sim. Unfortunately in my tests with the heavier aircraft and DX9 vs DX10, the frame rates have been meaningful; because the difference in FPS can be seen translated as less smoothness and increased jerkiness with DX10.       

 

Most notably at all;  all of my tests relate to TrackIR use, and TrackIR users demand higher FPS and fluidity due to how frequently the screen is moving around.    If I was not using TrackIR, honestly, I'd be happy with 20 FPS in almost all settings.    But when head movements become a little jerky with TrackIR, it's very noticeable. 

I am confused by the last line of your statement Steve.  Do we just add the effect to the Dx10.ini file and do we also rename it in the effects folder ?

Sorry I see the confusion.   The original question was how to avoid "converting it" when effects are enabled.   That's what I am describing - its possible to reduce the set of converted effects. 

 

However removing the effect all together is even better - provided that you don't miss it

Hello Gentlemen,

     I've been reading this thread since it came out and I'm seriously considering buying the fixer and giving the DX10 a try. I'm getting a steady 30 fps in my current DX9 using the "fsx booster 2013" program. I'm willing to give up a few fps in DX10 for better visuals and smootheness. My question is what to do with my config file? Would i still use the fsx booster program along side with the DX10 fixer to tweak the FSX config for DX10 ? Perhaps the fsx booster would no longer be of any use in the DX10 world? Thanks in advance for any help 

Sorry I see the confusion.   The original question was how to avoid "converting it" when effects are enabled.   That's what I am describing - its possible to reduce the set of converted effects. 

 

However removing the effect all together is even better - provided that you don't miss it

Steve,

 

I sent you a private message here on the forum in hopes to speak with you. Just a heads-up.

 

Thanks!

Hello Gentlemen,

     I've been reading this thread since it came out and I'm seriously considering buying the fixer and giving the DX10 a try. I'm getting a steady 30 fps in my current DX9 using the "fsx booster 2013" program. I'm willing to give up a few fps in DX10 for better visuals and smootheness. My question is what to do with my config file? Would i still use the fsx booster program along side with the DX10 fixer to tweak the FSX config for DX10 ? Perhaps the fsx booster would no longer be of any use in the DX10 world? Thanks in advance for any help 

 

FSX Booster can still be run along sided DX10 Fixer as it tweaks things not wholly related to DX10 issues.   I used FSX Booster for a while but stopped and just went back to manual editing.  I didn't like how it would update the config file while in operation and then remove all it's tweaks afterward it was closed.   I am not sure why it needs to do that instead of just setting things once and being done with it.     But anyway, I don't see why you can't use both at the same time.

Guys, could you check and confirm one thing in 737NGX (DX10):

 

In the left top corner under dx10 I can see a tiny white square, if you drag and undock it in windowed view you'll see the gauge name Light Sensor. 

 

Dirk.

 

Perfectly normal.  I asked about this on the NGX forum and it has to do with the NGX's complex systems.

 

Perhaps you're right and it is all based on the individual aircraft being used; it's complexity, modelling, texturing, effects etc.

 

Unfortunately the tests I would be interesting in seeing from others are all with complex heavy resource airliners, which you've said aren't your thing.

 

Here's a quick and dirty comparison of all of the add-on aircraft I have tested so far.  All tests at FlyTampa Vienna, with like for like settings:-

 

PMDG NGX             DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

PMDG 777              DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

PMDG MD-11          DX9 performs better by a small margin.

PMDG 747              DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

Aerosoft AXE           DX9 performs better by a small margin.

Coolsky DC-9          DX9 performs better by a significant margin.

QA 146s                  DX10 performs better by a small margin

Aerosoft T,OtterX    DX10 performs better by a small margin

A2A C172                DX10 performs better by a small margin

MilViz 732                DX9 performs better by a significant margin

Eaglesoft CX 2.0     DX9 performs better by a small margin

Carenado C208      DX10 performs better by a significant margin

 

Thanks for sharing your experience.  I think I'm noticing this with the NGX as well.  That's the only complex plane I have installed at the moment and I'm pretty sure I was getting smoother results in the VC under DX9.

Sorry I see the confusion.   The original question was how to avoid "converting it" when effects are enabled.   That's what I am describing - its possible to reduce the set of converted effects. 

 

However removing the effect all together is even better - provided that you don't miss it

 

OK thanks, I didn't realize the issue was with the affect being converted and just thought you had to get rid of it completely to improve the performance.  I guess I will try both and see what happens.

 

 

fsx booster 2013

 

I too no longer use FSX Booster 2013 since getting FSX Controller. If you do use it along side FSX Controller be cautious as I found it demotes some of your FSX settings where you may not get the full benefit of FSX Controller. At least that was my experience so far with it.

OK thanks, I didn't realize the issue was with the affect being converted and just thought you had to get rid of it completely to improve the performance.  I guess I will try both and see what happens.

 

FWIW, I was the original poster who gave Dave the idea to look at the smoke effect. In my case, the effect was already a drag on my system. Conversion appeared to make worse. I am happy to keep the FPS irrespective of the Fixer by leaving it off (no engine smoke, but worth it).

I too no longer use FSX Booster 2013 since getting FSX Controller. If you do use it along side FSX Controller be cautious as I found it demotes some of your FSX settings where you may not get the full benefit of FSX Controller. At least that was my experience so far with it.

 

Did you get any significant performance increase with FSX Booster 2013?  I'm thinking about trying it out.  I normally use Bojote's tweaking tool.

 

 

Did you get any significant performance increase with FSX Booster 2013?

 

I did BEFORE I purchased DX10 Controller. I have sent the vendor an email suggesting that they add an option to know if someone is going to be using DX10 Controller. They then can calculate some higher settings than the ones used today without DX10 Controller. FSX Booster 2013 did make it easer for some of the tweaking (which can all be done without FSX Booster 2013). I am no longer using it since installing DX10 Controller.

As a former software engineer in the game industry, I find it rather petty that people are whining and complaining about the pricetag of this item. You can't be a mutton-head off the street and write programmable shaders in DirectX. That said, you don't have to be an engineer or a rocket scientist to appreciate the amount of research, reverse engineering, testing, and iterative trial and error something like this entails. The man worked hard to provide the entire community a way out of the hole that Microsoft left FSX in. That should be rewarded. As I have been crammed into the vortex that is Windows 8.1, I use DirectX 10 exclusively (FSX under DX9 is broken). With this "fixer" almost my entire collection of aircraft and scenery products, into which I've vested hundreds of dollars, now "just work". Had MS released FS11 as a DX10 "upgrade" to FSX for $29.95, nobody would sneeze at it and we'd all be rushing to stores to secure our copy. $30 to breathe longevity into an 8-year old product. Damn. I don't know what your time is worth, but this was certainly worth mine.

 

Steve: good on ya mate. Long live capitalism.

Darn! That's a beautiful post, DAL, if I ever saw one!  I'm still amazed at some of my screenshots. What you describe has been my own experience too - completely - pretty much since June 2012, when Steve started this project..

 

Thanks for taking the time to write it!

 

All the Best,

 

pj

Yes well done DAL. Perhaps the whiners will go elsewhere to complain about how unfair life is. FSX is so much better with this investment ..... no need to upgrade to a higher speckd pc now, so have therefore saved myself hundreds of dolleroes. Well done Steve.

 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

....and why not :wink: .... Some familiar faces brighten the place up. :smile:

 

 

I've a question if anyone could help? :smile:

 

I'm a little bit thick and can't quite work out which of the BGL files I need to de-activate in the FlyTampa Dubai scenery, for the Papi / Approach lights? I see lit;s of entries for 'Nav' lights but not sure if I need to be / should be deactivating all of those.... Can anyone help be listing the BGLs that need to be removed in FlyTampa Dubai?

 

Thanks!

There is beta patch at fly tampa to fix the problem.