Good day fellow simmers, and to any fellow Canadians on here, happy thanksgiving  ^_^ 

If you look at my computer specs to the side, you surely won't be impressed. I usually have scenery complexity down to dense and autogen at normal. I'm forced to run FSX on a laptop for now and the foreseeable future. As such I want to gain as many frames as possible. 

I've heard that GEX can, in a lot of cases, help improve the smoothness and/or fps in the sim ever so slightly. In that sense, GEX looks like a must-buy. However after reading a bit I've been eyeing up FTX Global. The night lights *supposedly* have no FPS impact and look absolutely stunning (I like flying at night so this is an attractive feature for me).

I'm at a tie between GEX and FTXG. I'm unsure of which one to purchase. Obviously with my PC specs, performance should take precedence. Therefore I am asking for your opinion/advice on which addon is more fps friendly for my setup and/or an overall better product. 

 

Thank-you in advance!

 

FTXG is better on textures and fps.

+1 FTXG

 

 

scenery complexity down to dense and autogen at normal.

 

Nothing wrong with that! It's higher than I would expect. 

 

pj

CNF4

 

 

I've heard that GEX can, in a lot of cases, help improve the smoothness and/or fps in the sim ever so slightly.

 

I find GEX had superior performance over FTXG.  I'm limiting this to the USA as that is the only GEX product I had installed.  I also find textures in the US quite superior in GEX over FTXG.  There are vast sections for example in the midwest and elsewhere that just look amateurish and repetitive to a fault in FTXG.  All this negativity aside, it's fabulous to have FTXG everywhere else outside of the US!  And, the 3D lights and just fabulous and impact isn't that bad at all.  If I could keep the lights and re-enable GEX for the US I would, but I'm afraid I would probably lose the 3D lights if I do re-enable GEX.  Since I did not fully uninstall GEX prior to installing FTXG, though did disable it in the GEX GUI interface, I'm a little afraid of reenabling it not having a good clue about what will happen.

I find GEX had superior performance over FTXG.  I'm limiting this to the USA as that is the only GEX product I had installed.  I also find textures in the US quite superior in GEX over FTXG.  There are vast sections for example in the midwest and elsewhere that just look amateurish and repetitive to a fault in FTXG.  All this negativity aside, it's fabulous to have FTXG everywhere else outside of the US!  And, the 3D lights and just fabulous and impact isn't that bad at all.  If I could keep the lights and re-enable GEX for the US I would, but I'm afraid I would probably lose the 3D lights if I do re-enable GEX.  Since I did not fully uninstall GEX prior to installing FTXG, though did disable it in the GEX GUI interface, I'm a little afraid of reenabling it not having a good clue about what will happen.

 

Do you use a landclass blend or only utx for landclass? that makes a big difference. Try scenerytech or fsgenesis.

My understanding is that you are mainly looking at artwork differences since the texture sizes are the same, even compared to the 'hi-res' ones from FSX itself. The size meaning the actual resolution and the file size. So those textures just get switched and what you are later experiencing as low or high fps impact is caused by how much autogen was defined per tile and how efficient that autogen is.

 

So if Orbx had a very dense pattern, you would see more autogen (with no slider altered) over textures with less annotations. Now if the autogen itself gets altered, maybe into a more detailed and/or more efficient one for the standard houses and trees, you could also end up with an impact in any direction.

 

To compare, you would have to achieve the same autogen density, being influenced by the slider and the annotations as mentioned. Since I think that Orbx is a tad bit denser, you could end up with a nice view (denser cities and forests) and a bit less of fps. I haven't checked and I also haven't taken into account the mentioned optimisations from Orbx.

 

To conclude, if your sim can run the default textures at 1024 (texture resolution slider all the way to the right), it should also be able to do the same with either GEX or Orbx Global, whereas Orbx might add the lightweight and nice night lights. GEX has a 30 day return option though.

neither product performs badly.  ORBX's autogen annotation is more dense, but due to not being bound to default fsx autogen descriptors their autogen performs much better,  since theyve optimized the texture sheets.  as far as the textures themselves,  there is zero difference in frames between any of them, since they are all just 1024 texture sheets.  only differences are in autogen, and color balance (and price).  FTXG also corrects landclass in a few areas of the world.  

 

My recommendation is for FTXG (and I do own and have used both extensively)  the colors are richer and more realistic to my eyes (NickN's argument for his product is that his textures look more like Google Earth,  but I hardly think that washed out satellite photos constitute reality,  YMMV)  If you only fly in one area,  GEX is probably more economical, since you could just buy one pack.

GEX all the way here.  The new GEX has given me performance I have never been able to achieve while also improving the 'visuals'.  I have all regions and they look stunning, especially at night ( I also love to fly at sunset/night). I now run AI at max and have a consistant 30 FPS locked no matter where I fly

 

I researched both and when I found out FTXG changes some core files in FSX and creates possible issues with other addons, that was a showstopper for me.

 

 

I find GEX had superior performance over FTXG. I'm limiting this to the USA as that is the only GEX product I had installed. I also find textures in the US quite superior in GEX over FTXG. There are vast sections for example in the midwest and elsewhere that just look amateurish and repetitive to a fault in FTXG. All this negativity aside, it's fabulous to have FTXG everywhere else outside of the US! And, the 3D lights and just fabulous and impact isn't that bad at all. If I could keep the lights and re-enable GEX for the US I would

 

+1

 

I'll add that mountains (the Rockies) look more like dirt piles than rock and even with the V1.1 patch, SW desert areas still have a an green-brown hue that's not quite right. The Grand Canyon, for example, is so poorly rendered that last week I flew right over it at relatively low altitude and had i not checked my location, would have missed it.

 

OTOH, FTXG 3D lights are really nice - but to get the full benefit I must run my autogen sliders at higher settings than I ran GEX - and there is a noticeable impact on the smoothness of my sim as a result. The Vector Lights are a separate animal - akin to UTX road lighting. Also brilliant, but also slightly performance hungry.

 

I'm sticking with FTXG, mainly because the lighting looks so good and I get world wide coverage, but I hope Orbx continues to tweak the scenery textures and the forthcoming vector/landclass extensions improve the experience.

I'm sticking with FTXG, mainly because the lighting looks so good 

 

From what I've seen so far, the lights look incredible and are making me VERY tempted to buy global for them alone- though my main issue, I suppose, should really be FPS. My laptop can run fsx at decent settings (most scenery sliders to the right except for mesh, and scenery complexity and atuogen density at mid-low as mentioned before) but my main focus is to help improve the situation. 

 

My understanding is that you are mainly looking at artwork differences since the texture sizes are the same, even compared to the 'hi-res' ones from FSX itself. The size meaning the actual resolution and the file size. So those textures just get switched and what you are later experiencing as low or high fps impact is caused by how much autogen was defined per tile and how efficient that autogen is.

 

So if Orbx had a very dense pattern, you would see more autogen (with no slider altered) over textures with less annotations. Now if the autogen itself gets altered, maybe into a more detailed and/or more efficient one for the standard houses and trees, you could also end up with an impact in any direction.

 

To compare, you would have to achieve the same autogen density, being influenced by the slider and the annotations as mentioned. Since I think that Orbx is a tad bit denser, you could end up with a nice view (denser cities and forests) and a bit less of fps. I haven't checked and I also haven't taken into account the mentioned optimisations from Orbx.

 

To conclude, if your sim can run the default textures at 1024 (texture resolution slider all the way to the right), it should also be able to do the same with either GEX or Orbx Global, whereas Orbx might add the lightweight and nice night lights. GEX has a 30 day return option though.

 

Interesting points. I have heard that Orbx optimized the autogen significantly, but how much of an fps increase would that translate to, if at all? 

Nothing wrong with that! It's higher than I would expect. 

 

Surprisingly if I set them at anything else (even lowering them) I will get worse performance...  :huh:

 

 

 

Thank-you all for your input. I'm still on the fence about this, and likely will be for awhile. I'm currently leaning towards FTXG because the night environment looks absolutely incredible....but at the same time I want to make sure that I'm not spending $100 on something that could potentially bog down my already low fps. As well, it is ambiguous as to which product has better textures. Lots of mixed opinions exist on which is better.

 

Just out of curiosity, to any of you that fly in Canada, (that's where I fly the most) which product looks the best, in your opinion(s)? How do the winter textures look?

 

I suppose much more research is in order before I make my decision  B) but needless to say each product seems wonderful in their own way- they are true symbols of the incredible dedication and talent that the flight sim community possesses. Guess I can't go too wrong with either. 

+1

 

I'll add that mountains (the Rockies) look more like dirt piles than rock and even with the V1.1 patch, SW desert areas still have a an green-brown hue that's not quite right. The Grand Canyon, for example, is so poorly rendered that last week I flew right over it at relatively low altitude and had i not checked my location, would have missed it.

 

OTOH, FTXG 3D lights are really nice - but to get the full benefit I must run my autogen sliders at higher settings than I ran GEX - and there is a noticeable impact on the smoothness of my sim as a result. The Vector Lights are a separate animal - akin to UTX road lighting. Also brilliant, but also slightly performance hungry.

 

I'm sticking with FTXG, mainly because the lighting looks so good and I get world wide coverage, but I hope Orbx continues to tweak the scenery textures and the forthcoming vector/landclass extensions improve the experience.

 

That isn't really fair, to expect a general texture program to properly render the Grand Canyon. You should be using the photoreal scenery created by Holger a few years ago.

Maybe unfair, but as a general texture program, GEX does it better. Besides, it was just an example. GEX still renders much of North America, particularly the SW and Rocky Mountains better than FTXG IMHO. But I'm prepared to give Orbx the benefit of their landclass and vector offerings and hopefully a few updates to whip FTXG into shape.

Both very good products. I use FTXG because it's cheaper than GEX. I fly all around the world, not just one region. And if you want those night lights without FTXG you need to buy another addon (like Beetle Print's Experience X, great program btw) which will cost you 20-30 bucks at least. Discount that from FTXG's price tag, you see it's coming very cheap. Plus, they're releasing freeware airports for FTXG now.

 

I have all of FTX regions so I didnt get FTXG because I already have GEX for the regions I rarely fly However let me say this, I find myself flying Europe Gex more and more and ts become my number one region due to the stunning Gex textures (autumn) and Europe looks very very real with mesh, land class and GEX

 

performance impact is zero. I cant comment on FTXG as I dont have it

 

 

but at the same time I want to make sure that I'm not spending $100 on something that could potentially bog down my already low fps

 

I was running 29-30 FPS with GEX North American and kept the same after switching to FTXG.  However, no two systems, even those with similar CPUs and GPUs, are the same, so your mileage may vary.

 

In the end, you'll only know by making the leap.

 

BTW, my main motivation for making the switch was simple economics.  I wanted to fly outside NA and FTXG gave me a better bang for the buck. 

 

Ernie