Hi,

 

I've been running P3D since day one. For me P3D is worth every penny, ver. 2.0 more-so than prior versions. Why?... Well, I have hardware that is capable of utilizing P3D's advance capabilities, such as DirectX11. I have a GTX690 board, so once SLI is introduced (next update ?) I'll get an additional boost without spending another dime.

 

So, if you have the hardware to utilize what P3D brings to the table........ then yes, it's time to make the move. On the other hand, if your setup does not have the ability to use these new features, then I'd stay put for now.

P3D V2 is the future but it's still a work in progress which has already been mentioned in this thread. I wouldn't personally start building a new rig to fly V2 flat out, wait until the update comes out to fix some of the issues and than look at what hardware you need. Remember P3D V2 is nothing like FSX, we won't be waiting years for hardware to catch or basically pulling our hair out when we drop $2,000 on a high end machine and still have issues with stutters and FPS. Imo FSX is old, poorly coded. V2 on the other hand should be better in respects to taking advantage of modern hardware.

 

With all that been said I've gone back to FSX until P3D V2 matures. I'm just happy that we have a new simulator which we can look forwarded to.

As someone who has had a short love affair with P3Dv2 and has returned to FSX, I would say to anyone, at this moment in time, wait for 6 months until all, or most, of the issues have been dealt with. It will also allow time for many of the developers to release patches/updates to their sceneries and aircraft products to make them compatible with P3Dv2, which, at the moment, most are not!

 

Not picking on you Howard, BUT ........ if I had taken your advice last month, I would not have enjoyed the opportunity I have had to enjoy both P3Dv2 and FSX for the past month, AND the next 6 months as you suggest  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

I want to make sure I'm future proofing my system for that future switch to P3D, so is a GTX780 absoiltelt critical, or can I get away with a 770 and still have most things maxed out? For reference, the exact system I'm looking at is here: http://m.futureshop.ca/defaultpage.aspx?lang=en#/catalog/productdetails.aspx?ajax=true&sku=10254784〈=en-CA

 

Do a search of this forum. From what I have seen, a GTX770 4GB is working well with P3Dv2 and will probably allow for some expansion as they bring out the service packs and enhancements.

I also believe FSX is 'good 'nuf' and beats P3DV2 in several departments, but many users find themselves intrigued w/ the subtle differences in visuals & smoothness, enough to put up w/ its warts. I also am not quite 100% in agreement w/ the optimism for the future of P3D. Most folks here seems to consider a brighter, better future for P3D a virtual certainty. I'm cautiously optimistic is as good as I can get at the moment. If the rendering engine continues to improve in certain ways, including better AA, and something very few folks mention and that is a zone of low resolution that is not that far out from the eye point. As far as I know there is no parameter the user can change to affect this. At night, in large metro areas w/ 3D lights shining, this translates to an unnatural looking line of demarcation between in focus and low resolution. This is so in FSX as well but maybe because of the object higher density in V2 it's more visible. Even so, the HDR lighting and dynamic shadowing add something that as I say makes one tolerate the immaturity of P3D V2. I just hopped in the RA Turbine Duke and flew from KSBA Santa Barbara CA to Temecula CA at dusk and it was quite amazing indeed. And I don't have either ASN nor REX4.

 

FSX is not good 'nuf said' over P3D v2 for the simple fact it's a dead platform. That being said I agree with everything else you said. FSX is/was not built for today's HW and there's no active support for it from MS. The sight distance issue is a problem. By all means post this observation on LM's forum, it'll get a better chance of getting looked at versus the response you'll get from MS about this issue in FSX. That people fail to realize is the difference at this point. When there's no option for support and product growth versus a product that does offer this, FSX is not the logical option anymore.

Not picking on you Howard, BUT ........ if I had taken your advice last month, I would not have enjoyed the opportunity I have had to enjoy both P3Dv2 and FSX for the past month, AND the next 6 months as you suggest  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

 

Hi ANZ, sure, you make a good point, while installing P3Dv2 there's no reason of course why you can't continue with FSX alongside, which is what most people do anyway, I guess. It's just that I think it's important for those who are considering the move, do so, knowing what awaits them  :wink: 

Not picking on you Howard, BUT ........ if I had taken your advice last month, I would not have enjoyed the opportunity I have had to enjoy both P3Dv2 and FSX for the past month, AND the next 6 months as you suggest  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

 

Do a search of this forum. From what I have seen, a GTX770 4GB is working well with P3Dv2 and will probably allow for some expansion as they bring out the service packs and enhancements.

Exactly: I have a 2600K (two generations ago) but it all comes to life in P3D2 with a 770 4GB. Smooth and good fps. I'm not going back.

Is this an opinion or is there some factual study to base the statement on? IMO, one addon isnt going to make that big of a difference. Personally, I find ASN and FSX to perform and look just fine.

If you look at the results of the AVSim demographic survey, the most popular primary sim is FSX, followed by FS9, P3D and XPlane. That is not likely to change much in the near future. But if I was upgrading my hardware, I would definitely go with P3d2, as it is not a legacy product. It makes excellent use of your GPU, so don't skimp there.

I'm also on the sidelines on P3DV2.I have a great P3D1.4 running with most of my FSX addons that I enjoy.As a FTX/Orbx user I think when all their products become compatible with P3DV2 I'll make the jump.

I love P3Dv2. I also enjoyed v1.4, which is what I jumped to from FS9. I don't blame any FSX user who has invested a lot of time and money getting FSX running smoothly to take a wait and see approach regarding P3Dv2. If, you are not one of those people, then just go P3Dv2.

 

I just upgraded my GTX660 Ti to a GTX 770 and am very happy with my decision. I felt the 4GB memory I get with the 770 was a better investment than the little performance gain I would have gotten from a GTX 780 with 3 GB memory. It's another debate you'll get lots of heated opinions about. Another option is to just wait for the 800 series GPU's to be released in the Spring. I'm not one to jump on the new technology bus right out of the gate, but some do. Just a thought.

 

Todd

 

 

FSX is not good 'nuf said' over P3D v2

 

You twisted those words Dillon, I never said 'nuf said' I said FSX was  good 'nuf [of a simulator] to continue using to Matthew's question about how absolutely necessary it was to make the switch...

You twisted those words Dillon, I never said 'nuf said' I said FSX was  good 'nuf [of a simulator] to continue using to Matthew's question about how absolutely necessary it was to make the switch...

 

 

Maybe in the context of what you were trying to say it would have been better to had just spelled 'enough' out to be clear.  Sometimes abbreviation commonly used in texting and Facebook can come off not clear enough for everybody.  

Ive got a fairly lowly spec pc and old gtx460 graphics card bought p3dv2 for a month, its good but I won't be rushing to buy a pro license.  I play FSX literally just play for an hour to fly between one aerodrome to another using ORBX england and REX as addons.  I uses planes like the the Cessna 172 and Mooney and it probably does what I need it to do and difficult to justify spending hundreds to run P3Dv2 better.    At the moment my addons don't work and I don't want to go back to default scenery.  Another thing, the graphics engine doesn't feel fully optimised to me yet, considering the quality of graphics my lowly PC can run from big block buster software houses it feels to me like the whole engine needs more work to allow it to perform as it should, having to buy GTX780 to run a flight sim isn't right in my opinion.  This might the problem with trying to drag a relatively old graphics engine into a more advanced era.