It doesn't take much to wind you lot up does it? :rolleyes:  FS20 is having a good tee hee. :lol:

FSX runs fine for me. No OOM, stutters, etc.

 

Must be something on your end.

FSX runs great for me.  You just need enough computer for it to run properly.  Take a look at the post just above this one with the screenshots from FS2, Tomahawk, etc.  Then tell us again that FSX is disgusting.

To the original poster:

 

"Do you think for even a minute that I or other members of this forum who fly FSX would tolerate an unstable system like yours?"   Not a chance!  I fly FSX every day with Zero problems.  My system can handle it and I've installed every addon with a conscientiousness that is required by those that take this wonderful hobby seriously.

 

Stan

Accepting this is hard, but hes right in some way. the engine is....well no comment.

I think Phil Taylor did some remarkable work to improve this, but from the beginning on, this simulator was simply no good from a technical pov.

 

I don't think FSX's code has much to do with it. I think it's just the amount of things that need to be rendered. I mean compare a small, hand tuned for performance game world to a huge hundred million square mile world. With hundreds of thousands of objects, shadows for each object, reflections, etc, that need to be rendered while you fly. Not to mention aircraft physics, etc.

Physics? theres not much to calculate in FSX regarding this. the code is old. "refurbished". 

Well we don't need to render everything, espetially not those we don't see.

Love FSX but like Dirty Harry said, " you have to know your limitations".

Physics? theres not much to calculate in FSX regarding this. the code is old. "refurbished". 

 

Well it was coded in 2005 or so, not 2014. Most programs back then only ran on one core (games or otherwise), and didn't even use SLI. Not so much old code, but that's the tools they had to work with back in the day.

Back in 2005, it was already old. Yes, FSX still looks stunning with decent Addons (I also hav REX, PMDG, Airports).

But theres just 1 simple thing we hav to accept: the code could be way better, especially the scheduler. 

Well it was coded in 2005 or so, not 2014. Most programs back then only ran on one core (games or otherwise), and didn't even use SLI. Not so much old code, but that's the tools they had to work with back in the day.

Actually, it was coded far earlier than that. The code is ancient and not suitable for modern hardware. This is why we're getting pathetic framerates, even tho the software was released 9 years ago

When MS was designing SP1's multi-core capabilities (working with Intel), they had to choose between visual quality and performance. They lent more towards using multicore for visual quality as opposed to improving the framerate. Moving the terrain threads off to their own cores, etc.

 

 

Actually, it was coded far earlier than that. The code is ancient and not suitable for modern hardware. This is why we're getting pathetic framerates, even tho the software was released 9 years ago

 

So if it was coded recently (with 64-bit) we would be able to run all the sliders full right at 60 FPS with a LOD radius of 60 (as opposed to 4.5)?

Is it cool and shady there under the bridge?

I think what many people on this thread don't tend to accept is the fact that, even though they might be running FSX with tons of addons in a smooth and error-free manner, we're in the year 2014 and FSX was released almost 10 years ago. High-end PC's of *today* are driving a 10 year-old application in an "acceptable" way. That's something really unheard of in the computer world, think about that, it really shows how badly FSX was designed.

 

When FSX was released in 2005 no PC was able to run it. That wasn't the case with FS9 (or any other FS for the matter). That's the sad thing about FSX.

 

 

I predict people quoting me and saying they could run it perfectly from release date with a normal PC and so on, in which case I surrender.

Is it cool and shady there under the bridge?

 

Oh come on... that's out of tone...