Whether to buy the 777?

[SamH 0]

Evening gents

 

I'm not entirely sure if this is the right place to post this but I'm sure the mods will move it to the relevant place if required.

 

Essentially, I'm looking for user experiences of the 777, because I'm thinking of upgrading my computer at some point in the near future and if sufficient funds make themselves available, I'm interested in a high quality 777 (PMDG's being the clear frontrunner based on what I can see). The truth being known, I don't get overly terrible performance from FSX out of this current system (I'll put specs in my profile as and when I get chance) in most cases, I get decent performance out of the 747X at times, but I'm fairly sure that the 777 would stretch it to it's limits. That said, my main platform is still FS9 (both the 747 and the NG are particular favourites of mine) because I get very good performance on it but obviously, developers have moved past this and I'm going to have to as well at some point.

 

I'm just wondering how the 777 compares to the 747X, LDS 767X, which are the two best aircraft I currently own for FSX, how it affects your system in terms of memory usage, frames per second and so on? Reviews everywhere rave about it, quite rightly I'm sure given my past experience of PMDG's work, but I'm wondering about the experiences of other users too? Any help would be much appreciated.

 

Best Regards

 

Sam 

[hopskip 253]

[jetsflier 87]

First of all, could you post your system specs so we can try to judge based on that?

 

Obviously every system will be different but there are obvious cans and can-nots of each system.

[Dickens 1]

I'm not sure about performance differences, but the 777 is a joy to fly. If you can fly the 747, I don't think you'll have a big performance impact.

[Tatave 57]

The performance impact for me is actually less than the NGX. 

[Dickens 1]

The performance impact for me is actually less than the NGX. 

 

Same, the 737 is more intensive on my system, not that I notice an framerate drop, but there is a drop.

[Budbud 227]

Hi,

 

I own the three birds you talk about to compare them, here are my feelings (however, I won't put any values as they depend on each system and setting)

 

fsp use:

_ 1) LDS 767 is the best far ahead of others but the graphics are far behind!

_ 2) PMDG B777 much better than B747 both for fps and graphics

_ 3) PMDG B747-400X which is the worst in terms of fps but better in graphics than the LDS.

 

VAS use:

_ 1) LDS 767 far better, no OOMs but same as for the fps, low graphics quality compared to others

_ 2) & 3) roughly equal B777 and B747. Probably due to my settings but I have OOMs problems with both after approximatively 7h ou 8h flights when using high quality sceneries at departure (but both allow to reboot fsx with a saved flight and restored condition to complete the flight).

 

The LDS 767 for me is a definitely no go (anymore, though I loved it) because of the old VC that is not complete with pop up only FMCs and flat switches. 

I kept flying with it before the T7 was released because it runs way smoother than the B747 but now the B777 is out and the 767 can't stand the comparison.

 

To conclude the B777 runs much smoother than the B747 and less than the LDS 767 but the graphics, the VC and the system depth are all far better and make me choose it with no hesitation.

[Cristi_Neagu 134]

The performance impact for me is actually less than the NGX. 

 

 

Same, the 737 is more intensive on my system, not that I notice an framerate drop, but there is a drop.

 

I wonder if that is because the 777 is better optimized in general, or better optimized for new generation hardware (as in, the 737 would perform better on older hardware).

 

I'm considering the 777 too, but i'm worried about hardware limitations. I don't want to pay $90 for a pretty slideshow. My hardware isn't that new, but i can run the NGX at 20fps mostly anywhere, and i would say the comfort limit for me is 15fps. Below that it's just unusable. And i know most people would consider 30fps as the absolute bottom limit, but i got used to low framerates

 

With all that being said, i did hear plenty of people say the 777 is easier on the frames than the 737, and that there's a beta tester with a 2GHz PC, or something like that. So yeah... it's still on the table for me.

[SamH 0]

I've put my specs in my profile gents so you can get a better idea of what I'm working with. I have to admit, it looks phenomenal in that video.

 

Best

Sam

[Avwriter 85]

I wonder if that is because the 777 is better optimized in general, or better optimized for new generation hardware (as in, the 737 would perform better on older hardware).

 

I'm considering the 777 too, but i'm worried about hardware limitations. I don't want to pay $90 for a pretty slideshow. My hardware isn't that new, but i can run the NGX at 20fps mostly anywhere, and i would say the comfort limit for me is 15fps. Below that it's just unusable. And i know most people would consider 30fps as the absolute bottom limit, but i got used to low framerates

 

With all that being said, i did hear plenty of people say the 777 is easier on the frames than the 737, and that there's a beta tester with a 2GHz PC, or something like that. So yeah... it's still on the table for me.

Having looked at your specs, they are pushing the bottom end a bit.  Quad core CPU and a 1-gig vid card would help a lot.  That being said, I think it is reasonably likely that the 777 will run at least as well as the NGX on your machine, likely a touch better (don't expect a dramatic improvement).  Your mileage may vary, but this would be consistent with the experiences of many here, including myself.  Do be sure to follow the optimization suggestions in the introduction manual; they have helped many here gain a few extra FPS.

 

Andrew Jones

[Cristi_Neagu 134]

Having looked at your specs, they are pushing the bottom end a bit.  Quad core CPU and a 1-gig vid card would help a lot.  That being said, I think it is reasonably likely that the 777 will run at least as well as the NGX on your machine, likely a touch better (don't expect a dramatic improvement).  Your mileage may vary, but this would be consistent with the experiences of many here, including myself.  Do be sure to follow the optimization suggestions in the introduction manual; they have helped many here gain a few extra FPS.

 

Andrew Jones

Thanks for the reply.

 

Yeah, i know my computer is a bit old (well... maybe more than a bit). And i did follow optimization guides, including the one by Tabs here on the forum. If it runs at least as good as the NGX, then i'll wait for SP1 and maybe get it.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

Sam flies the NG in FS9, not in FSX!!

 

Sam, do you use virtual cockpits or 2D cockpits?

[SamH 0]

Sorry for the confusion fellas, Oliver's right I do fly the NG on FS9, I didn't get it for FSX for much the same reasons as the 777. And Oliver, I tend to use 2D for the takeoff and landing portion of the flight, but use the virtual cockpit in climb, cruise and descent.

 

Best

Sam

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

O.k., the B777 does not have a 2D cockpit (2D popups - yes, cockpit in 2D - no).

 

So there will be an additional strain on your system, because you will have to use the VC while on/near the ground (= while in heavy scenery).

 

The B777 is rather smooth even with lower frame rates, but I'm not sure what the fps could be with your current rig.

[pcubine 143]

Is the Windows 7 you list in My PC 32 bit or 64 bit?