Guys, 

 

I don't know how you get such a good performance but I am rather dissapointed with the new Heathrow..

 

With the Airbus Xtended in VC I get 16-19 fps, while I get 30fps at FlyTampa Athens.

 

I know Heathrow is huge, but do you have any suggestion to gain more fps? I can't enjoy at all taxing and using TrackIR with shutters..neither

taking-off in a flat external scenery.

 

CPU: i5 3570K @ 4.4Ghz,

GPU: GTX660 OC

 

16-19fps is not that bad and frankly you shouldn't have problems with those numbers if your fsx.cfg is in order. I would save it and then delete the fsx.cfg and let it build a new one, add HIGHMEMFIX=1  to graphics section and see what happens.

 

You can get smooth at 16-19fps !

16-19fps is not that bad and frankly you shouldn't have problems with those numbers if your fsx.cfg is in order. I would save it and then delete the fsx.cfg and let it build a new one, add HIGHMEMFIX=1 to graphics section and see what happens.

 

You can get smooth at 16-19fps !

Expecting panning around in a complex v/c using TIR to be smooth @ 16-19 FPS will leave you disappointed in my book no matter what your fsx.cfg looks like and especially so if you're used to higher numbers.

You can get smooth at 16-19fps

 

Exactly. I am seldom getting more than 15-20 FPS at mega airports (EGLL, EDDF, LFPG, EHAM) but since I don't expect more, that doesn't prevent me from enjoyment. Sure, I can significantly lower the AI, reduce autogen a lot, turn off road and water traffic, install low res textures and so on, but then I would lose most I switched from FS9 to FSX for.

 

As many of you write, some sacrifice must be made somewhere. For me it is living with lower performance at huge airports.

As it happens I fly only pax/cargo jets (except for Q400) and love big airports, with EDDF being my personal favourite.

And I've got through all this: buying a new PC, tweaking, lowering sliders, reducing textures, messing with fsx.cfg, etc.

Now I know where my reasonable golden middle is. And the price to pay is around having 15 FPS on average at largest airports. That's OK.

 

Coming back to the very topic, UK2000 EGLL gives me very low performance, even for my taste. I know it is, to a degree, due to its size and location.

But encouraged by some posts here and at the Aerosoft forums, I am almost decided to buy this new version. Especially that I am entitled to the discount.

 

Thanks everyone for your precious input.

Egll is the only airport I can't fly into with the 777, uk2000 and aerosoft without an oom

 

Klax dream team without ai is fine, as it cyvr dream team

 

All the others flytampa , taxi2gate, Latin vfr etc etc... All fine... Just bloody egll...my home airport

Thank you for your replies!

 

I already deleted and recreated the fsx.cfg using no tweaks and progressively the basic tweaks commonly used, but the same 16-19fps. It will only increase if I remove the autogen, but I can't stand the flat terrain.

 

Richard I agree with you, maybe TrackIR makes the experience worse in my case.

Yeah, I believe so too that TIR makes low FPS more apparent.

Folks,

I will probably buy this scenery. However, worried i'll mess it up, is there any way to keep UK2000 V2 installed but deactivated, and have SW's version installed and active?  

Might be as easy as unchecking the UK2000 scenery entry/entries in the scenery library.

 

Not 100% sure though if there might be some files that could interfere between the two products but maybe someone else who already have both products could confirm that.

Well I guess I could try it out, eh! Although a confirmation would be liked, too!

I just asked this on the Aerosoft forums but I guess I could ask here too, what's it like for AES support? I hear it's coming soon, a "new version", but I don't know if its a new version of heathrow or AES...It's been a long day and my brain right now is a bit like cold starting an old radial engine!

What's needed is a new version that will hopefully include compatibility both for this new EGLL scenery as well as other newly released sceneries.

 

I have a couple of sceneries I'll buy as soon as there's AES compatibility in place.

So it is AES?

In your opinion, is it worth buying Heathrow now, or wait? Purely your opinion!

Yes, it's AES that needs to be updated to support this scenery.

 

Personally I think I'll buy this scenery since the UK2000 version of EGLL is one of very few airports where I notice a FPS issue despite a fairly powerful computer.

 

However I will not buy this new scenery until an updated version of AES with support for this scenery has been released since I use the services provided by AES on each and every flight.

OK! Final question...s!

1) Credit packs will still be needed, right?
2) Do we know when this new version will be released?

UK2000 Heathrow Xtreme version 3 performs reasonably well on my PC (in P3D v2.3) with high detail settings, GO Xtreme mode active, and UT2 @ 100% (100+ AI planes on the ground alone). However, I do not expect framerates of 30-40fps at this airport with high detail settings. That just isn't a sensible expectation.

OK! Final question...s!

 

1) Credit packs will still be needed, right?

2) Do we know when this new version will be released?

1. Most payware airports will cost a couple of credits yes

 

2. Nope, been quiet for a little bit too long IMHO

UK2000 Heathrow Xtreme version 3 performs reasonably well on my PC (in P3D v2.3) with high detail settings, GO Xtreme mode active, and UT2 @ 100% (100+ AI planes on the ground alone). However, I do not expect framerates of 30-40fps at this airport with high detail settings. That just isn't a sensible expectation.

In a way what you say of course is true but it's not all about complexity and size but also how the scenery is developed using what methods and techniques.