Choosing A Flight Simulator

[AJLedbetter123 0]

Morning All,

 

I know this topic has been discussed numerous times, and I don't believe we'll ever find a 'perfect' answer, I do believe it's down to personal preference. However I'd like to get peoples experiences with other simulators.

 

I'm currently working with Flight Simulator X along with the obvious Acceleration Pack, ORBX Global, ORBX Vector, ORBX Europe, REX 4, Opus for weather, and so on, all of the obvious and basic addons including aircraft such as PMDG and MyTrafficX for the AI traffic to make the sim feel less 'lonely'.

 

I'd like to know what simulator is currently the 'one' people are heading towards, P3D, X-Plane or sticking with FSX; What are developers heading towards, I want to head to a sim that more developers will develop addons for, as I see currently P3D does seem to be more and more supported as time goes on.

 

What has the best performance to date; What sim would run good for me? (FSX does run really good for me) - I have a good rig, i7 3770K 4.4GHz Overclocked, 3x SSD's (One for OS, one for FSX, one for my other hardcore games) and a 1TB HDD for any other junk I may accumulate, GTX 780 Classified 3GB GPU, 16GB Corsair RAM 1600MHz - Don't think we need to carry on, it's rather good..

 

In conclusion I want to know; Which simulator would get me the best performance, which simulator will give a smooth flight and less OOM crashing, best flying experience, best visual aspect, can I use my FSX addons with P3D, is P3D the way for me to go etc, just enlighten me as much as possible.

 

Thanks,

AJLedbetter123

[twojastara 85]

In conclusion I want to know; Which simulator would get me the best performance

 

It is hard to tell. IMO you have outstanding hardware spec. However, there are people in these forums, that complain that on similar hardware they have some "micro" stutters (whatever you call it, whatever that means) and they can't run P3D at 4k resolution, or with everything maxed out, or they have only 100 fps or smth. It is very subjective to what "best performance" is to you. I am happy to run P3D on my medium PC with high settings and having 15 fps in full HD. But everyone has different needs.

 

Since you already have FSX. I recommend you to get 60-days trial with P3D and if you don't like it - request for refund.

 

Lukasz

[Guest]

+1

 

And

 

 

 

ORBX Global, ORBX Vector, ORBX Europe, REX 4, Opus for weather, and so on, all of the obvious and basic addons including aircraft such as PMDG and MyTrafficX for the AI traffic

 

A lot of this stuff will run on P3D V2.X you might have to download latest versions with P3DV2 installers.

 

That costs you nothing for 60 days. Its a no brainer.

 

I also have XPX but I never use it. I plan to though, when I have a little more time.

[AJLedbetter123 0]

It is hard to tell. IMO you have outstanding hardware spec. However, there are people in these forums, that complain that on similar hardware they have some "micro" stutters (whatever you call it, whatever that means) and they can't run P3D at 4k resolution, or with everything maxed out, or they have only 100 fps or smth. It is very subjective to what "best performance" is to you. I am happy to run P3D on my medium PC with high settings and having 15 fps in full HD. But everyone has different needs.

 

Since you already have FSX. I recommend you to get 60-days trial with P3D and if you don't like it - request for refund.

 

Lukasz

 

 

+1

 

And

 

 

 

 

A lot of this stuff will run on P3D V2.X you might have to download latest versions with P3DV2 installers.

 

That costs you nothing for 60 days. Its a no brainer.

 

I also have XPX but I never use it. I plan to though, when I have a little more time.

 

Thank you kindly for the response.. Graphically which simulator is superior?

[hesynergy 67]

That's like asking if you would like to have a Volkswagen or a Porsche Carrera 4, P3dV2.4 , being the latter.

 

Chas

[SpeedBird4509 0]

Your poll is in the wrong forum, should be in Hangar Chat

[AJLedbetter123 0]

That's like asking if you would like to have a Volkswagen or a Porsche Carrera 4, P3dV2.4 , being the latter.

 

Chas

 

I thought the question was rather simplistic.. It's asking which looks graphically better to date.

[Poppet 703]

I thought the question was rather simplistic.. It's asking which looks graphically better to date.

There's nothing Simplistic about the question

These are only my opinions of course.  People who own PD3 will say obviously that PD3 is better and of course then same for X-Plane.  

 

Graphically the base package of both Sims are similar. Then of course you have add on's weather engines aircraft and sceneries, PD3 has more because basically FXS is PD3 on steroids and its easier to migrate stuff over, opps have i just upset some people.  

 

X- Plane has less ad on's because its younger but has great support for the future still has plenty to enjoy flying though. X-Plane is 64 bit already, Pd3 has to make the big changer over yet. Both Sims can be a digital download, no CD's, X-plane is on Steam though which makes everything easier, one click and it downloads installs and configures your purchase or ad on. Steam are releasing the add on's slowly though.

 

PD3 is 200 Dollars and with every Version and update you have to pay, so if your going from V1 to V2 to V3 its all extra money.  X-Plane 10 is 60 Dollars and all updates are free.  

 

I have no problem paying 200 Dollars for a flight Sim.

Question is though is it really that much better then X-Plane?   When i heard that PD3 was 200 Dollars i thought to myself wow it must be the best out there:) Maybe that why so many people ran out and bought it,,,  I don't know, would love to hear 

 

It does seems though PD3 has a slightly better support for ad on's,  for now anyway. 

[AJLedbetter123 0]

 

There's nothing Simplistic about the question

These are only my opinions of course.  People who own PD3 will say obviously that PD3 is better and of course then same for X-Plane.  

 

Graphically the base package of both Sims are similar. Then of course you have add on's weather engines aircraft and sceneries, PD3 has more because basically FXS is PD3 on steroids and its easier to migrate stuff over, opps have i just upset some people.  

 

X- Plane has less ad on's because its younger but has great support for the future still has plenty to enjoy flying though. X-Plane is 64 bit already, Pd3 has to make the big changer over yet. Both Sims can be a digital download, no CD's, X-plane is on Steam though which makes everything easier, one click and it downloads installs and configures your purchase or ad on. Steam are releasing the add on's slowly though.

 

PD3 is 200 Dollars and with every Version and update you have to pay, so if your going from V1 to V2 to V3 its all extra money.  X-Plane 10 is 60 Dollars and all updates are free.  

 

I have no problem paying 200 Dollars for a flight Sim.

Question is though is it really that much better then X-Plane?   When i heard that PD3 was 200 Dollars i thought to myself wow it must be the best out there:) Maybe that why so many people ran out and bought it,,,  I don't know, would love to hear 

 

It does seems though PD3 has a slightly better support for ad on's,  for now anyway. 

 

 

Thanks for the response, I do understand that P3D at this time seems to be more supported which is a good sign but who knows where X-Plane will go, it's all untold at the moment.

 

I've seen numerous posts of people purchasing the $60 version of P3D, nothing is stopping users doing so which I do find weird. A large amount of my friends whom are simmers are doing the same thing.

[Humpty 751]

Hmm there is no perfect sim. I honestly enjoy XPX minus a few things.  There is a demo for X plane 10 download it and try it.

 

 I do not have p3D hence no comments.

[pmb 5,137]

I would advise against the XP demo. IMHO, even FSX looks better in the Seattle area than that XP demo. Supposedly, this is mostly based on the repetitive and sterile XP default autogen and other objects.

 

I found XP to get interesting when stuffing it with goodies from Simheaven etc. Then, there are areas (like the surrounding of my home FBO and town) which neither FSX nor Prepar3 can compete with (including the available addons).

 

Given the overall plot, I still prefer Prepar3d, though. I just can't fly without the ORBX stuff.

 

And, yes, the poll is in the wrong forum. You'll get what you're asking for.

 

Kind regards, Michael

[AJLedbetter123 0]

I would advise against the XP demo. IMHO, even FSX looks better in the Seattle area than that XP demo. Supposedly, this is mostly based on the repetitive and sterile XP default autogen and other objects.

 

I found XP to get interesting when stuffing it with goodies from Simheaven etc. Then, there are areas (like the surrounding of my home FBO and town) which neither FSX nor Prepar3 can compete with (including the available addons).

 

Given the overall plot, I still prefer Prepar3d, though. I just can't fly without the ORBX stuff.

 

And, yes, the poll is in the wrong forum. You'll get what you're asking for.

 

Kind regards, Michael

 

Thanks for the response, I do agree in my opinion it's a must for addons such as ORBX to help improve a sim to a higher 'eye candy' quality.

 

Seen as P3D is more supported than X-Plane it does seem more logical to go with P3D; Is the performance of P3D better than FSX?

[Humpty 751]

I would advise against the XP demo. IMHO, even FSX looks better in the Seattle area than that XP demo. Supposedly, this is mostly based on the repetitive and sterile XP default autogen and other objects.

 

I found XP to get interesting when stuffing it with goodies from Simheaven etc. Then, there are areas (like the surrounding of my home FBO and town) which neither FSX nor Prepar3 can compete with (including the available addons).

 

Given the overall plot, I still prefer Prepar3d, though. I just can't fly without the ORBX stuff.

 

And, yes, the poll is in the wrong forum. You'll get what you're asking for.

 

Kind regards, Michael

 

Not trying to start a flame thing or trying to get into an argument . But I tend to disagree. And there is no autogen it is based OSM data.

 

To the OP I would go with the HD Mesh v2.  

[Wobbie 938]

Yes Dear!

[pmb 5,137]

Seen as P3D is more supported than X-Plane it does seem more logical to go with P3D; Is the performance of P3D better than FSX?

Hard to compare given I got rid of FSX long ago. However, in view of your spec I am sure you are prepared to run Prepar3d quite well. My system is weaker than yours (see sig), but I am quite content with performance: around 20 fps in FB KSFO + ORBX NA with AI traffic to 30 - 40 fps in light-weight areas. No essential stuttering, at least not one disturbing my old eyes.This is in a C172 without 2D or 3D panel on display as I use a hardware panel, but pretty (some might say too) high settings.

 

One general point ot note: While Prepar3d is still CPU bound, it benefits much more from a good graphics card than FSX.

 

Kind regards, Michael