Interesting posts.

 

Running FSX with addons like ORBX,REX,Aerosoft scenery,PMDG ETC at extreme resolutions in certain situations with the graphics and traffic settings cranked will hammer almost any setup. The 32 bit architecture around which FSX is built, can almost be regarded as a physical law of nature and is sadly, a limiting factor. Regards

Interesting posts.

 

Running FSX with addons like ORBX,REX,Aerosoft scenery,PMDG ETC at extreme resolutions in certain situations with the graphics and traffic settings cranked will hammer almost any setup. The 32 bit architecture around which FSX is built, can almost be regarded as a physical law of nature and is sadly, a limiting factor. Regards

 

Yep this is all true. This is why I mentioned a few posts back that I get 25-30fps with things fairly cranked and ORBX and PMDG type setup in dense areas like KSEA or KLAX but as soon as the plane is moved to the middle of nowhere like the mid-west US over the flat plains I can get 150+ fps even with FTX global and Vector installed.  It's all about the combination of addons and location together and in some places you have to compromise.  For those situations I have saved settings files that can be loaded on the fly to knock down LOD, autogen, and scenery complexity a bit.  Sure I'd like to leave them up high, but toning the settings down a bit is a lot better than flying "MS Slideshow X" 

 

 

But FS9 cockpits look terrible

 

Respect Bert.

 

I agree.  However now that developers are aware of the polygon 'secret' in FS9 hopefully that will no longer be true.  I expect the forthcoming iFly 747, which is alleged to use such techniques, will be the proof of the pudding ... or not.  :unsure:  Certainly the video they recently released is inconclusive, though promising.