Darn it... a valid reason to try the Steam version (significantly greater FPS). Downloading now... I'll chime back in with some comparative trials of my own in a bit.

 

Dick

There are visual differences between your first and second pictures in the first example.  Look at the control tower, the glass is opaque in the FSX version but transparent in the FSX-SE version, is there a reason for that? 

 

The glass or texture isn't different. It's just that the angle that the shot was taken from is pretty far off. One looks off into the forest and one look back towards the airport scenery and you are able to see a tree through the latter.

 

 

You have too much interest here business wise, and that´s a problem.

 

How does he?  I don't believe he has any "business interest" in Dovetail.

 

Pete Dowson is saying something similar, what about the OP? 

 

 

 

It's just that the angle that the shot was taken from is pretty far off.

Yes, you might be correct; the fact remains that it's a difference which (to my mind) invalidates the example.

 

I would like to see videos (with FPS) within the same scenery / weather etc...  

 

Although i don't agree with how "Frosty777" phrased his question, i do retain a healthy skepticism.  I have no horse in this race, i purchased the Steam version when it was on sale, if these tests do prove significant differences i'll be moving over on next rebuild.

Although i don't agree with how "Frosty777" phrased his question, i do retain a healthy skepticism. I have no horse in this race, i purchased the Steam version when it was on sale, if these tests do prove significant differences i'll be moving over on next rebuild.

I agree that the test could have been done a little better and comprehensively, however, I for the most part believe the results. In my benchmark thread I tapped out the sim and did everything I could to get an OOM and break it, but it didnt happen. For that reason alone I have made the switch. I guarantee you won't regret it.

Interesting quote from FSDeveloper.com:

 

"I just re-tested the frame rate in our ACG Wattisham scenery that we are just finishing off. In FSX_MS I get 55fps full screen mode, 33 fps in the same situation with the Steam Overlay running and 36 fps with it turned off. So yes the Steam Overlay does seems to eat a few fps, but it doesn't account for the much bigger drop overall."

 

The popular saying "your mileage may vary" comes to mind.

My only observation here, and as stated in prior responses is that it is a fresh install. Fresh installs by their very nature are going to give you that "new out of the box" experience... A couple of months ago  I upgraded to FSX Acceleration from SP2 and noticed a pleasant FPS increase after defraging my new HD after installation. Not in the same league as the 15 FPS shown here, but at least I was getting an extra 5 FPS for a while in some of more complex situiations....

 

I am not saying what your seeing is totally due to this but I would be interested to know if this "increase" is sustainable after a few months of usage with new add-ons and scenery installations possibly being added.

Hi all.

 

As I promised, I downloaded the FSX-Steam, and installed it. My computer is low-end, and no FSX addons. I made sure the FSX.cfg files were the same. And...

 

No noticeable FPS difference.

 

I think FPS increase is a placebo effect people are seeing. Certainly no doubling of FPS.

 

Dick

 

 

Fresh installs by their very nature are going to give you that "new out of the box" experienc

 

With FSX, Believe me right out of the box is terrible until one get everything set and tweaked. I didnt see that with Steam/.

Hi all.

 

As I promised, I downloaded the FSX-Steam, and installed it. My computer is low-end, and no FSX addons. I made sure the FSX.cfg files were the same. And...

 

No noticeable FPS difference.

 

I think FPS increase is a placebo effect people are seeing. Certainly no doubling of FPS.

 

Dick

A duck is still a duck then I guess! (A duck, because it's Christmas.)

Hi all.

 

As I promised, I downloaded the FSX-Steam, and installed it. My computer is low-end, and no FSX addons. I made sure the FSX.cfg files were the same. And...

 

No noticeable FPS difference.

 

I think FPS increase is a placebo effect people are seeing. Certainly no doubling of FPS.

 

Dick

 

Oh God, I just noticed that he didnt mention that in the OP. I really hope he did this on a clean install of FSX. If not these results are useless. 

Oh, who cares.  It's Xmas eve.  Let's all go get plastered, and then come back later and discuss what these results mean. :lol: :lol:

Hi all.

 

As I promised, I downloaded the FSX-Steam, and installed it. My computer is low-end, and no FSX addons. I made sure the FSX.cfg files were the same. And...

 

No noticeable FPS difference.

 

I think FPS increase is a placebo effect people are seeing. Certainly no doubling of FPS.

 

Dick

Agreed with you on  FPS effect (same as before locked @ 30) however, the overall  smoothness for me is much better. Also, for the first time in my life, I have not made a single tweak in the CFG after installing  FSX. cheers.

The following MAY explain why some people observe significant differences between the two versions and others do not:

 

FSX:SE seems to come optimized out of the box. I mean some serious .cfg 'tweaks' are already implemented by default, in addition to the 2013 compiler used.

 

Vanilla FSX on the other hand comes.., well, we all know how. Maybe the people that already have a tweaked FSX do not observe significant/any difference, but the people who haven't tweaked FSX get 'gobsmacked' ^_^ by FSX:SE.

 

Just a theory though...

I wonder how the results break down when "Hates Dovetail" vs "Doesn't Hate Dovetail" is factored in? I bet that might figure into it. 

 

Personally I don't hate Dovetail, but I haven't downloaded FSX:SE yet, so I can't be part of the experiment. 

 

 

Also, for the first time in my life, I have not made a single tweak in the CFG after installing FSX.

I am looking forward to that, too. I am just downloading FSX:SE to see what it is all about.

 

From the steam website:  http://steamcommunity.com/app/314160/discussions/1/626329820729615790/

(quote)

Default System-Setting Alterations
* Increased TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD to 4096 up from 1024
* Changed HIGHMEMFIX=1
* Increased Vertex and Index Buffers and the number of buffers.

(unquote)

 

So on the "official" (visible) CFG-matters no real wonders seem to be done. :ph34r:

Would be great to see that the nevertheless somewhat changed FSX code (compiled with a newer compiler) will run much smoother than before... :rolleyes:

 

Reading this thread I am quite confident that some progress may be expected... B)