Is 100% traffic even "realistic?" Just curious...

 

Its worth pointing out that FS9 is more than a decade old now and for a good portion of those years you needed a pretty monstrous system to be able to run it at 30fps with all the sliders maxed...

Here is my recipe for a smooth FSX:  Do not buy any add-on, excepted the PMDG airliners and a good weather injector.  Keep autogen to Normal, traffics no more than 30%.  Smooth on take off, approach.  This is what I use my FSX for: exclusively Airliners (PMDG).  And I ignore the FPS counter, very smooth performance.  People add way too many add-ons and wonder why FSX runs like pig.  I had FS9, I could not tolerate the dated graphic engine (emphasize that this is my opinion and mine alone).

Similar recipe here... FSX DX9.   4770K + GTX 770.

 

Fly only Carenado F33,  RealAir Duke,  a2a 182, and Baytower RV7.

 

Freeway traffic at zero, other traffic low.  Fly over Orbx regions, use RXP GNS and Flight1 GTN for navigation.

 

FPS fixed at 30 and fly away...

 

Very smooth performance, very immersive.

 

Single player or Multi-player, runs like a charm.

I switched to FSX two years ago, and despite my weak system (AMD Athlon X2 3.2 Ghz), which I am going to upgrade soon, I still run it to my liking - even with MyTrafficX. Of course, the FPS can drop below 20 in complex scenery, but that does not spoil my immersion and memories of great flights. As the previous poster mentioned, I don't own many airport add-ons, because many of them are too taxiing on the system in terms of FPS and VAS load. Also, the default airports are detailed enough to me, especially compared to FS9 default airports. Most of the detailed default airports have jetways, trucks, signs and the correct layout. What more do I need?  I admire the craftsmanship of high-quality airport add-ons, but I don't need every single store and restroom from the real airport to be implemented into the FS version. I do fly some of the great airliners, such as LVLD767, Majestic Q400 and ConcordeX, since it is them that give the ultimate immersion. I also purchased some high-quality global add-ons, such as FTX Global and OpenLC EU, REX Texture Direct and ASN. These global enhancements are more important to me than detailed local airports.

 

Although FS9 can not compete with an FSX that is polished with the aforementioned add-ons, I yet admit that I still fly FS9 sometimes, and when I do that I realize that its smoothness is unmatched. FSX can not run as smooth, but the immersion makes up for it.

 

I have tested the Steam Edition, but it has offered no benefit over the original FSX version when it comes to FPS and memory consumption. The only incentive to hold on to the Steam Edition is the prospect of Dovetail Games optimizing it for a future Windows 10. Since Windows Vista, any new Windows versions brought some perks to FSX, which became worse with later editions (think of uiautomationcore and the joystick disconnects). As such, I expect the original version to exhibit more problems on Windows 10. Hopefully DTG will keep it up to date with the new Windows.

FSX runs fine just accept cant get what you want from it at all times. PMDG who cares not me. Not all simmers fly at 35,000ft nor care too. I5 3570k at stock with 760gtx I fly Carenado birds and A2a on my days off.