FSX vs P3D 2.4

[ashepherd316 63]

any neutral people who can tell me which sim is better and why thanks.

[kmkc6403 8]

fsx is not being developed anymore, while p3d is under active development. version 2.5 is in beta atm.

 

fsx uses a "dx10 preview" while p3d uses full DX11.

 

fsx requires a ton of tweaking to get to run decently. I havent had to touch the cfg of P3d once.

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/developers/ there is a list of developers of addons that are actively producing for P3D. That is a partial list. Go to any online store and youll see most things are p3D compatible.

 

It was a good run for FSX, but ive moved on.

[DylanM 1,069]

You could try it out yourself (for $10)...and get your money back if you decide it's not for you.

[damian03 0]

How?

[sgreen91 182]

http://www.prepar3d.com/prepar3d-store/

 

2nd selection called the "Professional Developer License"

 

Select either monthly or 1 month non recurring etc.

 

Hope this helps.

[ryanbatc 12,820]

To run the extra eye candy though, you need a decent rig - I get about half the FPS in P3D compared to FSX in similar situations with some eye candy turned on (cloud shadows, hdr, cockpit shadows)

 

If i turn that stuff off the sims are very similar. If say other than active development there's not a big difference between the two (when you level out the eye candy)

 

Downside to P3D is generally you pay more for payware.

[ricka47 611]

For me, P3D is better because FSX is dead and there will be no future development.  That was probably my biggest reason to make the switch.  I have found that, on my equipment, it runs better at higher settings than FSX.  Also, because of a number of factors such a cockpit shadows (and more), it just looks better.  Give it a try.  But, I'd wait for version 2.5 which is out soon as we are being told that it will require a re-install.

[figgios 0]

"Downside to P3D is generally you pay more for payware."

 

Please give examples. None of my add-ons are prized differently. Unless you think (for whatever reason) that you are a professional and go for that licence.

[RockOla 233]

For example the Flight1 GTN 750 for FSX costs 49,95 $

 

While the P3D version is sold by Flight1tech, for 64,95 $

 

You can explain the difference by the update rate of P3D which requires constant development while FSX core will never be updated. Or you can disagree with this, but the point remains that some developers charge more for the P3D version of their product.

[Ian S 214]

You'll struggle to find someone truly neutral as we all have our preferences. Personally, I thoroughly enjoyed FSX but after experiencing P3D I won't be going back.

[simmerhead 885]

I run FS9, FSX, FSX:SE, P3Dv1 and P3Dv2, but there is no way to be truly neutral. It all depends on what addons you use, what hardware you run and what looks and feels right to you.

 

I prefper P3D v2 mostly because I enjoy the immersive DX11 graphics. HDR lighting, volumetric fog, ocean waves, shadows and no autogen popping makes the world look more realistic to my eye. And I don't use a single tweak in the p3d.cfg file. I get occational stutters, but never blurry textures. Performance wise it isn't perfect, but it has a slight advantage out of the box.

 

Still, FSX has a better selection of addons, so if you are dependent on certain addons check for compatibility. It still works, it's just takes a little more TLC to get it to look great.

 

Most of all though, I wish to support simulators with active development. (I have DSC, X-Plane and Aerofly too, but never use them). Lockheed Martin have been more than supportive of our community and made major improvements to the simulator, although these improvements have introduced new bugs that needs to be ironed out.

 

Microsoft's attitude towards simmers have been nothing short of ungraceful. First they shut down ACES and FS11 development. They never cared to fix the last bugs in a SP3. Then they added salt to the wound by ruining Flight which at one point had promise. Last but not least they strike a deal with Dovetail to earn even more money from a piece of software that should have been freeware by now and put limitations as to what Doevetail can and cannot do with the simulator.

[n666eo 3]

I'm more on the FSX side.

 

- long time experience that solve every problem on every hardware.

 

- better perfomances for the same graphics. Better graphics in P3D but with poor performaces

 

- DX10 Scenery Fixer by Steeve add cockpit shadows to all add-ons (people tend to forget that FSX in DX10 mode already included cockpit shadows well before P3D...) and a full DirectX10 support, so the difference between FSX and P3D is very, very, small.

 

- More compatible add-on for FSX, and some that I will never leave (RealityXP as an example)

 

Summary : more good points for FSX. The only point for P3D is graphics, and using DX10 Scenery Fixer makes the difference so small that there is no point in P3D. But I use P3D from time to time, just to check my opinion is not changing...

[rparson99 32]

Steve's Dx10 fix is 30 bucks alone... And doesn't give you the shadow and lighting P3d has. Also, if you don't have fsx, you haven't already invested in legacy addons... So you could choose now which you will grow with. With directx 12 and other technologies on the horizon (occulus rift, 64bit...etc), P3d is the future.

[n666eo 3]

Steve's Dx10 fix is 30 bucks alone... And doesn't give you the shadow and lighting P3d has. Also, if you don't have fsx, you haven't already invested in legacy addons... So you could choose now which you will grow with. With directx 12 and other technologies on the horizon (occulus rift, 64bit...etc), P3d is the future.

 

If you use these points, you would choose X-Plane for the future. Exactly the same points, without remaining on an old FSX base as P3D...

[simmerhead 885]

And here we go again, comparing Apples, Carrots and Oranges.

 

Saying that the difference between FSX DX10 and P3Dv2 DX11 is very, very small, is inaccurate at best. The combination of HDR lighting, volumetric fog, cloud shadows and terrain shadows isn't a very very small difference. It is a very noticeable difference that is enough to make me use P3D as my main simulator rather than FSX, even though P3D still has some issues to iron out.

 

To the original poster, I say go for it! LM has a refund policy, so why don't you just install it and see for yourself?