Excellent post DarkStar!!

 

I haven't noticed lower VAS usage.  I've notice better VAS management.

 

See my posts here:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/462873-fsxse-wow-wow-and-wow/?p=3184860

 

and here:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/462873-fsxse-wow-wow-and-wow/?p=3185181

Your second post confused me. You say you use DX10, but used DX9 for the VAS management tests? Does DX10 FSX Vanilla handle VAS as well as FSX Steam?

Interesting tutorial. Thanks for that. Does this mean that the streamlining is just in the executable, or is it present in the dynamic link libraries too? I am thinking hypothetically of course!

 

I would guess yes since the dll's have the same build date as the exe, but don't take my word for it. 

Your second post confused me. You say you use DX10, but used DX9 for the VAS management tests? Does DX10 FSX Vanilla handle VAS as well as FSX Steam?

 

What I meant in that post is I tested the same flight twice...once with DX9 and again with DX10.  Same time and same scenario within the limits of "unscientific" testing.  lol  

 

DX9 is a bigger VAS hog than DX10 in the tests, but I was able to complete both flights.

 

I didn't use FSX-MS much with DX10 before switching over.  VAS didn't climb as fast using DX10, but FSX-MS doesn't release VAS as efficiently as FSX-SE...my opinion only.

Interesting tutorial. Thanks for that. Does this mean that the streamlining is just in the executable, or is it present in the dynamic link libraries too? I am thinking hypothetically of course!

Rob, the run time libraries included with Visual Studio were already "refactored" by Microsoft, so yes they will definitely have an affect on the entire set of files (both .exe and .dll) included in FSX:SE.

 

In terms of the 'example', the "check_for_water();" function was refactored by Microsoft, so all we have to do is call for it instead of continuing to use the earlier, more inefficiently coded function. B)

:Applause:  "Sigh".... So, it is proven that, after hundreds of tests & comparisons, people spend more time testing & posting results than actually flying :p0503:, & every setup will give differing results. Some better, some worse.

 

  :t0152:

Haha I am flying not testing.  However, I would like to add to the thread is that FSX-SE finally removed the seconds pauses problem for me when using ORBX sceneries. Using the box FSX, I would get seconds where the screen froze for a few seconds before continuing.  This problem is now gone for me and making enjoying ORBX as it should.   I still have the box FSX with identical ORBX installation and went back and forth between the two within the same PC session just to make sure, the FSX box always freezes for a few seconds.  

I would guess yes since the dll's have the same build date as the exe, but don't take my word for it. 

 

What I meant in that post is I tested the same flight twice...once with DX9 and again with DX10.  Same time and same scenario within the limits of "unscientific" testing.  lol  

 

DX9 is a bigger VAS hog than DX10 in the tests, but I was able to complete both flights.

 

I didn't use FSX-MS much with DX10 before switching over.  VAS didn't climb as fast using DX10, but FSX-MS doesn't release VAS as efficiently as FSX-SE...my opinion only.

 

Thanks for the clarification I get it now. Hopefully terrain.dll crashes are fixed and then I will move to Steam edition

Thanks for the clarification I get it now. Hopefully terrain.dll crashes are fixed and then I will move to Steam edition

 

As far as I know, the terrain.dll crash is fixed in the newest version of FSUIPC. And of course, it contains fixes for other common CTDs such as the g3d.dll error.

I just can't be bothered to go through all my many add-ons to re-install to Steam. It just doesn't seem worth it. If you could just move folders, then it might be worth it.

As to being quicker to install..... that depends on where you are and how big your wallet is.

I took 9 hours to download FSX-SE, disc install, about 30 minutes.

The difference between FSX Gold & FSX Steam has already been confirmed via Nick (Flight1 forums). There is no difference in overall performance between the two. The only changes Dovetail made were with respect to the multiplayer aspect of the Steam version (for obvious reasons). They also added a few already known community tweaks. Beyond that nothing was altered with respect to the FSX code itself. Fact.

The difference between FSX Gold & FSX Steam has already been confirmed via Nick (Flight1 forums). There is no difference in overall performance between the two. The only changes Dovetail made were with respect to the multiplayer aspect of the Steam version (for obvious reasons). They also added a few already known community tweaks. Beyond that nothing was altered with respect to the FSX code itself. Fact.

 

Not quite sure this is accurate.  FSX-SE does handle memory differently and is less prone to OOM's.  In addition is has been recompiled with a more modern compiler and should be more efficient.  While NickN sees himself as the final word on a lot of things Flight Sim, and I trust his opimizations on my FSX and FSX-SE install, he is just one voice in this disucssion.  Pete Dowson I think also qualifies as someone to listen to and he has confirmed performance improvements and smoother flight.

 

I have both installed side by side....they share a common scenery and ai files.  I actually find FSX-SE runs much smoother. looks great and allows for higher slider settings at the same framerates.  Its worth giving it a try.

I could not possibly agree more. Pete Dowson without question is infinitely more qualified to speak to the demonstrable facts of the matter, given his own insights into the core of FSX and FSX:SE. There is definitely a difference between a factual and qualitative analysis versus a purely experiential analysis.

+ %100^^^^

While it's great that the Steam version offers more life into FSX the reality is...it's still the boxed version of FSX Gold with a few added known tweaks. Nothing more...nothing less. Any gain one sees is likely attributed to several other factors aside from FSX-Steam version itself. Way to many other factors involved that contribute to overall performance between the same two software programs. Still a plethora of FSX boxed people seeing no gain with the Steam version vs Boxed version.

 

Haven said that...The Steam versions biggest improvement comes from it's ease of installation vs the boxed version.

...it's still the boxed version of FSX Gold with a few added known tweaks. Nothing more...nothing less.

Ah, so the long standing bug in FSX that caused terrain.dll errors, g3d.dll errors, and another half-dozen actual bug fixes don't count?

 

You know, those pesky things that "tweaks" couldn't fix?

Ah, so the long standing bug in FSX that caused terrain.dll errors, g3d.dll errors, and another half-dozen actual bug fixes don't count?

 

You know, those pesky things that "tweaks" couldn't fix?

I think the terrain crash was something in the Steam edition causing that. The G3d had to be fixed by FSUIPC in Steam as it was in FSX by Pete. All the bug fixes were bugs created in the Steam edition that were not in the vanilla edition. I agree with you that Pete's tests prove there is an increase in performance.