It does look better. The ground shadows look better too. Is that a result of sweetfx or just how each sim displays them?

 

I only use SweetFX to change the color palette. The shadows are all sim.

P3D wins, i have been a fan of MS:FSX since it realeased, the same with FSX:SE, been playing that "crap" for so many years now. I never considered to buy P3D, when it was 2.x people said it wasn't so good, so i just kept on playing FSX. When version 3.x came out i read about all the optimization in the game, including graphics and all. Then by a coincident fsx steam edition suddenly didn't work on my chipset anymore (according to dovetail), so i started playing p3d v3. And oh my god, it was fantastic, maybe it doesn't run as smooth, but you dont realize that when its above 30 - 35 most of the time do you?. Basicly with the exact same addons (pmdg, orbx, active sky, custom airport scenery, all that stuff..) i ran 13-22 fps on fsx steam edition ( 10 - 16 in custom scenery airports and 20 - 25 while flying in FL340). However on p3d v3.x i ran 25-45 (25-35 in custom scenery airports, and mostly above 35 enroute flying at FL340). Also P3d looks alot better, but still runs faster.. you almost think its 64 bit somtimes . I seriously never think i went below 25 fps in that game, (traffic turned off of course xD), and on my computer atleast, the smoothness on fsx steam edition isnt that good compared to p3d i think.

 

Btw. i have a 4 core cpu with hyperthreading, i know the games dont utilize that, but for some reason when i put my affinitymask in the .cfg file to 254, i get like 5 or more fps in p3d, i dont know why exactly, ive been calculating on websites and it says the best for me is something like affinitymask = 1023 or something, but that does not give me the same amount of fps nor smoothness as affinitymask on 254, for what ever reason.

Sounds awesome but I think I can say most of us don't have the cash for that. MY FSX SE has tons of pay ware and it's just too expensive to transition. Shame on those developers, and you know who you are, that tried to force people to buy p3d versions of fsx products already purchased...it's just a simple port over. Period.

 

Jcomm mentioned his mediocre experience with P3D v2, but I have to say as a v3 owner, it is way better than both FSX:SE and P3D v2.

 

I am running PMDG + FTX + ASN + REX Soft Clouds and it is sublime, FSX:SE looks positively "2006" next to it.

The lighting, the smoothness, and what you don't see; the VAStly superior memory management to any previous FSX/ESP engine.

Even XP10 is gathering dust since P3D v3 arrived on my hard drive.

Well, I've been on the wall for a while, duly considering a jump to P3d as I start to rebuild a new rig based on the 6700 and 1080. It's been a valuable experience reading this post, as there seems to be some honest opinions which, more or less, reflect my own person perceptions of P3d. I have too many addons and ancilliarys that I can't afford to lose by making the switch. If P3d was a 64 bit platform, then I'd do it yesterday. But P3d seems to have it's own fair share of issues, as does FSX. But in my experience I have had very few OOM errors. So I have to ask, what are the benefits, as I have always been very happy with how my FSX looks. All my scenery is Orbx with Rex and it looks awesome most of the time. I'm not bothered about cloud shadows, autogen shadows or in fact VC shadows, as I would simply turn them off to get better performance. So I have to ask, if I experience very few OOMs then where are the benefits for me? While there clearly are some, for me personally, I have come to the conclusion that the benefits don't override the sacrifices I'd have to make in other areas.

Interesting to dredge up this thread. I went down the route of 30hz 4K as advised by our P3D guru Rob Ainscough and found it to be the game changer for me. Finally I had the smoothness of FSX with the half refresh tweak that I just could not get with P3D at 60hz and with the wonderful PTA tool and some of the stunning visual tweaks that you can do with DX11 I haven't looked back since.

 

I went back to FSX for a time as part of the FSL beta program and have to admit that after the fluidity and eye candy of P3D v3.4 it felt like a huge step backwards.

 

There are a few issues around compatibility when it comes to runway lighting at add on airports which can be tiresome but as a staunch FSX supporter I have to admit that it's now gone altogether from my PC.

 

 

I went down the route of 30hz 4K as advised by our P3D guru Rob Ainscough and found it to be the game changer for me.

 

+1

 

I still have to use FSX for beta testing too and it is like taking bad tasting medicine...., you know it is good for you but it's still distasteful.  Any software is going to have issues, at least this is an evolving product that keeps getting better.  As for investment, there are few hobbies that are less expensive, even gardening will have costs. Sure is less expensive than the skiing I used to enjoy before my knees got old.

Jumped to p3d recently and theres no going back to FSuX now.

So all my FlyTampa airports and PMDG 737NGX, and PMDG777 will work just fine?

Is QW making their new 787 for P3d?

I could never get the same sense of altitude in FSX as I get in P3D v3.2 now we have PTA available to us.

 

Atmospheric scattering and haze varying by altitude and seasons makes a huge difference to the Sim

 

So all my FlyTampa airports and PMDG 737NGX, and PMDG777 will work just fine?

Is QW making their new 787 for P3d?

You're PMDG NGX and 777 will work if you buy the P3D versions. The FSX versions can't be used in P3D.

now we have PTA available to us.

 

What is this please?

 

 

What is this please?

 

It's what you need to get Atmospheric scattering etc into P3D

 

http://1coder.ru/PTA/

 

http://www.avsim.com/forum/764-p3d-tweak-assistant-pta-and-realismshaderpack/