I'll show my ignorance here and ask which is which?

 

Whoops, my mistake. The first is P3D v3, and other one is FSX:SE.

 

 

Whoops, my mistake. The first is P3D v3, and other one is FSX:SE.

 

Well I am not surprised but I would have to say given the example FSX:SE looks better but that is far from my general experience.

Well I am not surprised but I would have to say given the example FSX:SE looks better but that is far from my general experience.

 

In some cases, P3D looks better. And sometimes it doesn't. However, in most cases (those involving clouds) FSX:SE beats P3D fair and square in the frame rate department. For whatever reasons, P3D is just sluggish and stutters in cloudy conditions. I can't deal with it anymore. I've been told I need to spend $300 for a new video card. But why would I do that when I have no problems with clouds in the other simulator?

 

Especially when the visual differences are minute. Nonetheless, if you have an expensive GPU needed to render P3D's clouds at an acceptable frame rate, then you would have no reason to choose FSX:SE over P3D, with the exception of price, a few cheaper license options, and additional compatibility.

 

 

ha...ha.... +1 with Avidean, which is which  :wink:

Remember, you can always get a full refund from Prepar3d.

So, in a nutshell, you decide if you want a 10 year old slightly modded sim (to bring it up to so-called modern standards),

or

a constantly updated sim (yes, we all know it's based on ESP, Microsoft's pro flight sim at the time, but upgraded about 8-9 times by now)

Also, remember that as we all have unique PC's and/or laptops, one man's test results & pics will obviously differ from others.

The only true comparison will be on your own PC, & there is no Holy Grail.

 

Choose wisely & do not get caught up in ' analysis paralysis '.

Personally I'm waiting to see what the new offering from Dovetail is like. At the moment I don't see much in P3D which would steer me away from FSX with DX10 and all my add ons. I picked up FSX-SE in one of the sales a while back and have it on standby ready to install as a backup, but at the moment I'm running the old FSX-MS quite happily. Hopefully by the time we hear any solid info or see a release from Dovetail, P3D will be even more evolved (maybe even 64 bit?) so I can decide which way to go forward.

 

 

In some cases, P3D looks better. And sometimes it doesn't. However, in most cases (those involving clouds) FSX:SE beats P3D fair and square in the frame rate department. For whatever reasons, P3D is just sluggish and stutters in cloudy conditions. I can't deal with it anymore. I've been told I need to spend $300 for a new video card. But why would I do that when I have no problems with clouds in the other simulator?
 
Especially when the visual differences are minute. Nonetheless, if you have an expensive GPU needed to render P3D's clouds at an acceptable frame rate, then you would have no reason to choose FSX:SE over P3D, with the exception of price, a few cheaper license options, and additional compatibility.

True.  There is also a persistent problem of sub-par AA with P3D, which causes shimmering with structures in the scenery.  I recently reinstalled FSX-SE, since my favorite plane: F1 Mustang now works with it, and I must say that the latest version of FSX-SE visuals and performance is better than P3D.  The only thing that FSX-SE does not have is the removal of autogen pop-ups.