Sign in to follow this  
Sesquashtoo

Just a personal musing of FSX:SE

Recommended Posts

Since deciding to try out FSX-SE, and in seeing how incredibly smooth it runs, and stays at 30 FPS for 98 percent of my flight ops....AND...how much I love the look of the water running under Steve's DX10 Fixer mods,  and finally, (this was so important to me,) for what I love to do in flight ops...that water taxi operations are life-like and need minimum throttle input to get moving, and to stay at real-world water taxi rate...well...not seen in either FSX Boxed, or any 32 bit P3D version that I have owned.

P3D v3.x bit the dust...was retired yesterday afternoon.  ORBX Central now has two entries....FSX-SE and AeroFly 2

Of course, my personal opinion, but in having run both of them P3D v3.2 and FSX-SE....the airport and telemetry (land-class/regions,Vector, etc) graphics from Orbx looks better, smoother, cleaner, slicker, under Steam's tweaked and cleaned up version of FSX, than what P3D gave me.

So....I run with FSX:SE, FSW (still a work in progress...), XP11, AE2, and will never delete, or not use; FS9.9999999

I think it is something to be said, that even when you have the space to let it sit...you are getting such usage and joy from an MS-based flight sim, that you can decide to delete an entire flight sim from your system.  In my opinion, that is saying a lot!

Cheers, and safe landings....

Post Edit:  I realize that I put this into the wrong forum...was wanting to put it into the FSX:SE/FSX Main Forum. If a Mod reads this...could you please transfer this into the target forum I had wanted to place it. This was my mistake...and thanks. :)

The O.P.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

For all that are still running with any BOXED version of FSX, (I did for years....), I advise you to purchase and install Steam's FSX, and retire/delete your BOXED version of same.

The performance tweaks on many fronts, is visual from the get go.  If you want one that slaps you upside the head.....(lol),  as soon as you install, take an amphibian out upon any Great Lake, and start to taxi from idle throttle.   Now, with FSX:SE, it will be linear, with smooth progression of your aircraft upon the water. All the better, if that water is tweaked by Steve's DX10 Fixer, running under DX10, with his Varied Wave Direction option, engaged!:biggrin:

I have all the add-on's one years in this hobby , would be expected to have installed in FSX( whatever).  I have them installed in FSX-SE, and still 30 smooth FPS is enjoyed.

A most high personal recommendation for FSX users...

Cheers,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly you're very impressed by SE and your strong recommendation to move from FSX to FSX-SE is something that has set me thinking. Indeed I might have seriously considered it if I didn't have to reinstall the huge amount of scenery and aircraft addons I am already using in FSX. So if I was going to make any change involving a complete reinstallion of most of my stuff then I am probably more likely to go down the P3Dv4 pathway with the added benefits which that platform offers. But that's just a personal opinion which might be different if I had fewer addons!

Bill

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, scianoir said:

Clearly you're very impressed by SE and your strong recommendation to move from FSX to FSX-SE is something that has set me thinking. Indeed I might have seriously considered it if I didn't have to reinstall the huge amount of scenery and aircraft addons I am already using in FSX. So if I was going to make any change involving a complete reinstallion of most of my stuff then I am probably more likely to go down the P3Dv4 pathway with the added benefits which that platform offers. But that's just a personal opinion which might be different if I had fewer addons!

Bill

I Agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just did this about a week ago and I am very happy with this.

It also freed up about 500 gb of duplicate entries (FAX and FAX SE).

Very happy!

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JeffB said:

I just did this about a week ago and I am very happy with this.

It also freed up about 500 gb of duplicate entries (FAX and FAX SE).

Very happy!

.

By duplicate entries do you mean entries in the scenery library or scenery/aircraft addons that had been installed more than once in different areas of FSX? I can see why you're happy though because, whatever you mean, 500GB is a hell of a lot of duplication to free up!!

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, scianoir said:

Clearly you're very impressed by SE and your strong recommendation to move from FSX to FSX-SE is something that has set me thinking. Indeed I might have seriously considered it if I didn't have to reinstall the huge amount of scenery and aircraft addons I am already using in FSX. So if I was going to make any change involving a complete reinstallion of most of my stuff then I am probably more likely to go down the P3Dv4 pathway with the added benefits which that platform offers. But that's just a personal opinion which might be different if I had fewer addons!

Bill

Bill, actually, as a result of running with FSX:SE, I have yesterday deleted my copy of P3D v3.2 from my system. I frankly don't see any advantage to having it, above and beyond this great running version of FSX:SE.  It truly didn't take me long to add all my ORBX library (substantive) through Central 3, and have added all the other add-on's above and beyond Orbx.  Didn't take too much time at all. Seamlessly.

Truly, until you run the Steam version for yourself...only then, will you see why my recommendation stands...

20170914104037_1.jpg

20170914110348_1.jpg

20170914110647_1.jpg

Cheers,

Mitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, nam1394 said:

I Agree

Truly, I don't see any advantage to P3D (I only had the v3.2 version though), and I have now flown FSX:SE for hours, with no CTD, no OOM...so very much impressed with this 32 bit application! All this with PNW being flown over, night and day ops....all my other 3rP add'ons in place. Not one burp...and near about 27-33 FPS.  Most impressed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, scianoir said:

By duplicate entries do you mean entries in the scenery library or scenery/aircraft addons that had been installed more than once in different areas of FSX? I can see why you're happy though because, whatever you mean, 500GB is a hell of a lot of duplication to free up!!

Bill

I imagine he meant that there was both the same content on the hard disk, from having two versions of FSX...his boxed and then his FSX:SE.  Deleting his boxed freed up all that held content. This is what I think he meant...and means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sesquashtoo said:

Truly, I don't see any advantage to P3D (I only had the v3.2 version though), and I have now flown FSX:SE for hours, with no CTD, no OOM...so very much impressed with this 32 bit application! All this with PNW being flown over, night and day ops....all my other 3rP add'ons in place. Not one burp...and near about 27-33 FPS.  Most impressed!

That's pretty impressive alright! It's the OOM's, if anything, that would push me into changing from FSX to another platform and, as P3Dv4 is a 64-bit application, I understand it is free of the 4GB VAS limitation that leads to OOMs, which is one of the main attractions of it for me. As FSX:SE is 32-bit I assume it is subject to the 4GB VAS limit but I guess SE must be better optimised overall in terms of VAS usage if you are not seeing OOMs. Just wondered if by chance you have any of the notorious VAS hogs such as Aerosoft Frankfurt V2 or the Orbx SoCal scenery installed and how SE performs with these when combined with a VAS intense aircraft? 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, scianoir said:

That's pretty impressive alright! It's the OOM's, if anything, that would push me into changing from FSX to another platform and, as P3Dv4 is a 64-bit application, I understand it is free of the 4GB VAS limitation that leads to OOMs, which is one of the main attractions of it for me. As FSX:SE is 32-bit I assume it is subject to the 4GB VAS limit but I guess SE must be better optimised overall in terms of VAS usage if you are not seeing OOMs. Just wondered if by chance you have any of the notorious VAS hogs such as Aerosoft Frankfurt V2 or the Orbx SoCal scenery installed and how SE performs with these when combined with a VAS intense aircraft? 

Bill

Bill, I have SoCal, and have flown within it...completed every flight...and simply no CTD's or OOM's.  I do believe that perhaps, FSX:SE reclaims (resets?!?), scavenges?....VAS.  Don't exactly know...but have not seen any deficit, because it is 32 bit.  None whatsoever.

Again, most highly recommended for an MS-based solution.:cool:

Oh...and one HUGE perk....everything you own...paid for....will function, and beautifully so, a' la' Orbx...!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scianoir said:

By duplicate entries do you mean entries in the scenery library or scenery/aircraft addons that had been installed more than once in different areas of FSX? I can see why you're happy though because, whatever you mean, 500GB is a hell of a lot of duplication to free up!!

Bill

The answer is yes to both...I had two sets of the same in in both FSX and FSX-SE. But the main reason is that I had a lot of Orbx scenery.

So your mileage may vary. Bottom line is that FAX-SE runs much better and you'll save disk space by having only FSX-SE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still not sure why the move from FSXMS to SE is always regarded as tied to lengthy add-on reinstallation sessions. For me, it was all a matter of removing FSXMS references from the registry, installing FSXMS and adapting the paths in the scenery.cfg, exe.xml and dll.xml and copying all folders containing custom stuff from the FSXMS folder to the FSXSE folder. I only started over with the fsx.cfg.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sesquashtoo said:

Bill, I have SoCal, and have flown within it...completed every flight...and simply no CTD's or OOM's.  I do believe that perhaps, FSX:SE reclaims (resets?!?), scavenges?....VAS.  Don't exactly know...but have not seen any deficit, because it is 32 bit.  None whatsoever.

Again, most highly recommended for an MS-based solution.:cool:

Oh...and one HUGE perk....everything you own...paid for....will function, and beautifully so, a' la' Orbx...!

 

Hmmmmm.........you've got me thinking now! Being able to fly Orbx SoCal without issues is certainly a good recommendation as my FSX setup sails very close to the wind VAS wise in that area (although I also have a lot of other airport addons within Southern California which probably doesn't help).

The fact that you don't have to pay to use most of the FSX addons you own in FSX-SE is, as you say, also a great plus point. I have noticed that quite a few developers are charging a supplement for P3Dv4 updates even if you have already purchased them for FSX and with some such as A2A and PMDG you have to pay the full price again, so migration to P3Dv4 could prove a fairly expensive option for me. 

Thanks for your thought provoking post Mitch!

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bjoern said:

Still not sure why the move from FSXMS to SE is always regarded as tied to lengthy add-on reinstallation sessions. For me, it was all a matter of removing FSXMS references from the registry, installing FSXMS and adapting the paths in the scenery.cfg, exe.xml and dll.xml and copying all folders containing custom stuff from the FSXMS folder to the FSXSE folder. I only started over with the fsx.cfg.

Bjoern,

Would you be willing to list this process with details?  Or, were you following instructions you found elsewhere?  

Regards,

Dave

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if I understand this but there is no difference between FSX boxed and FSX-SE except Dovetail used a different version of Microsoft Visual and Microsoft dotnet when the product was installed.  Microsoft did not allow them any changes to the engine other than to make it compatible with Steam.  DTG did change a couple of entries in the FSX.cfg and added their own version of the uiautomationcore.dll in the main fsx-se directory but there were few additional changes.  Microsoft still has total control of the FSX license.  My boxed version of FSX works perfectly and the performance is absolutely stunning (I have fsuipc.logs to prove it).  Unbelievable fps even with fairly high settings (I use the settings in the AVSIM FSX Configuration Guide).  DX10 Preview is just as great as the DX10 Preview in FSX-SE.  They are both 32 bit applications so they both can easily run out of VAS if you do not watch your settings.  Of course, like FSX-SE, the more add-ons you have the more likely you will have FPS issues and OOM's from the loss of VAS. 

The only advantage I see with FSX-SE is the fact the boxed versions are becoming extinct.  It is also difficult to activate the product as you soon run out of activations and you have to then contact Microsoft and get additional activations authorized.  If you don't like that hassle, you can simply go to Steam and purchase FSX-SE for about $25.  Most, if not all of your FSX addons will work in FSX-SE and most developers have installers that will ask you if you want to install in FSX or FSX-SE.

One of the things that Mitch is experiencing is the clean installation of FSX-SE.  You always get good performance and graphics when you first install FSX or FSX-SE then you start adding the eye-candy and the addons, like FSDT, FlightBeam, Orbx/FTX, GEX, UTX2, MyTrafficX, Carenado aircraft, PMDG aircraft, to name just a few products.  The more you add, the more you have to adjust your FSX and display driver settings.

Many developers had to charge again for installation into P3Dv4 because you are going from a 32 bit application with FSX and FSX-SE to a 64-bit application with P3DV4.  They will make you pay another price when Microsoft Windows and P3D is upgraded to the 128-bit architecture.

But, what the hay.  They are all great sims.  FSX-SE is cheaper and can be installed fast and easy.  The boxed version you have to put a DVD in your drive and install it in that manner.  Personally, if you can afford the $199 for P3DV4, I would get that.  That is the future.  I have but hanging onto FSX boxed as I use it to compare between P3D and FSX.

Best regards,

Jim

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad to see how much misinformation is still being given out regarding the differences between FSX and FSX-SE.  See the full list of changes here:  https://steamcommunity.com/app/314160/discussions/0/496881136926977562/

While the fix that flushes the terrain cache helps a great deal with the dreaded OOM issue, you can still have them with complex aircraft combined with complex scenery and weather, especially when using large texture sizes.

The performance optimizations, terrain cache flux, and other fixes are enough to keep me using FSX-SE while waiting for one of the newer sims to prove itself better!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not 100% sure, but I think the FSX-SE can't run at 1/2 refresh rate. The box version can run it at 1/2 refresh rate of your monitor.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mikelab6 said:

I am not 100% sure, but I think the FSX-SE can't run at 1/2 refresh rate. The box version can run it at 1/2 refresh rate of your monitor.

Mike

It's works well for me at 1/2 refresh rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Donstim said:

 

The performance optimizations, terrain cache flux, and other fixes are enough to keep me using FSX-SE while waiting for one of the newer sims to prove itself better!

P3D V4:cool:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mpw8679 said:

P3D V4

This!  I tried FSX-SE in both Win 10 and Win 7... both times the sim came out of the gate with the blurries.  Tried tuning them away but ended up back at FSX Acell... until P3Dv4 was released.  Never going back to a 32bit sim!

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, lownslo said:

This!  I tried FSX-SE in both Win 10 and Win 7... both times the sim came out of the gate with the blurries.  Tried tuning them away but ended up back at FSX Acell... until P3Dv4 was released.  Never going back to a 32bit sim!

Greg

I'll admit FSX steam still does pretty good.  I use it mainly for the Majestic q400 and PMDG MD11.  But after using v4 awhile and going back to FSX the difference in performance is pretty impressive.  I can max out my 1080ti in v4.    In FSX I can barely get 25% usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Donstim said:

Sad to see how much misinformation is still being given out regarding the differences between FSX and FSX-SE.  See the full list of changes here:  https://steamcommunity.com/app/314160/discussions/0/496881136926977562/

While the fix that flushes the terrain cache helps a great deal with the dreaded OOM issue, you can still have them with complex aircraft combined with complex scenery and weather, especially when using large texture sizes.

The performance optimizations, terrain cache flux, and other fixes are enough to keep me using FSX-SE while waiting for one of the newer sims to prove itself better!

I agree but those fixes are for Steam...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jim Young said:

I agree but those fixes are for Steam...

Yep, that's what FXS-SE is. And the changes reading from top to bottom are relative to FSX boxed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.  Even FS Insider states the sims are essentially the same.  But I agree they have made some minor changes for the better.  If there are any major performance improvements I would be surprised.  It's why I lumped them together in this forum and in the AVSIM FSX Configuration Guide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this