Mike, Since FSX is "optimized" for Vista and NO ONE including you has a final release of Vista, then would it be better to run the beta of Vista to get more out of the FSX demo/beta now? OTHER than DX10 Video Card what would be the advantage at this stage? I have the last GOOD release of the Vista Beta but never installed it so at least I could try it for 30 days.Carmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif

I highly doubt Vista will have any advantages other than DX10, which of course is huge, but has no cards available yet to take advantage of it. The rest in my oppinion is pure marketing. How exactly is Flightsim supposed to run better in Vista?Besides, I expect games to run quite a bit slower right now on Vista because at this point there is still alot of debug code in it and it tends to eat quite alot of memory. Another thing would be gfx drivers (Vista requires a whole new gfx driver model that ATI/Nvidia cannot be expected to have nailed in terms of optimizations yet).Of course if someone can explain to me how Vista is supposed to make FSX better in any way, I'm all ears. But as I said, I doubt it.

Vista is a 64-bit OS. If FSX uses 64-bit then I'd say it would definately run faster. I'm not a dev so this is purely speculation but it sounds good.

It's the DX9 version later they will release the DX10 after Vista is released I believe :-)Andr

I think tdragger said FSX is 32 bit only.

Correct - FSX is confirmed to be a 32-bit program with no plans to port it to 64 for this version. Various discussions here at AVSIM have uncovered that moving it to 64-bit is far more involved than just shipping the source code through a 64-bit compiler. Much of the core sim code is written in assembly.

Vista ships in 32 and 64-bit flavors. The version depends on which you purchase, just to clarify an earlier post.

Still, I believe I had heard people say that FSX is "optimized" for Vista.Is it possible that this means more than just DX10?

>Vista ships in 32 and 64-bit flavors. The version depends on>which you purchase, just to clarify an earlier post.Hmm. I guess eventually I will get the 64-bit version of Vista then.I hope the 64-bit Vista runs FSX (a 32-bit app) just as well as the 32-bit Vista does.Rhett

To FURTHER clarify...Vista will ship 32- and 64-bit versions in EACH BOX (except for the Vista "Starter Edition", which is 32-only) giving you the customer the ability to install the 32 version "today", and the 64 version "tommorrow", in the event your hardware isn't 64-bit compliant at time of release. (In reality, though, the 64-bit version will be reasonably useless until widespread 64-bit drivers are embraced) Of course, this has little bearing on FSX, but worth the clarification - it'll save you a bit of money, Rhett! (link: http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x64.asp )

>Still, I believe I had heard people say that FSX is>"optimized" for Vista.>>Is it possible that this means more than just DX10?EXACTLY what I was getting at if people REREAD my original post. I KNOW there is NO DX 10 Cards (Again, REREAD original post) but it is commented that FSX is "OPTIMIZED" for Vista. So, I'd like to know WHAT advantage IF ANY there would be over just the DX10 point.Carmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gif

IMO, Vista will bring the 64-Bit era a lot closer. Vista is going to be a BIG release. The Beta alone was huge. Manufacturers would be incredibly stupid NOT to release 64-Bit drivers for Vista. With the success of recent Intel and AMD 64-Bit Processors, there really is no reason NOT to use the 64-Bit version with newer software. If you are trying to keep compatibility with an older program, sure a 32bit OS would be a better choice. But, I have no problem with most software.

That = marketting speak. FSX is 'optimized' to run on DX9, like every other major Windows game released this year.

That's good to know. Thank you for the clarification!Rhett