GamersWithJobs does a FSX Preview

[FlyingsCool 3]

You don't have to buy FSX now. You stay at your point in the cycle, with excellent performance of FS9, and, when FSXI comes out, get FSX on the newer computer you probably have at the time.I did not find the demo pathetic on my 1.8GHz PentiumM Dell D810 laptop. It ran pretty well in fact (setting the sliders appropriately for the known autogen bug).Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)

[Dillon 2,197]

Thanks for this read JC. I was hopeing more from Dual Core but TDragger spelled it out nicely here. At least their trying to do something with it... :-)

[Guest 2002cbr600f4i]

>Thanks for this read JC. I was hopeing more from Dual Core>but TDragger spelled it out nicely here. At least their>trying to do something with it... :-)Likewise I was hoping for more use of the multi-cores. However, when I thought about it more, I realized that it isn't in ACES best interest to go completely multi-core support yet... (And btw, I'm a software engineer that writes multi-threaded software all the time, so I know a little about this stuff ;-) )Consider:1) multi-core x86 CPUs have only been out for a little over a year.2) somewhere around 98% of the computers out in the wild right now are still single core machines3) When writing something as complex as a game, you either make it heavily threaded to take great advantage of multiple cores for speed up (which would KILL a single core system because of all the context switches), or you write it single threaded to run in a highly time deterministic manner (which doesn't take advantage of additional cores.) It is VERY VERY difficult to design a system like this to work optimally on both. Add to that that writing heavily multithreaded software is conceptually difficult and makes debugging VERY TOUGH.4) when writing commercial software (especially game software) to be successful you have to write it to get the biggest audience possible. In this case, it means writing to support single core machines, with some small enhancements to take advantage of the multi-core support in some small ways that won't kill users with single core machines.So, I can see why there are only slight enhancements to support multi-core in FSX. Hopefully by the time FS-11 comes around there will be enough critical mass of multi-core PC's out there that they'll make the change to the game engine to support and seriously take advantage of multiple cores. Heck, we might even see a 64 bit version by then too.--2002cbr600f4i

[Guest Len]

>But most new games require brand new hardware to run well.>Just wait till Unreal Tournament 2007 is released, that'll>require FAR more horsepower than FSX!!>>You can't have progress in visuals, features and realism>without a cost in hardware.>>JamesYeah, but nothing like the flight simulator series. I can run Call of Duty 2 at 1600x1200 very nicely on my 3.6 ghz machine with x800XT PCIe card. But FS9, when I crank it up to that still sucks and even more so trying the FSX demo. This has always been the achilles heel of this series. A bloated code which needs total revamping.