Flight Simulator X Trial Version - Date Published: 9/29/2006 - http://www.microsoft.com/downloads

[ryanbatc 12,770]

I like it a lot, here's some shots: http://forums.flightsim.com/dc/dcboard.php...id=457005&page=Bloom DESTROYS my system, my GPU, it just levels my FPS...(and smoothness)...I can go from 60 in the ocean to 20 by simply enabling bloom, must mean my GPU is inadequate :(Other than bloom issue, it is fantastic!!! REALLLLLLY awaiting the 17th now!!!

[Murmur 3,940]

> Suggestion...use the default settings for a comparison. I'll>try it myself at default and post again.>> You really need to leave your system specs as well.>> CraigIIRC default settings are automatically chosen according to detected hardware, so they change across different pc's.Marco

[slashed2 53]

That's a good point as my default settings for my old AMD Athlon 2.2 is 60plus frames albeit very low settings. Maybe choosing a stock setting for each tab and then comparing results would garner a fair assesment across differing machines.Ian.

[B777ER 2,475]

>Isn't it heart breaking to see that kind of FPS after>building one of the fastest PCs and OCing and then seeing the>second core at almost 0% utilization?>>I hope the AI aircrafts and what not uses the second core. >>>Manny>>I noticed heavy stuttering in "Instant replay" (spot view).>>I thought FSX was made to use dual core?

[Guest diajohn2]

I changed to the same setup as FS9. Now I don't have the heavy traffic files so there will be a difference. My perfomance was nice an smooth locked at 20. I put it at unlimited and it ran 30-40. I think FPS worries will be a thing of the past. Smoothness is what we really care about the most. IMHO>

[ahuimanu 50]

I think it was made to use threads/fibers in a more efficient manner. This also means that some work and be put off to a second processor/core. However, as is the case with most MSFS releases: brute force is what works.

[bic 44]

There's a small problem on my new E6300 (obviously Win XP Pro has been recently installed starting at SP1, then SP2 applied), on startup I get the splash screen then shortly the dreaded application errror with these details:AppName: fsx.exe AppVer: 10.0.60905.0 AppStamp:44fd0a92ModName: terrain.dll ModVer: 10.0.60905.0 ModStamp:44fd0f33fDebug: 0 Offset: 0003f701

[Guest JohnEGPF]

>think FPS worries will be a thing of the past. Smoothness is what >we really care about the most. IMHO>I hope this is true but from what I've seen the 2 go hand in hand.cheersJohn

[Guest SilverCircle]

> >think FPS worries will be a thing of the past. Smoothness>is what >we really care about the most. IMHO>>>I hope this is true but from what I've seen the 2 go hand in>hand.Well, nope. A steady and stable 20fps is much better than a stutterfest with framerate drops down to 10 and spikes up to 30. I hope, they will finally achieve that goal at some time - stuttering was much worse in the past than it currently is with FS9 (just remember FS2000). Maybe FSX can again improve that somewhat.

[FTD1949 0]

I agree John. I'm gonna quit driving myself crazy with tweaking until I have the real thing on my machine. In the meantime I think I'll just enjoy flying for a bit and enjoy a cold one later. Cheers, Craig

[FlyingsCool 3]

With so many more options to change, it will definitely take quite a while for us to understand the performance capabilities of FSX. With the new release, it added bunches of objects and textures that weren't in the initial release, so it is no surprise that performance dropped for some, especially those who cranked any of the AI sliders. Also, things like bloom and the extra water effects force the display engine to calculate each frame TWICE, in two separate passes. So those options on will KILL frame rates for anybody, until these effects are handled in hardware (they'll still need two calcs, but hopefully more efficiently).So don't forget, a lot more features were added to this new release. But to me, performance seems even better than in the first release.I can say that autogen seems to not have much impact on my system now after my initial flights. I tried it at sparse and at high, and I didn't see any difference around Julianna. The auto traffic was awful on my frame rates when I was on the ground at the airport, though. I had to turn that way down. I'll do some more testing later.Dell D810 laptop, 1.83 GHz Pentium M, 64 MB ATI X300 mobility Graphics, 1 GB mem, 7200 rpm 80 GB hd, 1920 x 1200 x 32 displayThomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)

[Mace 1,896]

>>I have almost the same h/w as yours and I am getting 15 or>less FPS.>>Thx>>MannyI was shocked to read your FPS report with the new demo.My rig (specs below) is doing better than that on default settings...No way that should ever happen, with your Core2DuoRhettAMD 3700+, eVGA 7800GT 256, ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, etc. etc.

[Manny 1,293]

"until these effects are handled in hardware "I Thought about that...1. With the best processor out there Core 2 Duo, the default FSX would probably barely run if you awail its goodies. Autogen, water, traffic and Bloom.2. What do we see in the horizon as far as processors are concerned? Quad core. Yup... thats what is in the future.. not 6Ghz Processors. HT has been on the plate for so long... so what is is Quad procssors going to do for FSX?3. If there is any new development in the graphics section.. like DX10 that can do some of these functions like bloom.. then no problems. I do not have much negative effect with high "water" settings. It looks like, the graphics card seems to have taken that load. However for Traffic and autogens, not sure there is a H/W answer in the near future.The concern:"Must have" addons for me.1. Ultimate Traffic (atleast 50% traffic)2. PMDG 747/ or any other payware airplanes3. Fly Tampa airports/flught scenery/Aerosofts sceneries...4. Radar Contact and Active Sky (These should have no problems)5. Ultimate Terrain/FS Genesis MeshWould PC development in the next year or so... be able to solve this with Quad core?Without these 1-5 addons, ie. if there are no H/W (6 GHz?) that can run these in the next 1 year ...... forget about it.Manny

[Guest]

Ok my PC is still down, so I can't try this. Can you change the "TEXTURE BANDWIDTH MULT" setting in the config file to about 400 and then check the FPS and report back. Thanks.

[frankla 44]

you got me there!