X Versus 9 -It has all been said before...

[Guest Hugo]

>>But the weak link in this chain right now, is the core process>cycles with not only today's CPU's Would a 1000 time faster meet the mark?http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...ws/15547144.htmoh yea, you also added:> of the immediate>future. Forget about CPUs 3 years from now. The Product life>of a Flight sim seems to be 3 years. So what the CPU>technology that is projected in a year or a year and half?Well, we're still left with some hope ;-)Hugo

[Guest JOHNWW2006]

Forgive me for butting in with the economics and hardware.I sensuously believe the most expensive rig never gets more expensive and I have followed this since fs9. I always tend to wait, Im sorry to admit it, but im a tad of a cheapskate and I support many payware and especially fsuipc (but a few months after the initial release of a new sim)Anyhow....to cut strings short. My rig now, I could sell it for probably

[Manny 1,293]

No Arch.. Its not the disappoint that my new rig would not be sufficiant. Its not about that at all.Its what Frankla says...That no matter what money you can throw now or in the near future (1-1.5 years), you may not be able to run with addons like UTraffic and any addon that would take processing cycle from the main core.Ofcourse, if what Hugo posted link comes true in the next 6 months.. I'll shut up. This issue will be moot then.A 1,000 times faster CPU? I can deal with that. Addons? Bring it on!:)Manny

[Guest mattiassjolund]

Luis (and some others),You are missing the point... As i said, the topic is rather the investment that i have maid versus the investment i need to make in order to reach the same performance and experience. Is it worth it to the individual user??? We are all dedicated to our FS, i just think i have made up my mind, What about yours? Are you willing to spend X thousand on a new computer, 10 new PMDG like products and 60 some products from companies like Simflyers etc?PS. The screenshots were just an example of what i got, even an old airhead like me can realize that the vendors will develop new killer ad-ons for FSX!!!/mattias

[kerosene31 349]

Why is this such a hot topic? Some people will get FSX on day 1. Others will wait a few weeks, others a few months, still others a few years, others yet until the next version comes out. It is the same each time. Everyone has different needs/expectations for a new sim.

[frankla 44]

You miss the point! We Want FSX! Yesterday in fact!!! We want it badly! But there is no hardware in forseeable future (regardless of what it cost) that can make FSX work the way that is better in a meaningful way!

[frankla 44]

I don't think you got what we mean! We do want FSX! We want it yesterday! It can look a lot better than FS9! But, many people are hopeful that a new system will make FSX what is promised to be. They count the days until they save money for a top end system. Manny and I are saying "don't hold your breath! Its going to be a long time before it happens". In fact it may be longer than the typical FS cycle of every two years! This was not the case with FS9 or earlier version of FS! A couple of months and a good bundle of cash took care of the low frame rates in FS9!! Not so with FSX! FSX relies on the same old "clock cycle" to improve FPS and that is not where hardware technologies are going towards! Believe me, I hope we are proven wrong. I have the money and can wait few months. But neither few month nor money will be enough!

[Guest mattiassjolund]

Well... How in a meaningful way do you suggest I miss the point, when I started this topic! Give me the pros and cons, get into the topic instead of some tired "geting back to you" attitude. All i am expressing is my thoughts regarding investing in a new system versus what i got today, regardless existing or not, is that in anyway affending you?/m

[frankla 44]

It was not a response to your post but the one right above mine! :)

[LuisFelizTirado 33]

Forgive me, Mattias, I believe that I do get your point.I have a 3-year old e-machines ! with an Athlon XP 3000+ (2.17 GHz), 512 MB RAM, and an old GeForce 5200 that I got on sale.It gives me 40-50 frames with FS 9, and about 25 frames with FS X. I have no intention of buying another computer - what for?On the other hand, if you will take a look at the other islands that I mentioned, you will notice an enormous difference. The Caribbean finally looks good! No more sharp cliffs anywhere. Aside from a small portion of the mesh missing on Tortola, everything looks much better.So, your images are not particularly representative of the changes. In addition, like many, you probably do not know that the island of Sint Maarten was an exceptional scenery location in FS 9, probably the personal (and late-night) project of one of the FS Team. There haven't been any changes to it for FS X, so it is misleading to show a comparison shot with FS 9 - it is the same thing.And there are so many other differences that I can see with my puny computer. The ground textures are stunning! Simply stunning! I love flying over them.Also, I was flying over parts of Africa and saw this:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/157596.jpgTrees! Lots of trees! The jungle! Never had that in FS 9. And it was fluid. So fluid that I did not particularly notice the frame rates - maybe around 27? With all those trees and my computer!The changes are enormous and nobody has to wait. Plus there are wonderful new aircraft, and the very fun missions.This is a new FS altogether and it works with the same computers that everybody has. The FS Team doesn't have some new generation computer either - they have the same Dells as everybody here. And they developed the game on those machines.So, really, Mattias, I understood you very well. Please take a better look and let me know if you really do not see anyhing worthwhile in there.And to perhaps speak more clearly, there is no need to spend any money on new computers. If this seems discouraging, then perhaps it is time to change the perspective. It is possible to have the same experience with FS X as one had with FS 9 without spending a few thousand dollars more. And one could even decide that, since we have lived perfectly well so far without sun bloom or 2x water effects, then we could continue to so now. And just keep the same computer and instead of trying to obtain all the new effects in FS X, just concentrate on enjoying the game.Best regards.Luis

[Mace 1,902]

I think that you and Manny are into the scene enough to see this trend: that cpu advances are not going to occur in raw speed, but rather in terms of architecture in the next few years. It's actually been that way for the last few years, as Moore's Law bit the dust in 2003.That does not bode well for MSFS in its current state. However, I am optimistic that this fact about cpu's will be realized, and appropriate changes made in the product.RhettAMD 3700+, eVGA 7800GT 256, ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, etc. etc.

[frankla 44]

What do you mean about changes in product? ARe you talking about next MSFS?

[Guest archtx]

Luis:That post was like a breath of fresh air!Thank you!Especially coming from such a respected member of the community.

[Guest FxF3]

Rant alert:It never ends. I remember when a game mag complained about Wing Commander 3 being made for computers that did not even exist yet.Funny thing though I bought the game installed it on my 100mhz AMDpowered computer and played the heck out of it. :D It did take a longggggg time for each mission to load but that did not stop me from having hours of fun.Fast forward a few years to FS9. IT give us a lot we asked for better autogen, clouds, and other things. Then it starts I can only get 4fps with my 350mhz out of date computer. Why should I have to upgrade my computer to play this why, why, why. Now the same thing with FSX. I mean come on get over it use your sliders. Stop trying to spoil the party for the rest of us. Look at these photos then use comman sense on your settings.The first 2 are maxed out is this a fault of Micosoft or Aces no its my fault for not using my sliders. 8 or 10 fps. Now the 2nd two 38fps still look good. Now the reason I posted this is not trying to make anybody look like a dummie but new people come into forums all the time and my not understand the red herring that so many of the neigh sayers keep throwing out.Rant off:Guy's just enjoy your sims to the ones that have put down thousands on Fs9 does it make it any less enjoyable because FSX has come along no.:-) I will enjoy my FSX when walmarts sends it as I should.

[Guest Ridge_Runner_5]

>Crank up the settings for the FSX shot, mine looks different.>So the point of your post is that you are not impressed with>FSX? >>I don't understand the point of posts like this, kinda like>boycotting the new product, makes no sense as you have a>choice.>>>>Regards, Michael>KDFW>>

Asus A8N32-SLI>Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD