Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

FSX - Slow, slow, slow/Unflyable

Recommended Posts

Guest

> The forums were literally flooded with complaints about terrible frame rates when FS2004 was releasedYou didn't join until May 02nd 2005. While its possible you were reading the forums for a few years before joining - I doubt it.> My biggest surprise this time around is how well FSX seems to perform on current hardwareHave you even got the retail version yet? I doubt that too. You might as well post a screenshot for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest david W.

>You didn't join until May 02nd 2005. While its possible you>were reading the forums for a few years before joining - I>doubt it.Sorry to disappoint you, but I have been around these forums since about 1997. (I have regularly forgotten passwords, and have had to create new profiles several times.)>Have you even got the retail version yet? I doubt that too.>You might as well post a screenshot for us.I never said I had the release version. I have the demo.regardsDavid W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

> I never said I had the release version. I have the demo.ok I saw a big difference between the full version and the demo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why do people keep saying they will run FSX when they can afford a dual core CPU, DX10, and Vista? I've seen several discussions that FSX isn't a dual core game, isn't designed for DX10, and might run worse on Vista. Why do you think all that will help you run FSX with add ons like you do with FS9?"Correct ..... These people ignore the truth, even ignoring facts from Tdragger, and a host of other people :-lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>The forums were literally flooded with complaints about>terrible frame rates when FS2004 was released. Loads and loads>of complaining posts. Infinitely worse than I have seen so far>with FSX.I remember it differently. For me, FS9 ran just about the same as FS8 on the same machine, and even a little bit better in some respects. It had denser autogen, so you needed to tweak that slider a bit, but overall there wasn't too much of an upgrade shock. And, of course, before that we had the upgrade from FS7 to FS8, which was a huge boon in smooth perforamance (FS7=stuttersville) for many users.So, our last two upgrades were a version that resolved a lot of performance problems and a version that added some additional detail and features but could still perform well. And, yeah, we had a lot of complaining posts with both--that's the nature of things--but I'm anticipating that FSX is really going to leave many simmers out in the cold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amen.


Intel 10700K @ 5.1Ghz, Asus Hero Maximus motherboard, Noctua NH-U12A cooler, Corsair Vengeance Pro 32GB 3200 MHz RAM, RTX 2060 Super GPU, Cooler Master HAF 932 Tower, Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU, Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit, 100TB of disk storage. Klaatu barada nickto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly so. Comments about the demo performance are no longer relevant. Even a couple of the beta testers have said there is big performance downgrade with the retail version. Doug


Intel 10700K @ 5.1Ghz, Asus Hero Maximus motherboard, Noctua NH-U12A cooler, Corsair Vengeance Pro 32GB 3200 MHz RAM, RTX 2060 Super GPU, Cooler Master HAF 932 Tower, Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU, Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit, 100TB of disk storage. Klaatu barada nickto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good God! You really need to join the MS marketing department. If you really believe all that you're going to be sorely disappointed.Doug


Intel 10700K @ 5.1Ghz, Asus Hero Maximus motherboard, Noctua NH-U12A cooler, Corsair Vengeance Pro 32GB 3200 MHz RAM, RTX 2060 Super GPU, Cooler Master HAF 932 Tower, Thermaltake 1000W Toughpower PSU, Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit, 100TB of disk storage. Klaatu barada nickto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Number1

Uhmm.......no. Either you don't have a clue what your talking about and you are simply repeating marketing speak, or you have an agenda.Why will FSX run better on Vista? Seriosly, you answer that question and I'll shut up. Can you name one reason besides ".....but the readme says so"? You people seem to think that Vista will run faster than XP while the exact opposite is true. Vista will require more memory and more cpu cycles for itself giving less to the game. It requires a completely different grafic driver, resulting in certain performance lossen (due to optimisations that ATI/Nvidia have not yet had enough expirience playing with). So why....oh why will it run faster on Vista. I just wanna know? I know of no new technolagy in Vista that would result in better FPS. The I/O system has gone through a bit of an overhaul, so that might help a bit in loading times, but come on, it surely isnt this magical thing.64 Bit? Nah, there is a 64 bit xp version right now.......only nobody runs it because a) software is not written for 64 bit yet so there is not point at all and :( driver support for anything but the most mainstream hardware is still a joke. Bit of a chicken and egg thingy really. So will 64 big Vista make FSX run faster? Nah, because as was stated many times before, FSX is 32bit only....resulting, and heres the funny part, in Windows having to run it under a Compatibility layer translating 32 bit instructions to 64 bit instructions. So it will actually run slower (although marginally).DX10? That one may actually help performance, but guess what, we have no idea right now. As was stated previously the ACES team has said that FSX was design for DX9 and once they get sample DX10 cards they'll "start thinking" about what to do with DX10. So again, DX10 just a marketing thing so MS can say at Vista launch that there already are DX10 titles out there. Personally I suspect DX10 (btw I hope youre willing to shuffle out 700$ at launch for one of those) will improve lighting visuals, I don't expect it to give us a huge performance boost. Better visual with little fps loss if you enable the feature, but generall nothing magical (remember, it was DESIGNED for DX9 from the get go).So, Dave, I challenge you to show my FSX running faster in Vista with full 64 Bit support than on the same machine in XP. Or do you not have anything to back up your claims?RespectfullySteven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Len,Have just been playing with the demo version after reading this whole post and the one thing on the slider settings that made a huuuuge difference for me (going from 7 to a solid 30 fps) is the Texture resolution. Just a change from 2m to 1m has this huge effect. That only is what is causes my reduction, ,aybe it could work for you?Regards,Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest camtech

All depends on how you set it up my friend, i use my com for FS9 only, i get rid of all things that are not needed , i dont use the net on my coms because i have a dedicated com for that, if i download software i will use a com that is not connected in anyway to my sim coms, i get rid of all those pop up warning s and such, in fact i take the time to see what is needed and what is not needed, i put as much resoreces to the sim as possible, all that crap in the tool bar i get rid of.one thing i learned over the years with this sim is that it demands cpu attention, and if you use your com for other things like the net . or other things you add-on that may have nothin to do with the sim , you will be amazed at the junk warnings and hidden software, that will affect your com.another thing i leaned is that once you start the sim it will load fast, and each time you load it again it gets slower and slower, that is the nature of the beast, so weekly i defrag with an great defrag program.to me as real pilots check there plane before they take off , i as a simmer check to see if my systems hardware is defraged and ready to go, and i make darn sure there are no hidden junk that will slow me down.Yes FSX is going to be a hog on your system and it demands your strict attention, i have a eight monitor set up with six coms, what im seeing with the Demo is i believe i will get better frame rates as long as i follow my procedures to the letter.as i said before most average simmers use there com for other things, i dont, ( very important in my humble opinion ).i will get the frame rate i need with all of my software loaded into it. and i mean i have a lot of software to add-on, radar contact, active sky and countless others. etc.even when i reformat and the hard drive is clean , i still will get rid of useless crap that is not needed.It is a challenge but worth it to me. To me FSX is going to be great to work with.Hardcore simmer..............Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't always turn off autogen-I made the observation (if you truly read my post) that at altitude with the new high res textures the sim actually more realistic without it-and that performance almost doubles. With autogen maxed I get from 8-20fps, with it at low settings(which would be equiv. to fs9 at its max) I get fs9 performance. With autogen off-I get xplane like smoothness (something I never got on fs9).http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug:Sadly, folks like you and I, and the original poster up top here, and a fair number I think in this thread, are NOT "the market" for MS!I feel like brothers-in-arms here; it's a siege mentality. I am enjoying it, eeek!Long live FS2004 on my XPS ! (If I am accused of being a Luddite, I can take it!)JS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah Finally! a Champion for mediocrity!:)


Manny

Beta tester for SIMStarter 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"Why do people keep saying they will run FSX when they can>afford a dual core CPU, DX10, and Vista? I've seen several>discussions that FSX isn't a dual core game, isn't designed>for DX10, and might run worse on Vista. Why do you think all>that will help you run FSX with add ons like you do with>FS9?">>Correct ..... These people ignore the truth, even ignoring>facts from Tdragger, and a host of other people :-lolThe fastest Single core processor today is the Core 2 Duo (Dual core).They are not ignoring the truth!


Manny

Beta tester for SIMStarter 

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  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...