Had to see it for myself! FSX -- WOW!

[Pete S 7]

Craig,I was reponding to Mike T, who started this thread. I don't have Vista and not planning to get it untill it is fully released and supported. I am perfectly happy with XP for now, and believe that FSX is at present optimized for Win XP.Pete S.

[Guest Binkles]

I kinda disagree with the FPS - I have mine locked at 20, and even with my new card, I have it locked at 25 (Fs9 this is).Do I feel the need to go higher? Not really. It's all a matter of personal preference, otherwise I would never of installed FS.I've tried the demo with 13 FPS and I find that's acceptable as well.It's the same with the whole aspect of FSX. It depends where you decide to lay the mark will determine where your satisfaction lies.

[Mike T 220]

Yup that would be little ole me and I humbly appreciate the powers that be taking the time to make note. I've never doubted that folks at Aces are doing their best and it seems that they are truly stumped which means they should fly me to Redmond (all expense paid, of course) to help them sought these things out! LOL. Ahem. I agree that the RC ATI drivers are not fully optimized, and I agree that Vista RC2 is still getting faster by the day (the performance increase between Beta 2 and RC2 is astounding - my hat's of to the Gods in Redmond).FYI my Autogen and Scenery Density sliders are set to: SparseCloud draw distance set to: 60MiAircraft traffic set to: 50%Bursty thingy setting to: offAA: handled by my video card at 6xResolution at 1900x1200AF: 16x HQAFNo aircraft or building shadows.I DO have detailed textured radius set to high and this is not up for compromise. The default settings shows to many blurries and that I won't tolorate...Also, reaching back into Taildraggers old notes I remember that SLI doesn't help FS9 or FSX at all, likewise my AMD Dualcore doesn't really do much either.Still I am tweaking. I am up to 14fps at SEA with the above slider settings at the airport. HOWEVER, I am up between 25-60fps at altitude with scattered or broken clouds and the sim at that point is so smooth it brings tears to my eyes (no kidding, with turbulence and the new motion effect I am getting motion sickness!) I find the sim smooth at anything above 10fps so my target is to get a steady 15 fps as a bottom floor and you'll never hear another complaint out of me.Anyhoo, back to tweaking. FSX is obviously a keeper and when she shines she really brings many new dynamic dimensions to the sim that we have not had before.Again, thanks to the team at ACES for taking notice. Crap, did I just drink the Kool Aid? M$ a really excited user! M$ a really excited user! :-lol

[FlyingsCool 3]

I think the difference between your thoughts about Vista and what the previous poster said is your comment - "will".As the poster noted, it is irrelevant for FSX retail today.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[FlyingsCool 3]

Who says I will get "dizzy" and "tired really fast"? I don't think I've ever experienced any of these effects, and I've never had a computer which supported any more than 20 fps MAX.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[FlyingsCool 3]

What is this fetish regarding pushing the sliders all the way to the right? The developers - NOT MARKETING - THE DEVELOPERS, who have been kind enough to speak to us, have been saying all along - (not an exact quote) "We designed this system with headroom - you WILL NOT be able to push the sliders all the way to the right with any system available today".Stop measuring the software by pushing sliders all the way right! It's not going to happen. In fact, there is so much headroom built into the software, that Adam stated to me that it is possible to run out of memory with FSX. 2 GB of address space just isn't enough for all the data that FSX needs to manipulate. It needs to become a 64 bit app. And it will. But not today, and most likely not in FSX. Think of it as a rebuilding year :) With all that said, I believe that I should be able to have smooth flight with similar levels of autogen as FS9, or at least SOME autogen. Hopefully we'll understand the issues and come up with hints for those of us with lesser rigs.For those of you who are happy with FS9, stick with it. Nobody is forcing you to purchase FSX. But why clog the forums with so much negativity?Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[Guest allcott]

Like you I'd prefer to see it overflowing with gushing praise, but aren't you being a bit negative about the way you treat those who don't share your view? :-waveAllcott

[FTD1949 0]

This is what he said: read twice: As the poster noted, it is irrelevant for FSX retail TODAY.

[FlyingsCool 3]

Translated - whining does not beget solutions.It makes people cranky and want to whine right back at you.A more appropriate response is:"Gee, I just bought FSX. This is my setup, these are my settings (all of them) and this is my performance. Anybody have any ideas on how it could be improved?"This tends to bring the nice side of people out, and elicits help.And I'll tell you, having to wade through responses from people who haven't got the FIRST CLUE as to development related decisions, is no fun at all! And will tend to drive the very people who could help you away. Your know-it-all drivel does NOT help and does NOT begin to offer solutions. If you think you know how to do it better, go ahead and put your money where your mouth is. MS needs the competition, and I'd bet the development staff would WELCOME both the challenge and the related justification they could then bring to their bosses to get them to spend more money and development resources on the product.If you have a question like "Could doing it ??? way make the product better?", again, would be more appropriate.Being the player of a game does not make you an expert in game design or software development processes.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[FlyingsCool 3]

I'm not looking for gushing praise in any way shape or form. I am looking for people to have realistic expectations, and from those to start discussions. Attempting to start or add to a discussion using unrealistic expectations automatically negates the discussion.My point was that expecting to push the sliders all the way to the right is like trying to turn your amp up to 11.I think a more reasonable discussion would be a search for what base performance factors are we looking for? and What slider settings attain these goals?; realizing that different people will have different base performance goals.If you get off on pushing sliders all the way to the right, don't buy FSX.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[Reset XPDR 1,372]

I agree, pushing sliders hard right is a privelidge, not a right, with any new FS release. With FS9 I was able to push my sliders much further to the right without being severely punished with performance. In fact, I haven't been able to set FSX to an equivalent FS9 setting without getting much lower FPS, which I was easily able to do with FS9 versus FS2002. Something is not right here.I still want the glass to be half full, but by geeze the glass is shrinking in size! ;-)Gary

[JerryG 1]

Mike,It's great you posted a follow-up. As you've seen, in about 6 hours you've witnessed the bad (low FPS) to "insane" as you put it (in a good way) as to the smoothness and great sensation of flight.Obviously, tweaks are needed. Some are already available. Somemore will no doubt be provided.So, until FSX is "optimized" in all scenarios (e.g. cities, max sliders, etc.), fly it where you can enjoy it. And, fly FS9 as well!JerryG

[FlyingsCool 3]

But the developers have specifically said - No machine available today can handle having all the sliders pushed all the way to the right. It was designed this way on purpose.Our task is now to figure out where the sliders should be set for a given set of performance requirements and a given computer setup.So here's a question - How many of you tried to use FSX with the default setup at installation and how was performance there? Did you install any addons? If so what addons? Did MS do a good job of choosing a default setup for good performance during installation of a default installation, no addons? If so, what would you like to see improved? How does it compare to FS9 (stock and/or improved FS9)? I imagine this is where we should start.Keep in mind, that the majority of FSX users will never have installed an addon for FS9, and this MUST be accounted for. We (advanced users who keep up with the addons, discussions, etc.) are a minority. We are IMPORTANT (at least my mother thinks so), but we are only a part of the equation.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

[FTD1949 0]

Thomas that makes to much sense Thomas. Wouldn't rather read the complaints or read about how FSX will be in the future? Personally I live in the here and now like you. Craig

[FlyingsCool 3]

Unless you HAVE to have it, make sure Bloom is off, too. It and I think the shadows and 2.x water effects require 2 passes for each frame, which tends to seriously degrade performance.After I turn these and all airborne AI off, I have found the biggest framerate killer is automobile traffic. My machine is WAY slower and MUCH less memory than you, so your results may vary.Dell D810 Lattitude 1.83 GHz Pentimu M, 1 GB mem, 7200 RPM 80GB drive, 64 MB ATI X300 Mobility graphics.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180