Hi Folks... Yes, it is possible to get good frames rates and results using a less than cutting edge machine, or resorting to turning down most sliders. I've had FSX since last Thursday, and after spending several days tweeking various settings. I'm quite happy with my current performance. I consider my system a mid-high end machine. Here's the specs;P4 @ 3.3GHZ,800mhz FSB1 Gig DDR 400 RAMFX7800 AGP 256Meg Graphics card250 GB SATA HDI have FSX configured as such;I have weather settings at default. I have air and sea traffic set at 25%. I have aviation traffic set at 30%. I have airport vehicles set at medium. I have scenery density set at dense. I have all terrain sliders set at maximum except water textures, which are set at at med 1.x. I have bloom and autogen turned off. I also have aircraft shadows turned off.With these settings I'm getting a constant 9-15fps (depending on location) while at the gate. During climb out I typically see 12-16fps. By the time I reach cruise altitude I'm sitting between 21-24fps (fps locked at 24). On top of this its important to note that lower fps rates on FSX look considerably smoother than the same frame rate in FS9.Yes... I'm very pleased with FSX, and look forward to the additional performance tweeks that are sure to follow :)Regards,Mark

I have all settings set to max, except for autogen set to sparse, water set to low 2x, vehicle traffic set to 5, Bloom off.Antistropic is enabled, and 8xS AA, 1024 x 768 resolution...And I get 32fps at Princess Juliana airport, in the learjet VC. I am using the latest demo build.And below is a screenshot.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/158354.jpgMy specs are:Intel Pentium D 950 @ 3.4ghzKingston 2GB DDRII RAM PNY 7900GTX 512MB, core speed clocked @ 625mhz