Not really true.But mistruths and misrepresentations I do respond to-I am still waiting for Staffan to post compare shots to the the link I posted above that show fsx is "more cartoon like" than fsx. Maybe he can convince me...since he doesn't own fsx I'd like to know how he came up with that definitive claim.It does not take a monster machine to get great FPS-it takes a monster machine to turn everything full up and get great FPS.I leave autogen completely off (I don't know how you missed all my posts of me stating I think autogen looks very lego like and unreal except in the <150 ft. range when I miss the atmosphere)-and I have stated that I don't care for the new water at all. With these two items off which I choose to do more for looks than perfomance-I run the sim with pretty much everything else to the full right (except ai traffic at 20%) and the norm is 30-40 fps with occasional dips to 20.As for Andre-isn't it great that people dig in and give freely of their time so that others who are having problems or want the sim to run with a different set of features can get some enjoyment? Beats complaining-especially when one doesn't even own the product. Just tonight andre sent me a file which helps in my wish to see trees near airports-now I have the looks I like down low and the great performance I demand. Pretty cool...thank god for the positive people around here sometimes called by others "a really excited user" and worse.By the way-titles like "a really excited user" seem rather petty don't they?http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Yesterday I flew a>737 into Ketchikan at 29 Miles Wind in FS 9 and FSX and the>plane in FS9 was hardly ever moving. FSX gave me ride, I>nearly got nauseas. I know we all hate low Framrates, but>there is always a trade off...To tell you the truth, after almost 20 years of simming I am dead tired of tradeoffs. :-lolI am not talking about flying with default planes ( I assume you ment the default 737). I am talking about beeing able to import all my favourite aircraft such as Super 80, MDMax MD80, Project Tupolev TU 154, DF B727, Level-D B767, PMDG B744 and Ready for Pushback B742.As long as they fully doesn

I have an answer for the FPS issue. All FSX users that complain about their lower FPS should realize that FSX is reporting less of an FPS than you are really getting.I've attached two screen shots. Attachment #1 is an FS9 screen shot showing the reported FS9 FPS (50.3) and in the upper corner is the actual DirectX FPS (54).Attachment #2 is an FSX screen shot showing the reported FSX FPS (16.2) and in the upper corner is the actual DirectX FPS (30).So FSX is reporting a lower FPS then you are actually getting. So don't hit ctrl-z and just enjoy the experience.Bruce

How did you get the Direct X frame rate utility?

That's part of FRAPS I believe...

>Also the>a really excited user really don't help with the same spill about nothing is>wrong when there is. I don't know if I'm a a really excited user or not, but I certainly don't have issues with the program.

>How did you get the Direct X frame rate utility?That is a feature in the graphic card control center. At least for some ATI drivers.http://www.scandicair.com/images/sa_banner.gifMy specs are:Dell Dimension 4600 P4/2.8 at 3.0 Ghz1024 Mb DDR333 Dual channel memory (2x256,1x512)AGP 256 Mb ATI Radeon X850 Pro ViVo, flashed to a X850 XT PE. Omega 2.6.87 (CAT 5.12)DirectX 9.0cW XP Home with SP2E171FPb Flat panel monitor 17"370Gb HD (120 GB Maxtor, 250GB Samsung) 7200rpm ATA Lacie 250Gb Extern HDMy work:http://library.avsim.net/search.php?CatID=...&Go=Change+View

The FPS is being displayed by ATI Tray Tools.I did a little experiment. If I lock FS9 FPS at 20 then the directx FPS is 20. If I lock FSX FPS at 10 then the directx FPS is 20 and they feel about the same. All the people worried about their FPS in FSX should realize that it's better than they think it is.I have an Athlon XP 3200 with 1.5 gig of memory and an ATI 9800 Pro with 128 MB. My normal setting is to lock the FS9 FPS at 25. I've been running FSX with the setting at unlimited and it's always smooth.Bruce

FSX looks much more cartoonish, and.....with lousy frameratesVery problematic framerates, yes. The graphics in the city are for the most part bland because you have to cut the settings down so much e.g., no autogen, everything else default or less, ai a measely 15%. And this is with a good system as well.You can achieve a bit better when you do bush flying.Those missions aren't bad. Reminds me of games in the mid-nineties.

The only tweak I have done is turn the autogen and water off-and those shots are done with those settings.And your ai, ga and airline traffic? As well as your land and sea traffic? Autogen off? That's bad. Water off? That's a huge aspect of FSX. Another tweak undermining what FSX is supposed to deliver.

We should sticky a list of all the trolls on this forum so that people know which threads to avoid.James

>I leave autogen completely off (I don't know how you missed>all my posts of me stating I think autogen looks very lego>like and unreal except in the <150 ft. range when I miss the>atmosphere)-and I have stated that I don't care for the new>water at all. With auto-gen & water off. I think it looks quite good, considering no add-ons. Lowest fps around 15 when banking over the city. High at 29+ with fps target at 30. The sim remains smooth within these brackets. The best part is no stutters.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/159446.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/159447.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/159448.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/159449.jpgL.Adamson

How many monitors are you running?

I simply LOVE how some are experts on FSX with such 'forceful' views and they do not even own a copy of it.Staffen, seriously man... thanks for bringing simplicity to my life.duttonhttp://dutton.fsblogger.com/I kicked the FS9 habit... so can you.

This is a rather stunning discovery-it would be interesting if the aces team comments on it. I run much better on unlimited-have wondered about that.It validates that flying even at 15 fps can feel smooth in fsx.What if the ultimate bug was the fps counter reporting too low! :-lol http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg