Agreed.Honestly I do NOT see how posting screenies helps prove anything. Sorry, A single screen shot tells me nothing. It's what happens between frames that counts.But thanks anyways :-)cheersgreghttp://www.fs2crew.com/linepilot.jpg

Those default AI plane models are absolute FPS-killers, even with only a few of them around.When I had default traffic, I think I kept my airline traffic at about 20 or 30%. Now that I'm using WOAI traffic, I have it turned all the way up to 70%, and I could probably go even higher without taking much of a performance hit.I'm only suggesting you try it because it made such a huge difference for me, and we have the same specs.Ok, you took the trouble to post this for me so I'll give it a go. But if it doesn't work....just kidding.

LOL!Hey from what you're reporting, it seems like you can't even play FSX so you might as well try anything you can ;) BTW here is the official WOAI site:http://www.world-of-ai.com/As long as you use the new installer, you can install any of the airline packages listed, and they tend to pick the best aircraft models from what's available in the community (AIAardvark, EvolveAI, etc).I just wish they released packages more frequently....I need my Delta!

This is why I love FSX it works for me and the ones it don't I'm sorry. When I first loaded up FSX I could of went right to Seattle just like the default in FS9. Then I could put my sliders all the way to the right.Instead I let FSX choose its settings for me then started from there after that I looked around forums found tips that worked used them.Now instead of complaining about FSX I enjoy it. Just like thousands of other people who have taken the time to learn. So many of us will enjoy our new sim no matter what people are saying about the FPS. And I will not try to ruin some other simmers happinessby telling them their FSX should be so many FPS or else its not good enough for them.

The trouble with a static screen shot is it doesn't convey any of the improvements listed in this thread:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...d=367319&page=3That being said-I probably get about 5-10 less fps in fsx than I did in fs9 with similar visuals and all those add ons that cost me quite a bit of money. As mentioned though-I can go down to about 12 fps in fsx and still have smooth flight-quite a bit different than fs9 that stuttered below 20 and instrumentation always stuttered.However, fs9 doesn't have all the stuff contained in the thread above-so a still picture can't possibly convey the "real" picture of what you would be missing.....Maybe the test ought to be a screenshot landng at seattle-but with ground effect, proper xwind handling, thermals, car traffic on the nearby roads, slippery runways due to rain/snow...whoops...fs9 can't do that...it can look very nice though-but demanding simmers want more..http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

greengriffonOk. This looks more promising. I've put the AI airline traffic up to 60%. However, there's not enough liveries and airlines right now. I saw AA and Continental. Is there North West (not Cargo)?. It look's promising though.Here's a series of picks. Settings are autogen off. Scenery complexity dense. Water 2.x low. All other scenery settings full right except scenery complexity and level of detail- medium. 60% ai traffic. 1600x1200 32 bit. Fair weather (theme).17 fpshttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Lent1/kseafsx.jpg11 fps looking towards KSEA. Note at 60% not much traffic but that's because there are not that many US liveries yet. Or are there?http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Lent1/kseafsx3.jpg18.1 fps.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Lent1/kseafsx2.jpgI'm anxious to really put the AI to the test though with these liveries. Thanks for the referral.

>Agreed.>>Honestly I do NOT see how posting screenies helps prove>anything. Sorry, A single screen shot tells me nothing. It's>what happens between frames that counts.>>But thanks anyways :-)>>cheers>>greg>http://www.fs2crew.com/linepilot.jpgWell for what its worth i think the later posts with screenshots are finally beginning to show what we need.It seems like either fsx is running on a cliff edge or just has a big conflict with some systems, which dare i say may be ati systems.I will try the autogen and ai tweaks again.READ THIS BIT PLEASECan someone who has it working well on an ATI card please post their driver version thanksTHANKSCan anyone who has nothing positive to say (or helpful) please move on.thanks again to those who have made a serious technical investigation.The fibre time tweak didnt work for me as the blurries over the city went well splodgy.thanks again to those that have posted screenshots plus technical details i think the chap with the 7950 has spent his money well.

>I'm anxious to really put the AI to the test though with these>liveries. Thanks for the referral.No problem.If you really want to put it to the test, make sure you have AA and Continental installed, then begin a flight at Newark International (KEWR). It's a Continental hub, and there will be lots of planes operating in the area.Head right over to the Manhattan skyline and you'll have a good test right there. Make sure you wave at my house on the way over ;)GG

Sorry but i for one am not bothered about the fs9 to fsx comparison, fsx is a massive improvement over vanilla fs9. (IMO)If people can indeed get highish fps in fsx and i cant i would just like to try to understand why, if its because they have lowered the detail due to 'tweaks' then fair enough but if its due to hardware or drivers, please enlighten me as i would like to try these first.thanks for your time chapsregardssmarti05

I rest my case! No-one is able to satisfy my reasonable request. It's clear that all those who want to like FSX despite the problems are unable to put their money where their mouths are. As for going on to the screenshots forum, there is nothing on there which demonstrtates the claims of some. As for bush flying, many like to fly airliners from city to city. Bush flying does not tax a system. Demand morefrom the creators of what is the crucial centre of your hobby, the FS platform otherwise it'll be a hobby of mediocrity. If you like mediocrity however, I'll shut up.

>If you like mediocrity however, I'll shut up.I like mediocrity, so can we count on you to keep your promise?This thread was pointless to begin with.

I've got the 7950GX2 shots above...even though the original post seemed a bit cynical...I think we've picked up a few tips along the way. I too am going to import 3rd party AI--was hoping ultimate traffic would post an FSX patch/version.One thing I failed to mention in my post above...I'm running the FIBER_FRAME line in fsx.cfg at .19--I went down to .05 before video got a bit unstable without appreciable increase in fps.Lastly, since most everyone is experiencing most of the fps degradation at select large airports, it might be useful if there was some focus (by the texture/scenery gurus)to reduce some of the complexity/coloring/shading of the actual buildings without loosing functional aspects (moving jetways etc). I noticed at some large/complex airports, KBOS comes to mind and even Heathrow, there is less impact on fps than let's say KATL (assuming equal numbers of default AI). I've haven't figured out how to target specific airport scenery files (yet).Rake7575

Thanks Geofa for the no autogen harping. I forced myself to try it last night and lo and behold I loved it. Performance jumped through the roof going from 12-15 around Reading, PA to stuck at 20 where I have it locked. I was able to change texture resolution to 1m and up the mesh complexity up from 60 to 100, and I upped traffic to 40% each GA/AIRL. Funny thing is, I really enjoy autogen, but flying around without it on my low end system allowed me to enjoy the sim and not worry about performance. I began looking at the textures and at points really felt like I was flying above rooftops and parking lots. Amazing. For now, I've found a sweet spot and I'll try Greengriffons world of traffic above to see if I can up the ante on airliner traffic. Anyone know if GAtraffic works or if any replacement GA traffic files exist?I do realize people love autogen, but force yourself to fly without it for a bit, especially over a city. It's ashame they don't have on option to display under a certain altitude though as sitting on a runway looks rather bleak. Ian.athlonxp3000+/6600gt128mb/1gb mem/2kmfans

I run an X1600 Pro 512M PCI-E card with the latest drivers & no overclocking. I have found that using Adaptive AI causes stutters (and blurries)with my system. Otherwise I'm using 6X AA & 8X AF with no issues.Jim

Greengriffin, How does world or ai work? Does it replace the default AI aircraft or disable them in some way? I know there is a traffic or AI bgl somewhere in the files. Just trying to understand how it works. Craig