Rob, Any particular reason your shots are all at night? How bout some daylight shots. Craig

Bob,I've posted my case very clearly on my web site, it wouldn't take much (except a little money) to get the key words "FSX frame rates fps" added to top list in Google search database. This would reach A LOT of people, many more than Microsoft would like it to reach.In fact, so much so that it might just get their attention, for better or worse.Not disagreeing with your statements, just letting you know how one can truely get attention if something is that important to them.Not sure I want to spend the money getting my web site put high in the Google search database, but that depends on how Microsoft respond (or lack of it) over the next few months. We maybe little people in the scheme of things, but the Internet and not too much cash can be a VERY powerful tool.Rob.

Well said Gary.Rob.

There is an idea, a performance add-on for FSX -- sorta like MegaScenery's attempt to sell their FS Booster (which did nothing on my system for performance). Maybe this was Microsoft's plan all along and the folks defending FSX poor performance are working on the very "Tools" we need to fix it ;) ha ha -- just joking!My goal was to demonstrate the how FSX looks at the same frame rate as FS9. Some still think FSX looks better, I don't and many other's don't either. But the beauty is letting folks see, and who knows, maybe this will help folks make a purchase decision or not (either for or against) -- but it sure beats an "artists rendition" of what FSX might look like on Vista/DX10 -- don't ya think?Rob.

I picked dusk because that requires different texture sets and I just happen to like sunsets :)But I can put together some day shots tonight, but these will be the last of the screen shots as it takes some time to get these done and I've got other coding to do.Rob.

Rob, Can you try something! Don't know if it will make much of a diference, but I noticed that initially FSX uses only one core. I tried turning off CPU 0 via afinity, then turned it back on. Task manager then showed both processors being utilized, (albiet only about 50% each), but I did notice an increase in FPS. It's hard to tell by how much though, as my Core 2 Duo is defective (Clocking at half Cpu (1.2Ghz)and Bus speed (133Mhz)), and I'm awaiting a replacement system, under warrantry, but it was noticeable.

>No problem, sorry that my message came across that way and>didn't mean to cause any issues.>>My goal is to get FSX to look as good as FS9 at the same frame>rates. So far I'm not having much luck. But you're correct>FSX does have the potential to be better than FS9 -- maybe in>a year or two or three it will.>>But deep down, I still can't help but think there is something>fundamentally wrong with the Aces dev team code -- FSX>shouldn't be this slow.>>Rob.Hi Rob,I tend to agree with your statements about FSX. If FSX was really built with future technology in mind then I'm a little confused about something. As I understand it the trend is toward multi-core CPU's running at lower frequencies. Program code has to be specifically written to take advantage of all this. Apparently FSX has not been and it is not anticipated that it will be patched at all. How then will FSX perform better or eventually take advantage of this new technology? I would love to be able to look forward to a solution because, personally, I think FSX has a lot of potential if one could attain some fluidity with all the features turned on in the near,(or even distant), future. Indeed, I too share your concerns. :-)In the meantime I will still fly the FSX missions. That's about all I can enjoy right now in FSX which gives me some fluid movement.System Specs. : Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 2.80GHz (2 CPUs)Memory: 1536MB RAMDirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)Card name: RADEON X800 PROManufacturer: ATI Technologies Inc.Chip type: RADEON X800 PRO AGPDAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz)Cheers,Mark.

Thank you.

>I'm fairly happy with the performance of FSX on my 3.6 P4>with 8800gts and 2 gb ram. I'm a GA burb flyer and it works>great for me as long as water is at the 1 level. I'd love to>be able to fly with water maxed but it aint happening. That's what scares me the most. I fly in mostly rural areas, with zero autogen, but I use the 2x low water, and it is very flyable, locked at 26FPS and works great. I love flying the extra or C172, or caravan wherever, whenever, and it is greatHow can your 8800 card not work well with water????? Wow....Im really starting to hope that DX10 solves a lot of the GPU/CPU guzzling performance issues

With your screens all being at dusk its hard to see detail of the land so. Without day shots its to hard to compare. Since you are getting 40fps with FSX what more do you want?

OK...that makes sense...So, instead of all of this amazing discourse, why don't we all agree that we'd like a patch and be done with it all?I suspect a performance enhanceing patch would be welcomed by both folks that hate fsx and folks that love it.Bob

Rob, sometimes its hard to be patient, but I'm pretty sure folks in Redmond have heard the issue. Perhaps you read this on the fs ACES blogs...I have.I do suspect a patch is being worked on. I can't be sure of that, but its been suggested by several MS folks.Such a thing doesn't come overnight. I think the pressure is sufficient.Just my Opinion.B

How about other Aircraft any would be nice, maybe a cloud or two, perhaps some more accurate terrain rather than the "Deserts of the Bay Area", maybe even a shadow or two -- oh I don't know, anything to make it seem more realistic rather than an empty world.Just curious, why can't you compare dusk shots?Regardless -- I'll get some day shots up if that makes a difference.Rob.

These old eyes can't see that good in the dark anymore. c

Rob, while you said you were joking, the notion of people "defending" fsx's poor performance is a key concept to the anger expressed here.I suspect folks are just being kind and understanding. While you feel like its a better idea to get "in their face", its really not a bad thing to live ones life in a kind and understanding head.I see people having fun with the new sim.I'll bet every one of them will enjoy a performance enhancement patch if one becomes available.If you ask if you like the sim, you get one answer.If you ask if folks would employ a better sim if available, you'll get that answer.If you make an assumption based on any comments of a persons base intent, you might very well be wrong.Best,B