Hi All,I'm wondering about the non-autogen buildings in FSX. I am happy with FSX performance on my p4 2.6 OC'd to 3.0 with 1.5 gig ram and Nvidia 7600GS. I get a steady 22 FPS which I have it locked to in all general airports with any weather and 15 fps (flyable but not smooth to my eyes)flying out of Boston looking at non-autogen buildings. I use the original FSX textures at 1m and medium autogen w/10% GA and commercial traffic.My question is why do the non-autogen buildings impact framerates SO greatly. Is it possible to substitue FS9 non-autogen buildings in FSX, because I fly both and don't see much difference in the buildings when flying out of Boston in FS9 vs FSX. The ones in FS9 seem to have little or no impact on my framerates.Thousands of autogen buildings seem to impact my framerates very little, where as panning to a few non-autogen buildings brings the framerates down immediately. Does anyone understand why this would be and if substituting FS9 buildings would be possible?Thanks,Tom

The buildings now are using bump map and specular textures that weren't used in FS9. If you don't end up flying near the buildings, you may want to consider either removing all the bump map and specular files for buildings, or it may help to find the tweak to turn off the use of 2.0 shaders altogether (this will force the use of 1.x water textures). Try it, see if you like it.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

Thank you very much, I'll give it a try.

how do you remove the bump maps and speculars for the buildings?? I would like to keep 2.x for the water so I dont wanna lose the 2.0 shaders.

Seehttp://fsx-tweaks.4t.com/texture_folder.htmlI should add I don't know what the caveats are related to doing this. FS is going to expect the files to be there, so may constantly search for them, or, it may be smart enough to only look for them once and if not there, not look for them anymore. And, it may be that FS constantly looking for the files doesn't have any real effect either. But I think it is worth a try. And there are other people doing it as well. I don't know if there is a better way to tell FS not to use 2.0 shader stuff for buildings. There may in fact be a setting for this, but I am not aware of it.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

Would you mind posting a follow up so we can see if this actually does improve fluidity....I am curious, but moving into a new home so I will be out of the loop for a few days.Would love to see if this works, seems like it should.thanks in advancedanon - -

Tried it. Don't work right. Missing buildings, Green concrete runway textures, all kinds of problems. Seems these things are needed.Carlos

Well, I just did it on my system, and there were no visual issues that I could notice. I did notice that, even though I supposedly disabled the 2.0 shaders, it hasn't taken for me yet. So somehow I need to get the FSX.cfg to read from the Display.cfg.I haven't done a performance comparison yet.I don't know why your system got messed up.Perhaps you moved some other files, too?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

Hi,I tried the two '.bat' files on Matt Foxx's site that basically copies the specular maps and bump maps over with empty files. The non-autogen buildings seemed to not affect frame rate drops as much when panning them into view however there was not a huge difference. Viusually I notice no difference. The jury is still out on this one for me.Thanks everyone,Tom