I suggest that you do a little search here on AVSIM, that's what the tips n tricks forum is for. I don't want to be too harsh on you but really that is what the search function is for, and because of the ample info available, hands don't need to be held to walk someone thru how to get decent FSX performance. If you don't have the time or inclination to tweak it then you are in the wrong hobby.Matt Fox's web site is a great place to start:http://www.fox-fam.com/wordpress/?page_id=41Keep in mind, I have what appears to be one of the top FSX cpu's: a San Diego core cpu. The only cpu's I'd take over mine are Core2Duo, FX57,FX55,4000+, and the latter two aren't much faster. If you don't have one of the above cpu's, you're automatically hamstrung to some extent. But, things can be done. You will just have to have lower expectations.Even I have to have realistic expectations. When in a big city, I have to make adjustments if I want 25+ fps. I don't expect to be able to run full sliders right in NYC with my Jan 2006 computer.Another often overlooked thing is adjusting memory latency. This can potentially give 5%-10% fps boost in FSX. You must have a quality motherboard and quality ram to do this, however. Otherwise you'll lock your system or it will be unstable.I suggest attempting a command rate of 1T, and dropping latency one setting at a time so you can isolate problems. One must know their stock ram settings before doing any latency tweaking. One must also know how to reset their BIOS in case they make the rig unbootable. Know those two things before doing anything.In my case, I now run 2.5-3-3-8 with a 1T command rate, and this has given me an 8% increase in frame rates in FSX, in all situations.I also strongly advise you to install Matt Fox's Autogendescriptions.spb file, as detailed on his site.The texture size tweaks didn't help my system. But then, others report great results with that. As with any tweak, you mileage may vary.Finally, Ryan Maziarz has good information, and a link is provided to his site on Matt Fox's.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2530 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

>>Modern theatrical film runs at 24 frames a second. This is the>case for both physical film and digital film systems."Ive known this for some time, and always find it interesting. I haveyet to hear anyone walk out of a movie theater complaining " boywas that ever crappy, it was so jerky I didnt enjoy it"... 'Nuff said.I have never set my sliders over 27, 30 absolute max. Oh sure youcan fool yourself into thinking its smoother, the minds a funnything. But really, when everyone's worried and talking about overhead.Forget the 90 FPS its just wasted space. But on the other hand, if thatswhat you like, go for it. I'll just plod along with my 24-27 smoothFPS.

Just for a comparison, I make weapon sights for the US military. Some of the sights have 60 FPS and some 30 FPS. It's very easy to see the difference, even for a novice. The Army is not satisfied with 30 FPS at all, due to the noticeable flicker. All new designs must have 60 FPS or better.Brian

>It's completely subjective and there is no right or wrong.>I've never known anyone to consider 9 FPS to be almost totally>smooth but if you're happy then fine. Lucky you, that saves>you a fortune in hardware upgrades!>>For me, I have it capped at 25 which I find okay for simming,>although I'd like it higher. When it ducks below that I notice>and below 18 or so, it's largely unplayable. If you use>TrackIR or something like that, frame rate becomes more>important to get the subconscious connection going - real head>turns are smooth, so in game ones must be!>>In FPS games (First Person Shooters) like Quake or FEAR, I>need at least 40 and much prefer 60 FPS (Frames Per Second ...>this is confusing!), my monitor's limit, because I want to be>able to quickly turn and get my cross-hair over someone's head>fast but in sims or strategy games like Civilisation, 25 is>fine.funny thing is i get ownage fps rates with everything maxed out in prey, fear, and doom 3, yet fsx is giving me 2-6 fps with sparse autogen.

>Gentleman i too like FSX and i would love to run it , i to>wonder why some folks are satisfied with 15 to 20 fps, thats>fine if you are fully loaded with add-ons.>>but be honest most of those guys are flying default craft with>very little if any add-ons and are claiming good frame rate ,>what about the simmer that wants to add more add-ons , will he>continue to get good frame rate , thats the one i want to here>from.>>To me FSX is for the average user and not for the guy that>wants more because there is no head room.>>..........RobertRobert,FSX is for the average user .... the larger market for the product is not us enthusiastRegards,Vernon