FSX Patch?

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

You turn the sliders down (or tweak it) until you get the FPS you want.

[Guest]

LOL, been off the boards for a while and thought I'd check back for patch status, cant be bothered reading all this, guess I'll know when the patch is out by more obvious threads and announcements on the Avsim front page.Have decided to stop flying FSX for now though, been playing it to saturation and think a little break might be good, so hopefully the patch will be out soon and I'll start flying FSX again, also been upgrading the computer and I'd like to see how a patched FSX makes any impact to what I was used to.Been playing some other stuff that sat neglected for now and think I'll fire up FS9 for a look again, been largely ignoring it since FSX came out.

[PhilTaylor 45]

As long as the add-ons followed the rules, the FSX SP1 bits should go "under" the add-ons and replace the base files only. That is the point of our layering system for add-ons as I understand it.The modifications I am less sure of. Based on my understanding, if you have a file for file mod, that didnt replace or add any files and only changed the content of an existing file - that should have no affect.

[Guest]

For those of us who have downloaded the modified autogen files and made some tweeks to our fsx.cfg file do we need to undo all of that to install the patch? I don't really want to undo it and not be able to run those tweeks with the new patch unless the patch is going to give me a sizeable frame rate increase like the tweeks did. I basically want to know if the patch is even worth my time before i say goodbye to all the tweeks i have done to get me the performance that i require. I am also finding bugs with the game that I would like to see if they can be fixed so who does that? Does tech support give answers to bug fixes? I have asked this question in other threads but nobody ever answers it.________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.40Ghz | 2 GB Super Talent DDR2 800 | Big Typhoon VX | eVGA 8800GTS @ 565/900 | Seagate 2x320GB SATA RAID-0 | OCZ GameXStream 700W | Creative X-Fi | Silverstone TJ-09BW | Matrox Triplehead Setup

[PhilTaylor 45]

First, I havent dug into this, but this is my current understanding1) interaction of tweaks and SP1As I said, if it was a 1:1 file mod that left the original file with the original name in place there should be no effect.Anything that can be changed via .cfg should be fine.I would stay with the tweaks until the patch comes out, then try the patch with the tweaks. Worst case you have to uninstall, reinstall RTM, install SP1, and start tweaking again. I dont believe all the possible interactions are clear but I still feel we wont require that. I could be wrong, but my first guess is they should co-exist.2) the best I can suggest is report bugs to tell_fs@microsoft.com. It *is* late to be getting new issues. We take a look at the incoming, but it is late. I will say we have fixed triple digits worth of issues. The Danube, for instance, is one we fixed.3) certainly at this point, when not everything is in SP1 yet, PSS will not be able to comment. Even after we ship it might be difficult for PSS to confirm a fix was included. We'll just have to play that by ear and see what I can get permission to discuss.hth

[FTD1949 0]

>There is one thing I would like to know about the "Service>Pack";>>Does it have to be installed to a "vanilla" build of FSX? For>those of us who have modified our sim, with smaller textures>and add on textures to get better frames, are we going to get>a patch install failure?>>Also, as my last thread was locked with no contact, and no>apparent reason, there is PLENTY wrong with the sim,>especially with the toll it takes on hardware. It's fine to>say "a two year lifespan", and talk of CPU/GPU and RAM that>hasn't even been developed yet, but what about those of us NOW>with existing "high end" systems?>>And FS9 was NEVER like this.>>>Kindest regards,>>Andrew.Apparently you think you have a high end system but I see no specs here.If you can't run FSX then I would suggest you either don't have a highend system (which is not needed) or have a system you don't have optimized.Craig

[Guest AJT67]

Craig,Asus A8N premium Sli moboAMD64 Dual Core 4400+ Toledo core (1mb cache per core)2Gb PC400 DDR RAMGeforce 7900GTX 1Gb Video memory2x80gb SATA 2, RAID0 (OS only)1x160GB SATA 2 Data driveOn-board soundPioneer DVD BurnerWindows XP Sp2, all latest hotfixes91.72 Drivers.

[PhilTaylor 45]

Let me consolidate between this and your last post.If the pretty simple rules I posted are followed, then 3rd party content and the tweaks should all work with SP1. Should, as this is informed thinking out loud.Now as to your rig.Given the CPU-bound nature of FSX, everything you can do on the CPU side to provide high performance is goodness. Do you mean DR400 Ram? PC3200? Your RAM perf is average, given DDR800 RAM is out. The Corsair DDR800 RAM that I mentioned in my blog post is especially sweet since, with a simple BIOS tweak, you can get an additional 8% system perf. And that is important for an app like FSX that pumps gigabytes of data thru the system to render the Earth. The A8N is a 2004 mobo. And your graphics card, in DX9 perf, is about half of a G8800. So I would rate your system as mid-range across all components even if the CPU itself is high. In 2004 or 2005, yes this was a top-end system. Not anymore.I wonder what standard benchmarks on your rig show? CPU, memory, graphics? And what a top-end rig shows? Performance is all about the weakest link.

[Guest AJT67]

Thanks for the update Phil.I see what you're saying, and I will end my comments with one simple view, save that this thread turns into a flaming match.Simple, I will just have to return my copy of FSX. My system runs ALL of my other apps perfectly fine, and at this stage, I am not able, nor willing for that matter, to build an entirely new system just to run one simulator.I can get quite a few hours air time in the real thing over here in Aus for the same price. In Australia, the cost of computer hardware is considerably more than the US and europe, and I would have to be in a position to be able to spend 4-6K Aus $ to build a system that you have "recommended".I guess being on the ACES team, you have the distinct benefit of not having to pay for hardware when you develop and test your new sims. Back to FS9 I guess, which has served me well. And I think in future, the term "Minimum Specs" should be re-phrased as "Absolute minimum specs".I'm sure a few will be dissapointed.

[PhilTaylor 45]

First, let me say its totally stand up on your part to make the comment about not turning the thread into a flame war and that wasnt my point. I am pleased we can have reasonable discourse and wish many others could be as eminently reasonable as you are.While I am sorry about your disappointment with the perf of the app at the moment and agree its perfectly fair to feel that way, I felt it fair to point out that what you are calling a top-end rig just isnt.I do hear your reasonable point about cost. I do believe there is a thread over in the hardware forum about an impending price drop of significant proportions. And the main poster gives a raft of good advice on mobo/ram/cpu choices. He doesnt think you need to spend that much to create a new top-end rig.And we do hope to make things better with SP1. I can only hope, while its fair that today you withhold your approval - that you will give SP1 a whirl before you return it. To that end, put it on the shelf for a bit and then see. If you have given SP1 a go, then its fair to return the product.In closing I will say a few of us are working to fix the min-specs. I agree they are absolute minimum.Cool?

[PhilTaylor 45]

http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho..._id=23407&page=is the thread where Sam makes some interesting points about overall synergy of system components. And makes some prognostications on a price drop in April.

[Guest AJT67]

Phil,Thanks for the reply, and yes, I am fully for keeping this as civilised as possible in every way. I have to admit that earlier this week, I had a bit of a "rant", and my subject was closed down almost immediately, however, in fairness to myself, a few people really did jump on me in the process.But I think it's also fair of me to give you a bit of an overview as to the kind of person that I am; You just get such a variation here, and WHO I am would probably justify I guess some of my views.Firstly though, and I say this with all sincerity, I am not going to do anything with my sim until I've at least service packed it. Now onwards..lolI am 40 years of age, with a wife and three kids. I have the benefit of being a real time private pilot with 1600 hours of command time. I work for an international engineering company as a Sys Admin for my state, so I know computer hardware. I have been a beta tester on all Microsoft OS since Windows'95. I recently finished Vista, and it has been requested that I move on to Longhorn.I know that the FS series will always be a "game" as such, and I also know that it is there as a substitute for the fact that with family, mortgage, etc, AT THIS TIME, I cannot really afford to fly. I could afford it, but the girls would have to go without holidays.As a result of this, my simming is quite important to me, I can sim the real time ops that I used to fly. The wife understandthis, so do the girls. I know when I retire, I'll be able to get back up their, but not until my girls are all through college.So, at the end of the day, my sim is very important to me. I hear what you say loud and clear about a "scalable experience", and fully understand it. I realise that in perhaps a year, I will also have a much higher spec PC than what I have now. I admit that I am to some degree dissapointed with some areas of FSX. Yes, I understand limitations, dev timeframes etc, and I live them every day at work. I just hope that the Service Pack fixes some of the issues that ruin the "experience" for me. Perhaps the ACES team could have thought about today hardware as well as tomorrows?As far as I'm concerned, if I can continue to sim, I can keep my eye on the ball, and will always have it in my mind that I have to get myself back up there in the real world again. I'd really like to PM you and let you know my areas of "gripe" within FSX, but I'm sure the things I'd like to see fixed are areas you have all been contacted about prior to my rants.By the way, exellent job on the "wet runway" looks.Respectfully yours,Andrew.

[PhilTaylor 45]

Andrew,I completely understand your points and why the Sim is as important as it is. Our aim with SP1 is to convince you, and by extension the rest of the community, that FSX is a keeper.And I really appreciate the dialog, I can only wish we had more threads like this where you all can reasonably express your frustrations without it degenerating into a slag-fest. It is these reasonable frustrations that led to us doing SP1, after all.Phil

[siggy 154]

Phil, regarding the tell_fs address, sometimes I get an automated reply and sometimes not. Does no automated reply mean my mail didn't pass the spam filter :-) ? (I checked my spam folder, to be sure, and there was no such reply in it).Siggy

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

>Craig,>>Asus A8N premium Sli mobo>AMD64 Dual Core 4400+ Toledo core (1mb cache per core)>2Gb PC400 DDR RAM>Geforce 7900GTX 1Gb Video memory>2x80gb SATA 2, RAID0 (OS only)>1x160GB SATA 2 Data drive>On-board sound>Pioneer DVD Burner>Windows XP Sp2, all latest hotfixes>91.72 Drivers.>Regarding your CPU, that processor is running at 2.2 ghz stock. A 2.2 ghz Athlon X2 will be hurting in FSX unless you back off the Autogen and maybe the AI traffic/road traffic. Also, I bet the Autogen tweaks would help you.I run basically the same processor as you (Opteron 1212). It runs at 2.0 ghz stock. But I overclocked it to 2.8 ghz, and that really helps. I can get it up to 2.93 ghz, and I can probably go for 3 ghz as soon as I can get Core Temp (temp monitor) to run on Vista x64.You could probably overclock your processor to 2.4 or maybe 2.6 ghz, depending on your CPU cooler. That would help your FPS in FSX.