Abysmal Perfomance of FSX in Vista

[Geofa 108]

I had occasional problems with xp too....I also had occasional problems with fs9...http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

OK, I'll try it. That kind of sounds like a driver problem. I'm using the same driver as you...we'll see.

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

>I had occasional problems with xp too....>I also had occasional problems with fs9...>>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgSan Diego no like you.

[Geofa 108]

Probably cause I grew up there and left... :-lolhttp://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest robains]

quotes were relative to FSX and Vista -- that's why they were selected. CTD isn't good in any situation, so then one can gather from your posts (and others) that you ARE indeed running into problems with Vista and FSX. And it would seem that more of you ARE running into problems with Vista than those not.Rob.

[Geofa 108]

Actually-in my case I think the problem is more in the new drivers from nvidia as I didn't have this problem until installing them.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

>quotes were relative to FSX and Vista -- that's why they were>selected. CTD isn't good in any situation, so then one can>gather from your posts (and others) that you ARE indeed>running into problems with Vista and FSX. And it would seem>that more of you ARE running into problems with Vista than>those not.>>Rob.>>So you don't believe me (or anyone else) when I post about a FPS boost from new NVidia drivers in Vista? But you do believe me when I say I turn off Superfetch while flying in FSX and twist that into your Vista and FSX are a disaster and Steve Ballmer is going to come beat your cat with a sock rant!?!?! No wonder you're confused. You can't see through the hate.I have no idea if Superfetch is causing a problem or not or if it slows down FSX. I turn off Superfetch and about 15 other services when I fly in FSX cause I don't want them running. Just like I don't want Word or Paint Shop Pro or Visual Studio running either. I can maybe eek out a FPS or two. I did this in XP with games. I'd do it in another OS if given the chance. Since I know something about operating systems and services, I tweak the OS to max out game performance. The first few weeks I flew FSX on Vista, I didn't stop any services and it ran OK. I'm just tweaking here--I'd still do it if I got 50 FPS--its not a Vista/FSX crisis. And you quote Astrodave...he called it a "slight annoyance". That's how he characterized it. Do you read what you quote? Or do you just grab whatever straw you can to perpetuate your Vista turns FSX into a wasteland mantra?

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

>Thanks for the ideas. I'd be curious if you get a crash to at>San Diego and satellite airports. >http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgOK, I tried San Diego. No crashes. I took off from San Diego Intl, and flew all over...downtown, Coronado, landed on the carrier.It was fine. Maybe you have some corrupted scenery?

[Geofa 108]

I "repaired" the install-still get the same problem-strange...http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[Guest robains]

Lets just say you tolerance (and Astrodave) of a poor quality product is higher.I wouldn't enjoy FSX or Vista after doing a 2 hr flight and on approach to destination airport I get a Crash to Desktop. But hey that's just me, clearly your tolerance is considerably higher. Where I would view this as 2 hrs of wasted entertainment, you would view it as "acceptable" or even an opportunity to tweak -- sorta like a challenge to fix it. I realize this is a common male trait "fix it", but in my case, I want to be entertained -- I spend enough of my day fixing all the other problems around anything related to Microsoft.Don't confuse "hate" with not accepting mediocrity. Fortunately many others appear to agree that Vista is a waste of money and time and evidence is clear that it doesn't make FSX experience any better only provides even more challenges to the consumer.I personally would not be happy spending $100-$400 for the OS and another $50-$70 for FSX only to be hit with poor performance and series of "challenges" to make the OS work and FSX work. I don't believe the "average" consumer has your level of tolerance.Rob.

[Guest FxF3]

I downloaded the Vista Advisor. The biggest kick was it did not recognize two very important pieces of hardware. My Geforce 8800 and my Creative Labs sound card. So know way am I going to mess with Vista right now. The Vista Advisor also told me some of my app's had to go:-mad . What the heck is with that? So I will stay with XP for some time.

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

Sorry, I see hate from all the shouting and posts like this:>Drivers to the rescue -- how many times have I heard this BS. New >drivers contain Magic and other good speed enhancers that somehow >overcome the CPU life sucking 3X number of services running in >Vista.>Please please do tell us how a vendor gets "non-compliant" drivers >into Vista OS? Do they pay off Microsoft to get them certified >without going thru normal certification process? Stop making stuff >up -- if you don't know the process of device driver development, >then don't say ANYTHING.... >If you want to contribute positively, stop being a a really excited user and >report reality not fiction. You do NO ONE any benefit by telling >them better drivers will save the day for FSX and Vista. Give me a >break!This is in response to Key_Is_Soaked who was making a point about how drivers can be immature in new operating systems--something that has been true since the beginning of operating systems. You bloviate about 3X the number of services (you ever actually used Vista?...you might want to count). Then you tell him to stop making stuff up (after your services whopper). Then you tell him to shut up.And then, the piece de resistance. You shout that it is not helpful to claim that better drivers will eventually come and they will be helpful vis-a-vis FSX performance. Not helpful to whom? To me? I got an extra 5-6 FPS from new drivers. I'm trying to find how I am injured or how that didn't benefit me. How about johngutt, jmendes, and bjablonka who all got a FSP increase from new drivers? Or are they all part of The Conspiracy?No, it does no benefit to you, cause it puts a chink in your Vista/FSX sky is falling rant. Geofa had "occasional" problems in XP and with FS9, too. You're still on Vista sucks. I don't get a CTD in San Diego in Vista. No, Vista sucks. Vista is far from perfect, but we don't obsess over it or harbor paranoia towards the company that built it. You do.

[Guest JackDanielsDrinker]

>I "repaired" the install-still get the same>problem-strange...>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgMaybe we should compare our driver settings...like AA, AF, etc. I'll post mine when I get home. Any other differences between our machines? There has to be something...

[Guest]

Well even with the problems, I still like vista due to the interface. I work in IT and I enjoy playing with the OS anyway. That's why I still have XP on a different array that I can boot to. I am getting more applications that crash and even fs9 crashed lastnight for the first time but I still like the OS. The crashes aren't my main concern in vista though, it's the fact that my cpu runs at almost 10C higher which is putting me near the edge. The reasons for my crashes could entirely be related to the fact that running vista is just causing instabilities in the system due to the extra heat that I don't get in XP. I may lower my OC down to 3.0 ghz and do some testing. 3.2ghz might be a bit too much for air cooling for my system with the added overhead of running vista. I don't plan on running vista as my sole OS for at least the remainder of this year. I am confident that vista will come into its own and I will refrain from slamming it until the vendors and their drivers are up to speed.________________________________________________________________________________________________Intel D975XBX2 'Bad Axe 2' | Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 3.20Ghz | 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

[soaring_penguin 428]

oh please stop BS.I am running FSX on Vista 64 bit just fine.NO CTD, NO blue screen of death, NO slowdowns, and impact of bloom "seems" less, but that can be just that, an impression, no real way off telling as each flight is different.It is posts like this that is turning me off on AVSIM nowadays.This has started when FSX came out and has become worse with the advent of Vista.And the people that are the most fanatic, - usually - don't have FSX or Vista running. I think it is just a lame excuse to pass on them, but why not let the rest of us enjoy it ? Rob, please don't get offended if you did try either of them, I don't feel like reading every single post of yours to quote you, I said "most people".The reason I have Vista 64 bit is that I bought a new PC, I could not wait any longer to get more out of FSX then I got on my 4 year old pentium4. And I just did not want to be in the cold again in a few months when the DX 10 patch comes out. So I thought it would be a better investment to buy immediately the proper OS for DX 10 then buy another OS in 6 months. Better use them to buy a faster CPU :-) .And surprise, everything runs better then expected, actually it runs great, even with "poor" driver support. (Desperately waiting for TrackIR 64 bit drivers tough, but on their forums I read today they are working to get them certified).Now if someone came here with a real problem, I would happy to help him.But posts like this are just worthless and take up valuable space.However, I hope my testimony helps someone to make the proper choice when buying a new PC, and not start with a handicap on the DX10 side.Just my 2 cents. Jan