Thinking now about gettin Fsx

[Guest shelley1995]

Hi, Seriously now thinking about this. Seems though lot of people have problems with this. Can someone say what seems to be the number one problem wiht Fsx? Does one have to have Vista for this to run properly? Thank you much.

[FTD1949 0]

>Hi, Seriously now thinking about this. Seems though lot of>people have problems with this. Can someone say what seems to>be the number one problem wiht Fsx? Does one have to have>Vista for this to run properly? Thank you much.>If you would provide your computer specs it would be easier for someoneto give you an honest answer.Craig ASUS A8N- nForce SLI Chipset SATA RAID Dual PCIe MOBOAMD ATHLON64 3500+ CPU w/ HT TechLG GWA-4161 DVD/CDSeagate ST3160811AS 160GB Barracuda 9 7200RPM 8MB SATA II 3Gb/s NCQSeagate ST3160811AS 250GB Barracuda 9 7200RPM 8MB SATA II 3Gb/s NCQEVGA 7950 GT KO PCIe 512mb nvodngov19147-[Guru3D.com] drivers SB Audigy 22G Corsair PC 3200 400MHZ Dual Channel DDR Super Alien 500W P/STrack IR3 w/vectorCH Yolk & RuddersFS Genesis Terrain MeshActive SkyRC4

[Guest]

The number one problem is people trying to run really high settings without the proper computer to support those settings. I run most scenery settings maxed except for water and light bloom, with autogen to dense, and I get a consistent 18-27fps on a 2.84GHz Athlon, though in a dense city I get 14-17fps. I have such a pleasant experience in FSX I no longer use FS9. All in all I really like FSX and have no complaints, but its true you do need a fairly fast system to enjoy it.

[Guest X15]

You do not need Vista, as has been stated you do need top hardware and a bit of common sense regarding the settings. Nothing will currently run FSX with all the sliders to max settings. If you must have max settings use FS9. If you want all the benefits FSX has over FS9 such as far better ground textures and a better 'feel' and are prepared to compromise on settings it is worth the effort.Maybe you can let us know what you want from FSX as well as your current hardware?

[LAdamson 240]

I use FS9 for some well done third party scenery, airports, and aircraft. For everywhere else, espeically city/mountain areas of the western U.S., I much prefer FSX.Athlon 3900+/2GIG/Geforce 7600GS 256MB/ 1600*1200*32

[AWACS 12]

My biggest problem with FSX at the moment is the lack of scenery and hi-fidelity aircraft addons. Though Cloud 9 has been ahead of the game in the scenery area, I am waiting for the Level-D 767 and 757 for FSX, as well as PMDG's stuff, and Flight 1 too.Jeff

[Guest SimFan71]

Personally I really like FSX - the feeling of flight you get beyond FS9 is well worth it IMHO, and like someone else said the mountain areas truly are quite spectacular. I've over time become a convert to FSX, and did uninstall FS9 after a while of owning the new sim, though I'll say I've spent more time tweaking the new sim than I care to mention (thanks to the many tips available in these forums!).It does need some pretty good hardware to run on though, what can max out FS9 probably won't come close in FSX, I've had to do some upgrading myself to get it where I would like it, but it has been worth it - at least for me as an avid simmer! You might want to post your spec's as someone else suggested, it can be very helpful in letting people gauge the kind of performance you might get.And yes, I too am waiting on some good FSX specific aircraft add-ons, there are things I miss from FS9 even though the default aircraft in FSX are actually pretty good.

[McCrash 3]

>Hi, Seriously now thinking about this. Seems though lot of>people have problems with this. Can someone say what seems to>be the number one problem wiht Fsx? Does one have to have>Vista for this to run properly? Thank you much.>performance, stuttering, low frame rate, bugshopefully the patch/update will fix these problems

[Guest Adrian Wainer]

Hi, you would need to state what is the specification of your computer to give any sort of intelligent answer to that question, since FSX is very demanding with respect to hardware and whilst highest level computers will run FSX with acceptable frame rates and good quality graphics quality, a low level machine would become unuseable if asked to run FSX with regard to frame rates unless you were prepared to accept very poor graphics, in which case you would be better with FS2004. As for Vista, Vista is a necessity if you wish to run Directx 10 but the last I heard, one still can not run Directx 10 in FSX. As for performance of FSX under Vista, I do not know since I haven't got Vista but I rather suspect that FSX running under Vista will be an even more computer hardware resource hungry combination than FSX running Windows XP. FSX will happily run under Windows XP Home, Windows XP Profesional and Windows XP Professional x64. Best and Warm RegardsAdrian Wainer

[LAdamson 240]

>>performance, stuttering, low frame rate, bugs>I've had quite a different view, although my machine runs FSX rather well.It's kind of like these two pics. The first is FS9's default Caravan, and the second is the new FSX version. Just as FSX has greatly improved on the Caravan, it's done it with a whole lot of scenery as well! The high resolution default textures are such an improvement, that I have to have 3rd party scenery areas for FS9 to even still want to use that sim. Turbulence, 3D cockpit movement, weather, and the basic feel of flight is also improved in FSX, without the need for a multitude of addons.But the bottom line, is how well your machine will run the sim. My five year old model didn't, but my newer high end "mid grade" Athlon 3800+ does rather well. I run FSX in the mid 20' to 30 fps range; and it's smooth and stutter free. Normally, I run FSX with auto-gen OFF, as it's a frame rate killer. Yet, FSX uses much higher resolution ground textures, that often make up for those cartoony looking houses in FS9. FS9 Caravan:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/169261.jpgThe improved FSX Caravan:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/169262.jpgFSX without auto-gen:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/169263.jpg

[Guest Stoopy]

And, lest we forget, isn't the downloadable demo still available on the fs-insider website??http://www.fsinsider.com/Downloads/It does at least offer a glimpse to the form & function so you can see for yourself to an extent. :)P.S. Hiya, Adrian buddy, howya doin'??? ;)