>Im not the only one Mr. Bill, as you can see... I have read>now it's would be Windows Vista>>Do you mean I need to uninstall Windows Vista too? What more?>>Do I have the only Vista license of the world with FSX>installed?I'm running fine on Vista. I would suggest following some of the suggestions made.

Well for me it seems to have added some blurries but with the exact same settings my FPS did increase that 20% ish like Phil said....so now I have to investigate the Fiber frame fraction thing again....Does it still exist? Or exist like it did in RTM?EDIT#1: about the autogen, it really pops in and out now....moreso that it did prior to SP1, is this an effect of SP1? However, my perf with full autogen (some tweaks though such as TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=2500TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=3000 )is a lot better than it was

I don't know that it's Vista to be honest. For example, on my laptop (Turion 2.0ghz) with an ATI Xpress 1100 integrated card running with 256MB of shared RAM (2G system total) I get better performance and stability running Vista64 and FS9 than running XP Pro SP2 with FS9.Yes, I understand we're talking FS9, but I don't see how Vista could be causing performance this low with FSX on my hardware. To be honest, with the sliders set where they are to get 12-17 fps in FSX, the visuals are far worse than what I get on my anemic laptop running FS9 w/add-ons. I should have never wasted my money on FSX Deluxe, and it looks like it's heading to the bookshelf until my next major upgrade where I'll try it again.

Nahh Brian... going to skip that

>Im not the only one Mr. Bill, as you can see... I have read>now it's would be Windows VistaDid you physically remove the SLI link like both Phil and I suggested? FSX does NOT support SLI, so having the link in place will halve your performance immediately.As for Vista, I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot barge pole yet.

>I also have to say that I am VERY underwhelmed with this>patch. I have most settings down to med-high and med-low. In>a mid-sized city with an average airport (traffic turned off)>I'm getting anywhere from 10-17 frames. Note that this is a>fresh install of FSX as of today on a fresh OS with nothing>else on it, the latest drivers from their respective sources,>and SP1 applied (with a defrag.)>>Hardware:>>Athlon 4600+ (dual core)>2G RAM (dual channel)>Radeon X1950Pro w/512MB DDR3>Vista 32 Ultimate>>I would expect much better performance than this. Back to>FS2004 it is and what a shame with all this hardware. I'm>going to have to recommend FS2004 for $20 from Wal-Mart before>I could recommend FSX to anyone. Make sure the jobscheduler section is set in your FSX.CFG file. This is what activates the second core usage![JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=nwhere n num of cores scheduled1 = 1 core 00013 = 2 cores 00117 = 3 cores 011115= 4 cores 1111

I will try this.

Not so fast, guys, I run FSX at full sliders, light bloom, and no FSX tweaks. I get 25-30 FPS 90% of the time and 15 in REALLY dense areas. For everyday commercial operations, this thing is INSANE with SP1! That's why what this Tomas guy is saying is a joke. All in all, SP1 allows for Ultra custom settings!QX6700 Quad CoreEVGA 8800GTX 16AA 16AS2GB Corsair XMS DDR2800EVGA 680i MoboWD 250GBx2 in Raid-0

Wow Chris!What a performance, and what a rig! This proves that FSX with SP1 and proper HW is a winner :)Tero

I must say... I am mighty impressed with the ACES team. I'll be the first to admit I was skeptical of this "community" attitude but they really pulled it together and made FSX awesome! It is a great way forward for the future. The possibilities are endless.Guys, we aren't even talking about DX10 yet! So much more to come!

I have to add another success story to the mix. When I had a bone stock fsx on my pc last week, I was lucky to get 10-15 fps when flying around Boise with no autogen, high 1x water, no traffic etc. I installed the service pack, I'm flying around Boise with mid 2x water, very dense autogen, everything set to high except traffic, and I'm pulling 17 or more fps constantly, this is unreal!I do have a blurry issue, but I'm testing some of Phil's tweaks. Thank you Aces!

Yup Chris,It's only now, after SP1 release, that the community can really start waiting for FSX addons. So many addon makers have had their projects on hold until SP1 is out.Now that the performance is on a good level, and the addons start dropping in, we can start to enjoy FSX as it was meant, and get on with the simming :).Can't wait! :)Terops> had some scepticism myself too, but after I saw PT making regular updates and making certain commitments to our community, I got the feeling that this time we're moving in the right direction. MS deserves a positive slap in the back for this. Some might argue that the RTM version should never have been released, but in the SW world this is how it goes sometimes. They have made great improvements now for the sim, and instead of criticising for poor, initial performance, let's enjoy what we have on our plates right now.

Wow, didn't change any of my previous settings and I can tell a huge difference... SMOOTH as silk. Now when I look around in the 3D cockpit, it's really smooth and not jerky like before.Only concern is the 2D panels are all blurry and whenever I click on something in the 2D panel, the entire screen goes white then "resets" back to the 2D view, although with the switch I was clicking now in the "up" position (if I was trying to click up). I'm just going to sit back and let the pro's here "debug" the issues and I'll just fly in 3D splendor until the 2D problem is fixed.AMD 64 X2 4400+Asus A8N-32 SLI Deluxe2 XFX 7800GT in SLI2 GB Corsair XMS ramCH Flight Sim USB Yoke & USB pedalsViewsonic VX924 LCD

the support for multi-core is greatespecially since Intel have released their price points for their cuts in July :)150 pounds ish or 260 dollars ish for a Q6600 Quad-core :):)Mark.

Phil-Dave had a very good suggestion a while back:Those 3rd party addons should use _USE_RTM_VERSION in their Preprocessor directives when compiling on VS2005 SP1. That way, the bits produced will depend on RTM MFC libs, thus not requiring the VS 2005 SP1 redist.Best,