Reporting roughly 40-50% increase in frames on a mainstream system.E4300 @ 2.4Ghz - 2 Gig Ram - 7600GT.

glass panel?

Chris,The major part of the performance gains in SP1 is based on a more efficient use of multiple core cpu's. So obviously a single core won't benefit as much as a multiple core.Ulf B :-)

>>Windows Vsta Ultimate 64 Bits (Updated and Clean installed)>Ulf B>>Thom

Hi Phil, 2D Panel, 737-800 default. If you need some testing in my QX6800 Quad please feel free to contact me!

>Chris,>>The major part of the performance gains in SP1 is based on a>more efficient use of multiple core cpu's. So obviously a>single core won't benefit as much as a multiple core.>>Ulf B :-)Seems to be with the Quads Core... I hope so, look at the strange hangs up in my system, I have my PC very healthy with the TAGAN 1100W running fine.

Hi Pete,I now live in Anchorage, but lived on Kodiak Island, in Cold Bay, in Dillingham, and Ketchikan. I got a well rounded exposure to the state :0)Fly safe

Hi Ulf,I'm seeing a performance increase generally (better load times, increased frame rates etc) the problem here is with the fairly frequent and significant stutters. It is the stutters that kill the experience for me and a bit of a concern when you consider that all scenery sliders are set to the left hand stop and with no autogen.I suspect that this particular problem won't be an easy one to catch - there are others experiencing these stutters but it looks as though the majority of users have a generally positive experience with SP1.I'm off to do a bit more testing - again I'll post the results here.Regards,Chris

Dear Phil and the ACES team,I have a relatively old system compared to the latest kit, but I am very happy to report that the improvement that SP1 has brought is way beyond my expectations. To give you a rough idea I can now set my scenery to Ultra High and get better frame rates than on Medium Low before. The only exception being the water which I have to keep within the x1 scale. It took time but I uninstalled everything to do with FSX then did a fresh install, but boy it was well worth it.For info I have an Athlon XP 3200+, 1.5Gb dual channel ram and an ATI Radeon X800XT. FSX is running on it's own SATA hard drive.Thank you very, very much for all your hard work. Looking forward to the next upgrades, by the time which I will have built a new PC!Regards,Dave.

This is strange but...Tried some flying three US locations: Friday Habour, Seattle and Pensacola with 3 aircraft: Microlight, Maule and JP5.Very occaisional stutter at Friday Harbour and Seattle and with a few more (but not many) at Pensacola. Set weather to clear and same again.I then went back to Valley (for those not sure where this is it's RAF Valley in Anglesey in the UK) and tried again with the same 3 aircraft and with weather set to clear; result same stutters as before at Valley, e.g. signficantly more than in the US and of a longer duration - what gives?All flights comprised of a take off and then a slow left hand turning climb up to about 13K (not that high in the microlight).Experience of flying in the US - fine, give or take a few infrequent stutters it's OK. Experience of flying in the UK - forget it. So; as I don't intend to do all my flying in the US where do we go from here? 'Tis a strange one.Query for Phil - are there any differences between the way the scenery is compiled for the US and at least the UK? Or are there other differences that might account for the above?Regards,Chris

Thomas,Did you at fs2004 LAUNCH have all sliders to the right with fps running and locked at 25fps constant? -i assume (know) the answer is no, no one did!Why make all this fuzz about this when history repeats itself, it will run better and better as new hardware is being introduced, that's how the FS series always have been and still is.Please stop monaing about it and try to remember the past.Regards,Eirik

Beforehand in Sydney with medium gen settings I was lucky to get 10-15 fps and lots of stutters. Now with gen settings at max I'm getting around 23-25fps! Truly bloody amazing! And that's with no other tweaks. Well done Aces.AMD4600XPNvidia 7900GT3gig ram

My system is a single core 3.4Ghz P4, 2 GB RAM, Windows XP.After installing SP1 FSX failed to run. I did an FSX repair, but no joy. I finally uninstalled and re-installed. I was back in business.After installing SP1 and setting up FSX I ran a set of comparison benchmark flights. They all showed a frame rate increase as follows: 41% 29% 43% 11% 17% The average frame rate increase is 28%, which is not bad at all. However, I did notice that the ground texture updates were probably slower, often leading to somewhat blurred textures. I hope Microsoft did not achieve some of the frane rate improvements simply by slowing down the texture update task. I'll increase the fiber frame setting, though this will eat into the frame rate improvements.I was pleased to see that SP1 now enables ground lighting at dusk (enabled by DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1). However, it may be that Microsoft forgot about building lights. Although the ground lighting was on at dusk, the buildings remained dark and unlit.I could see no other visual changes due to SP1. But as FSX already looked very good (particularly the high resolution textures) that's no bad thing.Unfortunately the pointless accesses of scenery from half way around the world (most noticeable when large high resolution photo realistic scenery is used) has not been fixed. This can lead to long loading times and stuttering and frame rate loss in flight.I also noticed that a number of silly errors had not been fixed. For example, when you use the disable joystick command, it also disables mouse-as-yoke control, which to a large extent defeats the original purpose of the command. Of course, SP1 was primarily aimed at performance improvements rather than bug fixes. Another silly error: the list of flights is not listed alphabetically (but the list of missions is). And so on....I think Microsoft are to be commended, not only for all the work necessary to produce SP1, but for the forthright manner in which they kept us informed. Many thanks, guys.Hopefully there will be an SP2 which will be aimed at fixing obvious errors and bugs. Well done, Microsoft, but there is still work to do....Best regards, Chris

>After installing SP1 my FPS goes from 20 without panel to 2>with panel (Cessna172)>>Thanks in advance for any advise.>Regards>BertI am seeing the same thing here. System is AMD XP3500+, 1GB RAM, nVidia 7900GS, XP Home. It's incredible, VC is super smooth (ah and by the way, did you change anything to gauge rendering? I was blown away last night when I saw super smooth GDI+ gauges being rendered in VC... Not super resolution, but super update rate, insane), but changing to 2D kinda spoils all the fun.Cheers, :-beerchugEtienne :-wave

I'm a "medium" user of FSX. I am also a real-world pilot (CFI, II, and some charter flying). I found FSX originally to be almost unusable, due to its demands on the computer.SP1 has increased the speed, flyability, and appearance of FSX around the quoted (here) 100% or more. Frame rates (set to unlimited, to see what it would do) run in the 35 to 60 range. I did not change ANY settings post-SP1 to see what the difference was. Flyability, as far as control response, smoothness, texture loading (scan around the cockpit, appearance of scenery) has improved enough to use FSX as a true simulation of "what is to come". I can run instrument approaches of upcoming flights, and they will spot any deficiencies that I have.Nice work, ACES.