I'd like to make a poll on SP1. Can you please reply to this post with:-Your CPU and video card-Your FSX screen resolution-2D panel or VC-your minimum fpsThanks,James

This is not going to be useful without getting the full settings everyone is using, and that's not practical.

But it can give an idea, because all talk about fps, about the digits of their video cards or the number of cores they use, but very few talk about the resolution and if they use VC or 2D. A 1024x768 in 2D is quite different from a 1600x1200 with VC, isn't it?So thanks for your opinion but I'd like to know about those parameters.

For example, if you have a good video card, the resolution won't make any diff at all, but autogen on its own could probably halve or double FPS by changing it. In fact, many or most of the settings could have a huge impact so its not enough to just know a couple.

Like Maui said, resolution has no effect for most people, unless they have an under powered video card. Somebody with an 8800, for example, can run any resolution they choose and it will not affect performance. I think with FSX most everybody runs at the highest resolution their monitor will support, and still they are limited purely by CPU Speed+Memory Bandwidth.As to the poll, I run the highest my monitor allows, which is 1600x1200 with 16xAA and VC. I prefer my minimum to be at least 20fps, so I would adjust my settings accordingly.

What might be useful for people with FS9 (like me) is whatsort of performance people with both FS9 and FSX/FSX+SP1 get asa comparison. From the initial reactions of the SP1 patch it soundslike FSX+SP1 is a great sim, and could certainly tempt me from FS9even though I have spent some

Intel Core2 Quad QX6800 Extreme 2,93 Ghz 8Mb cache L2 1600x1200 @ 32 Bits 2D panel 7 frames

AMD X2 6000+, 8800 GTX1440x900 32 bit3D panel12 fpsMike.