After all kinds of problems with low fps above mountains with lots of trees with SP1, I decided to test FS X SP1 thoroughly, well, as far as I could... I was wondering if I was imagining things and had some settings wrong, so to get things clear I went all the way: I completely uninstalled FS X and reinstalled it, just to be able to test FSX BEFORE and AFTER SP1 with the EXACT same settings. I did a lot of 'tests' before all this, but at a certain moment you don't know anymore which settings you used when and I got more and more depressed because it seemed to me fps was lower all over the place with SP1, and that with lower settings than before! At least, that's what I thought because I had nothing on paper. So that's why I went the hard way. I wanted to be sure!!! ;)My results were VERY satisfying... APART from the mountains with TREES!!! I saved and flew a few short 'flights' in both FSX and FS X SP1 and compared the results. Settings were EXACTLY the same (and don't really matter for this comparison, nor do my specs: the important things is circumstances were exactly the same). ALL FPS are AVERAGE!La Guardia, at runwayBefore 16After 2131% upLa Guardia, driving down runwayBefore 19After 2742% upFlying straight towards Empire State BuildingBefore 12After 1958% upLooking around while flying towards Empire State BuildingBefore 10After 1990% upInsbruck Approach Mission, looking straight forward (seeing only clouds btw)Before 13After 2161% upThat's an average improvement of above 50! Very nice! What also became VERY apparent is that looking around with the Track IR 4 Pro is A LOT smoother with SP1! Looking around used to become a quick slideshow, but not anymore. And I'm not talking about fps alone (see the result above) but the overall smoothnes, regardless of fps, is a lot better. That's VERY nice! Also loading a flight (the first one at least) is A LOT quicker with SP1!But now the mountains with trees... Did I imagine things or is there really something weird going on?Mountains near Bergen with a lot of trees, looking downBefore 23After 1344% DOWN...!So I was right after all... Everything has improved (luckily) and a lot too. But what's with the trees in Norway...??? I always liked to fly above those kind of surroundings, more than above cities. But it seems my bush days are over with SP1...Anyone got a clue what's going on here...?

I had a similar question and started a post about 2 weeks ago asking for help. I think it was called something like 'desert textures' or something similar.Got lots of good advice; trouble is I can't find the post to thank all the nice people. If you can find the post under my name it may help. I'll check back later, gotta go now.

Er... I suppose this answer was meant to be posted in my 'Sand all over'-topic...? ;)

Hi have you tried Aime leclercq Treex ver 2.1 for FSX SP1,try this fantastic addon,i use the performance set(there are 3 types)HiFI quality and performance,try these ,,and let me know what you think,for me it made a massive improvement,and they look brilliant. cheers steveps big thumbs up to Aime for all the hard work

Hi also try the different forest colour steve

I have not noticed any problems with trees in SP1. My fps appear to be better all around, in all situations.I have some benchmark .flt's I use for comparisons. I plan to run new benches with them this weekend.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

Today I gave Treex 2.1 a try and strangely enough the performance trees did give no improvement at all. I also flew around Switzerland for a while: GREAT fps (25-30), awesome, around the Sion airfield (autogen and so on on extremely dense, a lot to be seen: I just LOVE to see those cars drive down the road, makes it so much more real!) but also there fps starts to drop when I head for mountains with trees... I just don't get it...!But I seem to be the only one with this problem...