Sign in to follow this  
Guest gabe007

Addon aircraft frame-rates compared to default FSX planes

Recommended Posts

It seems that some of the addon aircraft tend to reduce the frame-rates more than the FSX default ones. As an example the updated FS9 Carenado Cessna Centurion II (there's a patch at their site) reduces my frame-rates too low to be smooth (down to 13 or so in the air and nearing 10 sometimes on ground. The default Cessna 172 has framerates at my locked 19 fps in the air and near that landing at small GA airports.It just seems many aircraft addons for FSX have worse framerates than the defaults but aren't really more detailed looking.Does anyone know of any GA aircraft (payware or freebies) that seem to not reduce the frame-rates much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Most of my payware aircraft drop the framerate at least a couple fps but one that stays locked at 30 is the Aerosoft Beaver X.You get lots of different aircraft and liveries and it loks and flies great.Check it out here.http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/us/iboshop.cgi?showd,,10389Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get great performance with Real Air's SF260. I highly recommend it.Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My FPS are almost identical to the default planes with all Carenado planes (Centurion, 182rg, 182, Cheyenne, etc...) The only addon plane I have which is an FPS hog is the EGS Cirrus with its glass cockpit.FSD planes are also great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eaglesoft's XL2 Liberty is a small trainer-style GA aircraft with a good cockpit and is frame-rate friendly. That, and as has been mentioned, the BeaverX is a wonderfully-detailed aircraft that has been nicely optimized to preserve frame rates. Jeff ShylukAvsim Product Reviewer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jeff, our SR20/SR22 X along our recently released CJ1 X and Columbia 400 X are running well for a majority of users under FSX/SP1 according to our latest customer feedback.:-)Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Thanks Jeff, our SR20/SR22 X along our recently released CJ1>X and Columbia 400 X are running well for a majority of users>under FSX/SP1 according to our latest customer feedback.:-)>>Hope this helps.I should give it another try then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Ron,That Columbia is looking might nice! Always wanted one :) In real life, of course.. but since I probably won't get a chance to own the real deal this one comes in a nice second :) Good to hear that it's frame friendly too!Best,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hey Ron,>>That Columbia is looking might nice! Always wanted one :) In>real life, of course.. but since I probably won't get a chance>to own the real deal this one comes in a nice second :) Good>to hear that it's frame friendly too!>>Best,Thanks Damian. By the way, drop me an email when you can. I have a couple of questions.:-)Congrats on your latest release as well! Saw the shots and it's looking great!:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I normally use the FS9 free version of the RealAirC172 in FSX and it has no effect on my frame rates at all. See also my thread entitled My Solution to blurries and Stutters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the above.The Beaver X and the SF260 (which has THE nicest panel EVER ! - but need you to play around with different types of AA as it's THAT sharp) are exactly the same for me as the default planes.On my system, I am keeping around 30-35 fps on all views.BUT: beware of: Wilco Feelthere ERJ 145 / Wilco 777 / Captian Sim 757 / Iris F15: these bring my FPS down to 12-17fps in basic airports with same settings as above, and barely reach 20 fps in a lonely sky.So the latter planes are halving my framarates ! Be warned.However, I will have these to look forward to when I eventually upgrade the PC.It must be said though, that these planes that reduce my framerate to unuseable levels: are pretty impressive: especially the ERJ 145: the sharpest looking VC I've ever seen !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Flight1 Cessna Skyhawk 172R is great - vast improvement over the stock Cessna 172 and very frame-rate friendly. It's about all I fly these days though am trying to master Australian Simulations' Glassair III (which is proving tricky).Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but aren't really more detailed looking.Many things other than detail can drag down FPS.How many textures does the aircraft use?The default C172 has really one main external texture and one spec and one bump and one reflection file. Many of the updates were in the interior which now has five textures rather than one.Some addon aircraft use 20 or more textures for the external fuselage. Each texture takes memory (RAM and Graphics), disk load time, processing power, etc.How detailed are the systems and gauges usedVery smooth, very detailed gauges takes more processor and graphics power than the default gauges. Does the aircraft have several additional systems modeled, running?Glass cockpits like the G-1000 require a lot more to update than a needle .bmp in an analog gauge.The basic point of every FS addon is - when you add detail - either visually or systems - it takes more power to run the addon.More power for the addon means less power for the program to maintain FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this