What I don't understand is why so many of the reviews of Acceleration and SP2 conflict with actual experiences of the users. A lot of the reviewers report performance increases with SP2 and some even praise the DX10 preview. I don't think I have seen anyone in these forums report a performance increase with DX9 or DX10 and certainly no one it seems was able to run DX10 without problems. To me this is quite intriguing. Surely the reviewers aren't lying? http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/l...reviewid=816545 This is the link for one of the reviews I read. I will try and find the others as well and post them.

I think you will always find that to be the case-as those who are not having problems are simply happily playing the title.In my case-I run dx9-I have not had one of the problems mentioned, and it does run a little faster in my case though on 4 year old hardware the increase is not much.The problems seem to be with dx10 and drivers-and hopefully those will be sorted out soon. As with all new technologies-there are always troubles. Took me about 6 months for Vista to settle down.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Britney Spears new album is getting rave reviews by some.My opinion of Acceleration would be better if it worked for me.Or if I was a reviewer and had a dozen tweeked upber machines with marketing staring at me telling me that company XYZ is thinking "wink" about a full page ad running for 3 months.And airfare,room and company ;) to the next game convention in Vegas:-cool But I wouldnt know anything about that...

Most reviewers don't have converted up FS9 aircraft, multiple tweaks, multiple addons, etc.They don't get their systems and game configuraitons so far out of spec as most of us do.And most flight simmers don't either - they run FS pretty much straight out of the box. Acceleration works great intalled on a non-tweaked FSX SP1.What you see on these forums and similar forums is a small percentage of the overall FS market.Acceleration provides some performance improvement - not substantial or earth shattering - but noticable.That is my experience. Many will discount it. Tough I really don't care about the FS9 Only mindset any more.I am continually amazed when people blame Flight Sim when they install an addon and they have problems. A good Flight Sim + addon = bad Flight Sim. The problem ain't FS/ MS fault.Now, there are plenty of people who should not move to FSX. If you don't have the hardware or your critical/ favorite addon are not available in FSX versions - Don't make the move.It took me 2 years to get FS2004 to working as stable as FSX is working now.I figure I'm a year ahead - though I did buy a new computer setup for FSX last spring, just as I bought a new computer setup for FS2004 about 6 months after it's release.

> I don't think>I have seen anyone in these forums report a performance>increase with DX9 or DX10 You have now. I am definitely and most assuredly seeing a very nice perormance increase in DX9 with Accelleration/SP2. Far more "flyable", extremely smooth and I can now even activate UTX without the frame rate hit I was getting with it before. Intel Dual Core E6750 @2.66Ghz non-overclocked, 2Gigs RAM, and an ol'school ATI 1650 PRO vid card. Having a ball!Only issues I've had were the change in alpha transparency handling on some (but certainly not all) old favorite FS9 planes that apparently weren't created "by the book" per the SDK, and so far, taking about 45 seconds in DXTBMP to add a normal ol' regular dark-gray Alpha layer to the effected window or prop disc textures has fixed that, so color me stoked about the release and update. The beloved Airhed Super Decathlon from FS9 didn't need any tweaking at all, not surprising since it's such a fine work of art to begin with.Erich

Its good to see a positive review from time to time. I personally can't find out what Acceleration is all about since its not released yet here in the UK but I certainly will give it a go and hope for the best.

Also remember that people having problems will be the loudest.People having no problems with Accel will be quiet, busy flying.Seems like most of the issues I've seen are from people with DX10 video cards.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

I agree, if you are a winxp dx9 user then you will love sp2 and acceleration. The sim is nice and smooth in dx9 now. Dx10 on the other hand.....very very bad performance and compatibility issues.

IGN = 8.2 "Impressive"http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/829/829227p1.htmlGaming Nexus = 7http://www.gamingnexus.com/Default.aspx?Se...=Article&I=1618

I'll add that one thing I was running with was a few effective tweaks in place and sliders were managed well for best performance and features but not all maxed to the right. What I HAVEN'T done is to take advantage of the additional performance to move any sliders further right. Naturally, doing so would nullify the performance gains, and having gotten used to a great-looking sim where I had it, I don't want to fall into that trap. This time, I'm just gonna take the FPS and run... ;)I think that's the recurring issue....any and all performance benefits seem to be largely met with an expectation that some more sliders can be cranked up and then those folks are dissapointed when frame rates predictably fall back to where they were before due to increased resource and CPU load from the higher slider setting(s). I was never able to really fly FS9 smoothly with everything maxed out until this latest computer build so it's not a surprise. MSFS sliders seem to have always "gone to 11" to paraphrase Nigel Tufnel of Spinal Tap...more so in FSX and that's cool with me. Speaking of which, since hard drives are so cheap and huge these days, stock FS9 as well as a "Golden Wings 3" modified version of FS9 are on my system too and when I'm repainting or tinkering around I usually use those since the load times are still quicker and I can test for FS9 compatability for anything I'm working on that I plan on sharing with others. But for an actual flight experience, there's no question FSX + UTX + FEX + Xpack/SP2 have brought me a simulator experience I used to only dream about.

>I agree, if you are a winxp dx9 user then you will love sp2>and acceleration. The sim is nice and smooth in dx9 now.>What about if you're a vista dx9 user?

>>I agree, if you are a winxp dx9 user then you will love sp2>>and acceleration. The sim is nice and smooth in dx9 now.>>>>What about if you're a vista dx9 user?>>Yeah smooth for vista too in dx9! Just dont bother with dx10 and you will be very pleased. It runs like a top now in dx9.

I have posted elsewhere on this forum that indeed I have an increase in performance with Acceleration--DX9 and WinXP for me (on a 4+ year old machine).Randall

>I agree, if you are a winxp dx9 user then you will love sp2>and acceleration. The sim is nice and smooth in dx9 now. Dx10>on the other hand.....very very bad performance and>compatibility issues.Believe it or not - i am an Ultimate 64 user with a DX10 card and love SP2 as well. In DX9 mode (for the record)... :D Heiko

My Acceleration runs fabulously, better than sp1.e6600@3ghzx1900xt vid4gb ramXP OSdx9Bob