Sign in to follow this  
Guest Shep

FSX - the proof - it can be made to work and work well

Recommended Posts

Like many folk, I have spent loads of cash to be 'DX10 ready' for FSX! The guy who posted these screenshots on the link below, has a three year old, less than cutting edge, DX9 system that proves beyond doubt that with the right scenery and system set-up, it is possible to achieve fps just as good, if not better, than FS9. Take note of the fps.http://www.visualflight.co.uk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7787RayPS - My reason for posting the link was to show what is possible in FSX with a little perseverance and no big cash injection either.

Share this post


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

Well to be fair in the first photo scenery shots the person doesn't have autogen on.....And the next few seem to have scenery buildings on, but not autogen, not sure if that's built-in scenery or what....Near the end you see the true autogen turned on and his shots are reduced to 16-18 FPS....which is what I usually get but 24 would be better ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ray,No AI traffic in that pic, that should increase FPS. Scenery looks like England VFR stuff, that is good scenery. I can show you pics that look good also, if you select just the right altitude, just the right view angle. FSX doesn't have a problem looking good, it just has a problem looking good all the time at all speeds and all locations.Also, taking a screenshot is NOT representative of the entire flight experience when one is sitting behind the monitor doing the flying.I've got some very nice screenshots with ActiveSkyX and GraphicsX. Got some great shots of Phoenix too. But part of the problem is I can make FSX look really bad also by enabling specific options/features and shifting to external views, etc. etc.Fire up COD4 DX10, the polygon count is unreal (way exceeds what is in FSX) and textures remain true from close to far away, no sudden shifts. In fact, you've motivated me to post some COD4 screen shots so folks can really see what DX10 could look like when enough coding resources are tossed into a game. It will make those pics you posted of FSX look like Cartoon cutouts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

COD4... you mean Call of Duty 4? CoD4 is a DX9 game. It doesn't support DX10 at all. So what you are seeing is DX9 in all it's glory. If CoD4 was DX10 it wouldn't run that good...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little lost here.You state: "Like many folk, I have spent loads of cash to be 'DX10 ready' for FSX!"In the link you reference, Monir states: "The following Pics are in SP1 as I have not yet installed SP2." for all the screenshots.What does this have to do with DX10?Happy flying:RTH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>A little lost here.>>You state: "Like many folk, I have spent loads of cash to be>'DX10 ready' for FSX!">>In the link you reference, Monir states: "The following Pics>are in SP1 as I have not yet installed SP2." for all the>screenshots.>>What does this have to do with DX10?>>Happy flying:>RTHMonir explains that after a computer crash he had to return to a pre Acceleration image he had made with Acronis. He has excellent results with DX9, possibly as good, if not better than I'm getting with a DX10 system. I was merely trying to convey that aspect - obviously not well enough! I posted here for purely interest sake to show what could be achieved with a 3 year old DX9 system with Horizon VFR - perhaps I wasted my time.Merry Christmas.

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