Both FB's and XC's sceneries perform well. As always, if you pump up the traffic dramatically, performance may suffer.

I'm currently using XC's because the train mesh is better, the terminal layout is current and the taxiways are current.

Must say, version 1.1 of X-Codr has done a really good job with the scenery. The mesh of the airport to include all the taxiways is spot on. It's not that flat tabletop the Flightbeam currently has. The night lighting is really good as well. He nailed the sodium style night lights and the immersion at night is very very good. I like it so much I've uninstalled the Flightbeam version. X-Codr is more up to date as well with the terminals and gate. Performance is just as good as Flightbeam on my system. Winner of a scenery for sure....

13 minutes ago, B777ER said:

Performance is just as good as Flightbeam on my system.

Yes, I agree with all these points. I just flew in in the Fenix and had stellar performance.

Sounds like X-Codr is the current best option.  The flatness alone of FB's is enough to put me back into Asobo's as I say fixed the heinous terrain problems there finally.  I'll keep an eye out for a sale on X-C's.

Thanks All

3 hours ago, Noel said:

I'll keep an eye out for a sale on X-C's.

If you already own FB's version, a reduced price alternative from X-Codr is probably the best way to get a more modern version.

Unlike some very vocal complainers about the mere existence of duplicate airports/aeroplanes existing, I like that there's competition. If I were a more frequent flyer to KDEN, I'd happily pick up the X-Codr one to replace what's already in my Community Folder.

For any scenery devs out there reading this, WSSS, KATL, EGCC, EGKK, LEMD, KORD, LSGG and LSZH could all be improved upon with replacements to 2024/5 standards.

The XC one hasn't been on sale on any of the sales that have happened since it was introduced. I decided to just get it rather than continuing to wait.

2 hours ago, F737MAX said:

Unlike some very vocal complainers about the mere existence of duplicate airports/aeroplanes existing, I like that there's competition.

Yes, I also like that there are different versions of airports. DEN is a good example, an airport done by FB going on a decade ago and no longer reflecting the real layout and look of the place has been updated by another competent developer and it looks very convincing. I was very happy to part with the old FB rendition and move to x-codr. There are other airports like this too. FlyTamp's rendition of Toronto is very dated now, the texturing is not that great, and there are terrain morphing issues around the infield tunnel that makes taxing there impossible I would be jump at a chance for a better rendition of this airport.

I suspect we will see more and more duplicate airports as we continue with 2024; there are only so many airports worthwhile to make and so many have been done already.

I'm probably in a bit of a minority because I don't really need ultra detailed animated passengers and other performance-sapping components in payware airports.   My main criteria has more to do with if parking and jetways work well with GSX and they have decent night lighting.   This is why for now Asobo's KDEN is good enough until X-C's goes on a meaningful sale.  Even though I live in a Denver suburb I use A Pilot's Life and KDEN comes into play not all that frequently as for weeks at a time I might be out of the US.