Sign in to follow this  
Guest

FSX SP1 or SP2 ??

Recommended Posts

I recently read a few posts concerning bugs / issues relating to SP2. Although I had not noticed too many problems running SP2, other than the dreaded 'blurries' (textures not keeping up), I thought I would uninstall SP2 to see whether the overall sim, and in particular the blurries issue would improve. I am not sure whether there has been an improvement or not, but wondered what the general opinion was on the worth of reinstalling SP2 or staying with SP1, and what benefits if any are gained with SP2 over SP1, bearing in mind that I am running XP, DX9c (not Vista, FX10). I can live with slightly lower fps if the texture loading issue is better with SP1.Cheers,Stuart

Share this post


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

most such "problems" and "issues" are due to operator error or incorrect expectations.The rest is due to addons that weren't designed with FSX in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to what I have read on Phil Taylor's blog and other Aces team blogs, SP2 was NOT an update of FSX. That was SP1. SP2 was the Vista, DX10 upgrade. The only thing change I know of was a minor modification of FSX.exe to let it know it can handle greater than 2GB's of memory addresses (something like that). Now Acceleration included SP2 but it mainly installs several new aircraft and missions. So, if you do not have a Vista OS AND a DX10 capable video card, stay with SP1. If you want additional aircraft/missions, then buy Acceleration. Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have Vista64 and an 8800GT DX10 video card. I un-installed SP2 due to constant crashes. I have had none since removing SP2.No operator error. Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SP2 all the way. If you are into addons then most 3rd party vendors will be releasing for SP2. Why would you want to run without the latest updates installed? Unless you have masses of older FS9/early FSX content then it makes no sense at all. I have XP and SP2 showed good improvments for meAs for the fixes, here is the list from the weblog. You can see there is much more in SP2 for DX9/XP users than was made out in a previous post.Here is a list of what is in SP2 from a

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. Guess you have made my mind up to reinstall SP2, and at least keep up to date. Seems there is more to gain than loose.Cheers,Stuart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like SP2 on my WinXP Dx9 system. I use lots of autogen trees and fly low enough to see them most of the time; they don't "pop" as much as they did after SP1. I also like the fact that there are no aircraft shadows on cloudy days. I assume building shadows also disappear but I don't have those enabled so I don't know for sure.R-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I recently read a few posts concerning bugs / issues relating>to SP2. Although I had not noticed too many problems running>SP2, other than the dreaded 'blurries' (textures not keeping>up), I thought I would uninstall SP2 to see whether the>overall sim, and in particular the blurries issue would>improve. I am not sure whether there has been an improvement>or not, but wondered what the general opinion was on the worth>of reinstalling SP2 or staying with SP1, and what benefits if>any are gained with SP2 over SP1, bearing in mind that I am>running XP, DX9c (not Vista, FX10). I can live with slightly>lower fps if the texture loading issue is better with SP1.>>Cheers,>Stuart>------------------------------------Stuart, I was running two days ago with just SP1. I installed SP2, and had all sorts of video problems. I also didn't see any real difference in the sim, in general, or FPS increase for that matter.So, ....I removed SP2, ran SP1 (for good measure) again, reinitialised UTX USA and Can, and finally reinstalled the four entries for GEXnhanced 1.05. I then flew the sim, and had great performance and no further video problems of any kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SP2Would not run the sim without itif you are having performance problems with SP2 it can be a number of issues mostly due to drivers or possibly how SP2 was installedThis list outlines the way I install FSX, SP1/SP2 and/or Acceleration which is different toohttp://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/Ya...um=1197380641#1It is important each update be allowed to register to the system and itself by booting the software and I find booting the default flights briefly before installing the next SP or Accel also can have positive effects.I also found when issue are present from a SP2 upgrade after you have had SP1 installed for some time, it is best to wipe it freash and start clean using that list... it has in fact fixed many of the complaints of performance that simply applying SP2 after running Sp1 for a period of time, would not fix. I would not fly without SP2. the only bad thing about SP2 is the lack of support for aircraft that were not designed for FSX and I do think many of those are aircraft that were not even desinged using 100% FS9 standards but would run in FS9 without issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>SP2>>Would not run the sim without it>>if you are having performance problems with SP2 it can be a>number of issues mostly due to drivers or possibly how SP2 was>installed>>This list outlines the way I install FSX, SP1/SP2 and/or>Acceleration which is different too>>http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/Ya...um=1197380641#1>>It is important each update be allowed to register to the>system and itself by booting the software and I find booting>the default flights briefly before installing the next SP or>Accel also can have positive effects.>>I also found when issue are present from a SP2 upgrade after>you have had SP1 installed for some time, it is best to wipe>it freash and start clean using that list... it has in fact>fixed many of the complaints of performance that simply>applying SP2 after running Sp1 for a period of time, would not>fix.>> >>>I would not fly without SP2. the only bad thing about SP2 is>the lack of support for aircraft that were not designed for>FSX and I do think many of those are aircraft that were not>even desinged using 100% FS9 standards but would run in FS9>without issues. >>>>Nick, why wouldn't you fly without SP2? Just because (as some say about Vista) "it is the future", ou do you see any real improvement (like 20% in FPS ou less blurries or whatever) by using SP2? If it doesn't give us any performance improvement and just "breaks" a lot of addons, i don't see why should i have it installed... My FSX SP1 runs flawlessly, guess i prefer the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried SP2 and had nothing but CTD's. Mind you, this was a relatively clean install of FSX, my only add-ons were the FSD Navajo and the Eaglesoft CJ1, both said to be FSX compliant. I tried several different drivers to no avail (yes, I went through the complete removal procedure each time). The concensus on the CTD forum was that Nvidia needed to fix the drivers and the ATI users were not having problems.I uninstalled SP2 and all the problems went away. I may try it again, but not until I change video cards or Nvidia issues new drivers that address the problem.Dale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's up to you, but as Nick says it fixes a lot of issues with SP1 and improves performance with autogen batching.If you want to use old content that wasn't designed properly for FSX then go ahead and stick with SP1.Just don't be surprised when many of the new addons are only supported in SP2.Glenn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good reply Dale. Exactly my problems also with a new system build and fresh install of Vista64 and FSX.As to the non-compliant add-ons, I do believe add-on developers are a bit tired of re-work and re-release each time MS offered an SP.Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"As to the non-compliant add-ons, I do believe add-on developers are a bit tired of re-work and re-release each time MS offered an SP."Thats because 90% of them were not made to the SDK standards anyway!I think Eaglesoft may be the exception.......Let's face it, a lot of addon devs were updating FS9 models and claiming FSX 'comapatabilty'Better get used to it for FS11..............Glenn

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