going back to FS9

[David Roch 1,982]

Mr "jwenting" has been warned one week ago but it seems that he doesn't wish to post anymore in Avsim's forums.

[Guest DALTech_Ops]

Thank you David. The gentlemen who originated the thread certainly did not deserve those comments.Mitch

[Guest shnala]

Personally, I think you made (a huge?) mistake. Especially looking at your spec.... :S ____________________________

[Shri 0]

Hey ClaytonYou are going back to FS2004, but I am going back to Flight Simulator 95 released about 10 years ago because that gives 100 frames per second and FSX gives only 20 frames per sec :-lol Just joking :( Shri

[Guest lingfors]

>hi all>>i have decided to go back to FS9, dont get my wrong, FSX is>great and has alot of potential however i am getting fantastic>performance with all sliders maxed in FS9 compared to FSX,>>on a scale of 1 to 10,10 being best, i would say performance>wise i am getting 5/10 for FSX and 9/10 for FS9>>also there are so many addons out there for FS9 which as this>product is a well established product,>>the only good / better things in FSX is the camera views,>(which can be replicated using FSRecorder) the groundtextures>are top notch compared to FS9.>>However using a quality airplane like PMDG 747 the peformance>is alot better in FS9 than FSX,>>certainly FSX has alot of potential but i think its till 2>years ahead of its time for afforable computing to use and run>smoothly.>>no more waiting over 3 minutes for FS to load with FS9 i only>wait 5 secs!>>:( Troll post.

[oqvist 11]

Not really because it does make sense though the computers are already here that does run it smoothly... Just if you stay away from big airports which is kind of hard in a 747 ;)It depends on who you are if I was an airline pilot just flying at 30000 feet on AP FSX doesn

[David Roch 1,982]

>Thank you David. The gentlemen who originated the thread>certainly did not deserve those comments.>>MitchNot very pleasant to do but "jwenting" is out now.I warned him last week that his contempt would not be allowed anymore.He should own up to his behavior.

[Paul J 349]

Ya know - I was kinda suprised he was even back here. I hadn't seen his input for about 18 months or more. I always considered him (and one other person) to be one of the most rude and insensitive posters on Avsim, and one of the major causes of why we lose the new guys and the good guys. Certainly I stopped visiting this site for a while because of these two folks, but things changed when they disappeared, and Avsim has been THE site to participate in over this last year, with very little acrimony from anyone. I think it's the result of good policing by Tom, David, Geoff and the rest of the team! Thanks for a great site guys.:-beerchug

[downscc 1,327]

This is a worthwhile discussion, in my humble opinion, because we have probably spent considerable time trying to make the transition to FSX. Many are satisfied, many are not. I think the value is in discovering what the major issues are in the release of software of any kind (simulation, business, et al).FSX has provided a lot of spiffy eye candy, but there is a price to pay in hardware. I would have much preferred up to date airports and a weather engine that works. My wish list is much longer, but eye candy is pretty far down there. Thank goodness for guys like Pete Dowson and his FSUIPC that finally allows me to even sample FSX with my inadequate 3.2GHz single core.A coworker and simulation enthusiast of mine has noted that the MSFS releases seem to be better products every other release. I hope he is right. I am looking forward to FS11.

[oqvist 11]

Nah FSX is the better release... It

[clayton4115 56]

yep, as i said FSX is great but for consistent fluidity i prefer FS9, and i am flying PMDG so i know i am flying with the best (best VC) as i never fly the default aircraft anyways.

[Guest Hocking]

I haven't been in here for ages myself. I really got a bit burned out on MSFS because all the frustration with dealing with FSX when it first came out.Well, anyway, I learned a BIG lesson in all this. In the future, I will delay my transition to the new MSFS for at least two years from it's initial release date. I won't even bother buying it until about two years after it is released. Mainly for two reasons: 1) The older version of MSFS will be more developed and supported by third party add-ons which is what I think makes MSFS what it is, and 2) I won't have a computer capable of running the new MSFS like I want it to for about two years after it is released anyway. Why bother even getting it until that time.I think this will reduce the frustration that I have had with MSFS, and will not disinterest me from the entire simulator like FSX did (I haven't flown in about 8 months I hate to say). I just didn't have the time to tweak and mess with everything constantly like so many others on these forums did. I just started playing other sims (like Silent Hunter 3, Silent Hunter IV, Steel Beasts, ect....).I think many people should consider doing the same thing the next time. Heck, when they announce the release date for the next MSFS, it might be time to give FSX a try again.

[oqvist 11]

It

[Guest John Glossop]

It's a little strange to me, actually, that you are having performance problems with your rig. I have a very similar set-up (C2D 6600, 8800GTS 320 meg, I have 4 gig of DDR2 800 RAM, plus 3 SATA2 HDDs). I'm running Vista Ultimate 32 bit, and am showing a performance rating of 5.3, limited by the CPU (a suitable upgrade - which I am not likely to do - would take it to 5.6).I don't get stutters, I do get frame rate problems with a lot of traffic, and the level of detail that I have set for myself, but the satisfaction level I get with FSX is very much higher than FS(. There are new tools coming out for FSX (ADE, Whisplacer and FSX Planner, to name a few) which are making the scenery MUCH more true to life than the default stuff, and all in all, I'm enjoying FSX much better. I defrag often, BTW - I have my PC set up to defrag once a week - automatically, which possibly makes some difference.Anyway, good luck to you, and I hope you'll reconsider FSX. I for one want as many people as possible to use FSX, so that MS get the message that the franchise is still alive and kicking, and will continue to develop even more mind blowing stuff for us, all the way up to that FX90 you mentioned further up the thread.

[clayton4115 56]

yep i do get 'acceptable' performance with FSX but its smooth like butter in FS9, everything is so much faster, ever the change of views, the textures are so much quicker to load, loading from desktop takes 5 secs! not like 3 minutes! and the smoothness really adds alot to the realism experience,but its good FSX is out it gives me all the more reason to upgrade in a year or so from now, who know what latest and greatest stuff will be out in 12 mths time, just imagine how smooth FSX will be with a machine in 12 months time.p.s i'd love to overclock my CPU but im too scared to play with overclocking as i know zilch about it, my mobo is a overclockers dream, so i am lead to believe, but i dont want to go there just yet.