Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

tfm

TIME TO DECIDE FSX OR NOT WITH UPDATED HW

Recommended Posts

Hi all I have been absent from here for about 5 mths been an avid simmer since the Sublogic ATP days on my PCjr. I have had FSX ultimatesince it came out and I shelved it in lew of FS9 cranked all out. Well I decided to slowly update my HW and I am at the point where my unit is all apart waiting to go into a new case and I am adding an E8500 from my 6600 with the 8800GTand 4 gig. I am now asking an unbiased opinion where I should go.I prefer heavies with great scenery and eyecandy. I have 2 choices Xp or Vista Home rather not use a dual boot.Both sims FSX or FS9 but with FS9 I have a lot of dollars invested in 3rd party. I now have 3 SATA drives with a dedicated FS 10000K raptor which I use Drive 1 for windows and all of its BS,Drive 2 will be FS addons that can be used outside of the FS drive and FS related tools. So here I am at an Impasse and would really appreciate any feedback you guys have and if you think FSX is where I should go please tell me the tried and true 3rd party A-MUST list.Thankss AgainAndy

Share this post


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

My unbiased opinion is that you should take all of the money you have in your bank account and donate it to AVSIM.Well, I guess I have bias...Seriously, though, you are asking a ton of questions. It would be pretty hard to answer all of that in one go, for free.The simple answer could be that if you have both on your new rig, then use both. FS9 and FSX can be installed on the same system. People say FS9 is better for long-haul heavy aircraft and that FSX is better for exploration-style low-and-slow flight as well as Missions. That answer is as good as any, I think. I don't use FS9 anymore, but that doesn't mean it's bad or anything.I also like the features in FSX more than in FS9, but again, that's my experience, and your mileage may vary. Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately its up to you to decide.Based on your hardware, I would suggest you go with Vista64 if you are going with Vista at all.Tried and true A-Must list, you say? I can only vouch for what I have tried myself, which among payware is FEX, ActiveSkyX, Eaglesoft Twin Comanche, and the PMDG MD-11.RhettFS box: E8500 (@ 3.80 ghz), AC Freezer 7 Pro, ASUS P5E3 Premium, BFG 8800GTX 756 (nVidia 169 WHQL), 4gb DDR3 1600 Patriot Cas7 7-7-7-20 (2T), PC Power 750, WD 150gb 10000rpm Raptor, Seagate 500gb, Silverstone TJ09 case, Vista Ultimate 64ASX Client: AMD 3700+ (@ 2.6 ghz), 7800GT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you overclock that CPU you should be able to enjoy the big iron in FSX. You'd really have to crank that CPU if you want to enjoy payware iron, like LevelD 767, PMDG 747/MD11, Captainsim 757 etc... somewhere around 4.0 Ghz to enjoy FSX the way you describe you want to.I say that because I'd assume you be flying in large cities (where big iron go hehe) and large cities in FSX are rough on the FPS to start with.I'd try FSX for sure. I recently uninstalled FS9 for good and really dont' see a need for it now - I moved on.... There's too many good things about FSX :)Then again, I'm primarily a GA FSX flyer. But I enjoy the bizjet and the occasional heavy, I own the LevelD 767 and can have fun with it in smaller cities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for it FSx is is so much better. As for havy metal FPS, its a bit of a msinomer, as the develpoers are getting better and more familiar with the FSX SDK the models are getting better and have less of an FPS impact. Anything that is a fs9 import or built using the fs9 sdk will more than likely have a FPS hit. As for aircrfat, GA. Just flight Flying Club X, great for learning just updtaed to full FSX SDK, love it theve also made one of the planes free so grab it and see.Digital Aviation Piper Cheyenne, still hase a GPS fix on way but best twin turbo out thereAerosoft twin otter and beaver X both brilliant for shirt TOL and bush flying.Flight1 PC12 is another . sinlre engine turboprop, glass cockpit.also have the Feel there legacy Jet, is FS9 import but still a great samll business jet addon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies but can I make one observation I posted this in the FSX forum and reall most responses were go with FSX but as one mentioned Ocing the E8500 to over 4gHz .Does Xp vs Vist Home make a difference with FSX since DX10 and dual core utilization come to play with Vista 32. The reason for this is the time it takes to get everything up in running and debugging only to find out oops I should of stayed with FS9 and XP. I honestly would like to move on as well but will I still enjoy the sim as I did with FS9 with all my add ons,btw I have always been a fan of 2D cockpits which is less taxing. And where is FZSX on patches and what is essential to optimize it. I intsalled it 2xs when I first purchased it only to shelve again and again. Thanks again for your patience and expertise.Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would do it one step at a time. Install fsx on xp-see how it runs.If you are doing Vista for dx10-I would not bother-it really doesn't add much imho and at least most have problems with display anamolies.As for Vista-I have had nothing but trouble with it-including 2 reformats with no success. Seems I am a victim of a well known bug that makes it refuse to do updates-and then every once in a while products like you buy for flightsim say you don't have a license.I can't install Vista 64 which I have because my elite hardware panel doesn't work with it.I am sure most have a good experience with Vista-but I have not.Anyway-I'd take it by baby steps one step at a time.GeofaMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy,I also have FS9 and FSX installed and I too have much invested in my FS9 setup.After I built my current PC 8 months ago I thought I'd fly FSX exclusively but that has not been the case. FPS at larger airports with MyTrafficX is a third of what I get in FS9 with everthing maxxed.As I fly the 737 and Concorde I'm high and fast most of the time. Therefore, the eye-candy of FSX soon disappears. However, the clouds (especially with FEX textures) do look very impressive in FSX which is why I would still like to use it despite having very few 3rd party airports.At some point I'm going to add Vista and dual boot. There's no way I want to lose my FS9 install and with dual boot I don't need to. All I need is to add more RAM and my system should give decent performance in DX10 mode more than it currently does in DX9 mode with XP.There's no need to burn your bridges. If your C drive is large enough and it sounds as though it is then install Vista-64 with dual-boot enabled and you can have the best of both worlds. And if you fancy a flight in FS9 then just reboot and choose the XP option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got FS9 and FSX running on top of Windows XP and enjoy them both.Mostly, I fly FSX, but once in a while I go back to FS9 and fly the Meridian or PMDG 737NG and/or visit some of my payware scenery, like Aerosoft New York...I've not yet heard a good argument for going to Vista32, just for FSX.If at all, then Vista64, I guess.FSX will give you great eye-candy right out of the box and dialing back a bit on Autogen density and traffic has given me solid performance, even into big cities. Like you, I've got Windows on one drive and FSX on it's own Raptor drive which is defragged by name for quick access.Once you get hooked on the look out the window in FSX, it is really hard to go back to FS9, except for a visit...But, luckily, the two releases happily co-exist, so there is no tough decision to make..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I am almost up and running and maybe I will coexsist the 2 ....UNDER XP .I have Vista on my laptop and since it is mostly tuned down I really see no benefit over the true n tried XP. How many updates are there for FSX anyhow and does having accelerator have any advantages.Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy,Well I am almost up and running and maybe I will coexsist the 2 ....UNDER XP .I have Vista on my laptop and since it is mostly tuned down I really see no benefit over the true n tried XP.There's one very large benefit - DX10. As you have a DX10 capable card and FSX under DX10 gives a substantial fps boost I don't understand why you don't go down the dual-boot route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No less a person than Pete Dowson said it to me so who am I to contradict? He's reporting a boost of 40-50% in DX10 mode with Vista-64.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I left the FS Hobby for about a year and returned with a new rig with the following specs:Dell XPS 710Windows Media Centre 32 bit SP3Intel E6600 Quad Core 2.53GHZ (unsure of FSB)2GB RAM500GB HDNvidia 8800 GTX 768mbI decided to install FS X rather than FS9 and don't regret it except for the fact that the PMDG 737NG is no longer available to me.I have only run the LDS 767, Wilco A320 Series 1 and more recently, the PMDG MD11.Other Addons complimenting this are Activesky X, Squawkbox 4 and FS2CREW LDS 767.Performance for me has been more than satisfactory, albeit with mostly default scenery. This is ok for me given that the default scenery is actually pretty useable. I do own London Heathrow addon scenery and never really notice that much of an impact with it.I fly mostly from the Virtual Cockpit and the improvements in graphics & effects make for a much more enjoyable experience than FS9.I'd recommend you try FS X out. I'm happy that I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar agenda to yours. I've really blitzed this over the last few weeks so I'll try to pull together a few tips based on my experience.It is absolutley critical to get your hardware fine-tuned. It is not just about de-fragging your HD, though of course this sort of thing is important. Do not assume - as I did initially - that things like RAM timings and speeds are of little importance. Try the hardware forum here on Avsim, but there are also other good places around. Nick_N knows his stuff and is generous with his time. Here are a couple of links to show you what you might be in for:http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/Ya...?num=1224240402http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/Ya...?num=1224509329http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=28244http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/Ya...?num=1223693603Provided you can get your kit to work with the CPU at 4GHz+ AND singing along nicely with the other components in your PC, especially the RAM, then the goodies that can bring lesser PCs to their knees should be within your grasp, including:1) Anything for FSX from the Level-D and PMDG stables (A quick run-down: the Level-D 767X is absolutely first class and gives good performance but is just beginning to show its age (it was not re-written from the ground-up for FSX so some parts of the VC look a bit flat). The PMDG 747X is also absolutely first class but it is a real performance hog and it has fewer nice touches IMHO than the 767X (for example, no nice speed or flap call-outs from the 1st officer). The PMDG MD-11 gives the best of both worlds, IMHO, as well as taking things to a new level in some respects; and it has just stolen top-spot for me from the Level-D 767. However, the MD-11 has quite a big problem with the legibility of the fonts in the VC at the moment which PMDG have promised to fix in a service update, so if this one tickles your fancy you might wait a while to see what happens);2) Activesky X for good weather and, in particular, good skies (set it up to deliver 15+ layers of clouds and you'll see what I mean - but don't try this unless you've got the hardware right first, or you'll get a slideshow in weather of any complexity);3) Flight Environment X (needed for best results from Activeskey X - though there's no need, IMHO, to bother with the enormous textures they've started to promote. Personally I think they're heading in the wrong direction with that idea and they seem to have ground to a halt with their promise of a weather engine, but nevertheless the basic product makes a huge improvement to the skies);4) Ground Environment X (USA version is already out; European version is under development. This product gives a much more plausible and pleasing simulation of the ground than the default scenery, including by using some clever techniques to give a 3-D look to the textures. What's more, this product seems to be less dependent than others on fine-tuning the PC);5) Ultimate Terrain X for Europe (don't know about the USA version, but with the European version you get much better use of the ground textures and, most significantly IMHO, incredible dawn/dusk/night lighting - although the lighting inflicts a big performance hit and is strictly for fast PCs: this is one of those areas where I've found that every extra cycle of CPU speed counts);6) The Megascenery airports (I have Heathrow 2008X and Frankfurt 2008X: both are really eye-popping but, again, for reasonable framerates in all weather conditions they are really the preserve of well-balanced, top-end PCs);7) FlyTampa's Hong Kong scenery (this, IMHO, is the definitive local scenery add-on for a well-balanced, top-end PC; and it is well enough written to be quite forgiving of more modest machines as well. You have the option to install using "strict" compliance with the latest FSX SDK - for incredible detail and framerates; or with looser compliance, which is identical but cripples performance in exchange for slightly more tyre marks etc on the ground textures at the airport. It's a no-brainer for me: use the strict compliance mode and you've got another eye-popper);8) MyTraffic X (version 5.1b has given me pretty good results. Version 5.2 has just been released and the product now seems to be reaching maturity. Again, though, for best results you'll have to get your PC nicely tuned up);9) The RIGHT VERSIONS of FSInn and FSCopilot (for flying with Vatsim. I know this one is contentious; but if you read the FAQs first and install it properly, you should have little trouble with it. IMHO this is one of the most under-rated applications around, partly no doubt because the manual is not very well written and sometimes online support is - how shall I put it? - idiosyncratic. But then it's FREE and when you've got it working, it's great. Others like the new Squawkbox 4.0 beta - but personally I don't see the attraction: you need separate software just to get it to assign a joystick button to work the microphone: bizarre, IMHO).TimPS: Now that SP1 is available and drivers and more mature, Vista 64 is definitely the right way to go IMHO, particularly as you have 4Gb of RAM. Two tips, though: (1) install FSX into a directory OUTSIDE the default Program Files folder: this will minimise UAC problems; and (2) run FSX itself and all other FSX-related add-ons and applications as an Administrator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites