Midcon113

I will do that - probably have to wait until next weekend. Never heard of that site before - it's cool!! Thanks for the tip on that one!

Hi Everyone, I'm currently using SimBrief to put together my dispatches for my flights and reall am digging the system. However, I'm also using Rex Essentials for my weather, and it just seems there's a total disconnect between the two. I think the culprit is Rex Essentials. Right now in the background I'm flying over northern Wisconsin and there were thunderstorms to my north, and when I check real time actual radar, it's crystal clear. My winds aloft are nowhere close to what SimBrief told me to expect to. METARs on the other hand are pretty much spot on. So that brings me to my question: if I were to upgrade to ASN (through Steam) or AS16, am I going to see an improvement here? From your experience, does the weather get more accurately depicted enroute by the Active Sky engines? How closely do the winds aloft match what SimBrief is giving me? Lastly, my big problem with the built-in FSX weather has always been the rapid changing of winds aloft along the route, where it appeared surface weather was being extrapolated all the way up, and I'd get 180 degree wind shifts about every 10 seconds. Rex seems to have fixed that and I'm assuming Active Sky does as well? Thanks in advance, and I'm grateful for any insight you may have. Mark

Hi Jagabom, I got it to work by installing the file and registering it in c:\windows\system, c:\windows\system32, and c:\windows\syswow64. So, three folders, not two. Windows 10, 64 bit. Hope this helps! Mark

Thank you all for you input! I appreciate it!

So, I'm starting to rebuild my FSX:SE install and thinking of a few things now that I also have a new computer on the way. I have the AivlaSoft EFB product, purchased for the box version of FSX, and I'm looking to add either Active Sky Next (since it's DLC now) or AS16 for the weather engine. I have two questions: 1) Can the EFB and AS16/ASN products be run on a networked computer, reducing overhead on the FSX:SE machine? (I'm fairly certain EFB can be run on a network computer for the boxed edition, but how successful is it with the Steam Edition?) 2) Conversely, should I worry about this given the following specs on the new PC: i5 6600k 16 gigs DDR4 ram GTX 970 video card Primarily going to fly PMDG 777/J41, Aerosoft Airbus series, potentially Blackbox A330/A340, and miscellaneous Captain Sim products Bonus Question: If a networked setup is the way to go, what else should I consider running on the networked machine to improve performance while enhancing the FSX:SE experience? Over time I'm going to add AI traffic, potentially ATC (though Radar Contact is getting a little long in the tooth - any recommendations here?), enhanced scenery, etc. Any and all suggestions/ideas are welcome - and I haven't yet ordered the PC parts so if a configuration change is warranted I'd be interested in those thoughts too. Thanks!

Martin, Thanks again for the all the input! You've given me a lot to think about and I haven't made up my mind yet. I'll pop back in if I think of additional questions!

I'm having a similar discussion as well, and really am thinking the i5 6600k processor is enough. The 6700k doesn't seem to add enough to really justify the extra cost. That should save you around $100 - and I'd take that money and upgrade the video card you've selected probably. I'm also willing to sacrifice some performance for cost reasons, and it seems like the i7 just is an area where, yeah, technically you're getting a few more FPS than with the i5, but probably only a handful - certainly not worth (IMO) the extra cost of that processor.

Martin - very interesting review - thanks for sharing! So last step, looking at those numbers: at max load, the Noctua generates 4db less in noise than the H100i GTX (the AIO I am contemplating) while both maxing out at 68C. I'm wondering if you took an H100i GTX and replaced it's fans with the Noctua fans - you should get the same temp results, but with the lower noise. That may be the way to go for me. Question is: is this possible? It seems from watching various build videos that it is but again, this is my first time building my own custom rig, so I'm looking for any help I can get up front. You guys have been great on this question btw - thanks very much! It's almost buy time!

Okay this is a good question: what will a 6700K processor net me in terms of performance over a 6600K? Are we talking more than 5%? 10%? An extra frame or two per second is not worth the extra money to spend on the 6700K IMO. However, this is where I go crazy with the specs - will a 6700K perform better in terms of accessing the drive to load, say, autogen or other files? That's what I'm trying to get a handle on - what are the actual improvements one can expect? Same goes for a 1080 over a 970 - are we talking a few FPS, or a significant increase? I was sold on water cooling before I made the post, but now I'm starting to think about it. On this end, I'm really looking for the tradeoff between noise and effectiveness. If both are effectively silent, then air cooling would be the way to go - I just wish aesthetically they'd make a black version of that massive cooler. The beige/brown color scheme of the Noctuna fans doesn't match anything in my office. If they wouldn't be visible that'd be one thing, but the case I'm going with has a clear side. Thanks for the input folks - I really appreciate everyone's thoughts!

Hi Martin, Excellent points! One thing I'm trying to go for is as quiet system a system as possible under load. For a flight simulator this obviously isn't an issue - with the engines going the background noise from the CPU fans is not going to be noticeable, but in other programs I run it can be. So, acoustically, how do those fan-based heat sinks compare to water-cooled heat sinks? Thanks!

Hi Lars - thanks for the input! I'm okay compromising some settings - I don't need everything maxed out in order to be satisfied. Good news!

Thanks for the reply Charlatan, especially the insight into P3D - I wasn't aware that more graphics card made a difference for it.

Starting to look at building my first custom computer, and virtually all the games I run are going to be fine with the following configuration, but I just want confirmation on FSX/P3D/Xplane. I don't own P3D or Xplane yet, but I do have FSX+Acceleration and FSX Steam Edition. So, the idea would be: i5 6600K ASUS Z170 mobo 16 Gigs DD4 RAM GTX 970 video card The two areas that seem like a potential issue to get the best performance from flight sims are obviously the processor and video card, but is it worth spending an extra $120 or so on an i7 6700K, and probably another $250 or more on a 1070 card? Am I really going to get significantly more FPS out of that? I'm going to use an AIO water cooler for the processor in order to be able to overclock it, but probably not on the video card. Any thoughts folks? Thanks in advance!

Tom, Like everyone else here, reading those words from you just floored me. You are a cornerstone of the FS community - it wouldn't be what it is without Avsim, and you made Avsim happen. Keep fighting the fight - you and your family are in my thoughts and prayers! Mark

Hi @DeskPilot518, Unfortunately, my i52320 processor is not capable of being overclocked - neither the motherboard nor that specific processor supports overclocking (or so I've read - can anyone confirm?) I agree that that would be the best solution. Thank you! Mark

Hi Folks, Been getting back into FSX lately and have a question for you all. I'm currently running FSX on my desktop - i5 2320 processor with an NVIDIA 560ti card, running Windows 7. Using the FSDT KORD scenery, PMDG T7, UT2, GEX, UTX, Rex 4+Essential textures and weather, and Radar Contact, I can get 15 FPS generally. I'm not disappointed with this, but of course I'd love better performance. I also have a gaming laptop - MSI GT70 with an i7 4700MQ processor and an NVIDIA GTX 770M processor. It's running Windows 8.1. Realistically, would moving to the gaming laptop result in a truly noticeable improvement in performance? Right now, upgrading the desktop is probably not in the cards. Any thoughts would be appreciated. I don't know how stable FSX + all the add-ons are in Windows 8 for one thing. Thanks in advance! Mark

Dan, What a great example of looking for a complex answer to a simple question that only needs a simple answer - that indeed solves my problem! Doesn't do much for my ego (as in why didn't I think of that LOL!) but I appreciate it! Thanks much! Mark

Hi Everyone, Still new to the 777 (bought it when it came out then took an extended FS break - getting back now and really enjoying the 777!). I had been having a frustrating problem that has now been partially solved by a forum search, and yes I'd probably find the answer if I RTFM which I intend to do, but with so much reading to do I'm not sure I'm going to find it all. Issue: The first issue is that Radar Contact wasn't working properly with respect to radio communications. Short story is that by searching the forums I found the answer - change the PMDG settings to stop masking the built-in radio with an untunable frequency. That issue is now fixed - but now I have a different issue. Radar Contact is working fine - Otto's handling the comms correctly - but on top of RC's ATC I'm also hearing the default ATC. In other planes, I've solved this by simply swapping to COM2 and tuning COM2 to an unused frequency. Since RC saw the frequency in COM1 it continued to play correctly, but I couldn't hear the default ATC because I was listening in to COM2. So the simple question is: how to I make this work in the 777? Referencing the manual is fine - I will read it, just haven't gotten around to it yet. The 777 is such a well behaved bird that I can start it up from C&D, program the FMC, and fly without having to have read much of the manual (Kyle's YouTube videos helped there as well). Thanks in advance! Mark

Hi Eserice, That's what I had heard - the fuel burn problem at least. Glad to know the CIVA INS fixed that particular problem. Thanks for the input! Mark

Eserice, Any update on how this worked out for you? Also, just to confirm, are you using FSX SP2? Thanks! Mark

NikkiA - that was my impression too. It works fine, but misses the point, though that's not the fault of the person who put the package together - they were just doing the best they could given the lack of a suitable replacement for RFP. Well, the search goes on! Maybe someday we'll see something on the same level as RFP for FSX. Thanks! Mark

Migster, I'll take a look. I downloaded the package from FSDownload, and it turns out that the exterior model is RFP, the panel background bitmap is RFP, but virtually all the gauges have been replaced with either the default FS2002 Concorde gauge, or from the default 737-800 package. I'm sure it works, but that's not what I'm looking for. Hopefully the simvation version is closer to the original. Thanks! Mark

I downloaded it last night and will try to give it a shot tonight; that would be good news if it does indeed work and doesn't include too many compromises from the original. Mark

Bryn - thanks for the input - that's disappointing but understandable. Will - any idea where it's located? I couldn't find anything obvious. Thanks! Mark

Thanks Tom, that's the impression I'm getting as well. It's too bad nobody's done a more hard-core 747 classic for FSX. Mark