Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About aerdt

  • Rank
    Member - 1,000+
  1. Sweet. That was one of my favorite planes for FS9.Thanks for the info,Pat
  2. I agree with you that Aces shouldn't have broke backwards compatibility mid-release. But I would also imagine that it's incredibly hard for them to pinpoint those backward compatibility issues, because most developers are using highly customized code that didn't follow the SDK or development guidelines that weren't even fully FS9-compliant in the first place.Pat
  3. FS9 aircraft belong in FS9 and we should not expect them to work in FSX.The best approach right now is to keep FS9 around for legacy content and FSX for the cutting-edge, new stuff.I never expected that FS9 aircraft without a FSX patch work in FSX anyway, so I am not too terribly disappointed or surprised that they don't work. My favorite FS9 add-ons have either been ported to be compatible with SP2 (ATR, Level-D, Cheyenne, Eaglesoft planes) or are completely new releases (FT A320).Pat
  4. Uh, yea, Rhett is absolutely right. Don't expect 40+ fps running a complex add-on with FSX. With your setup you can expect about 60fps with the default flight and settings (as per benchmark from arstechnica.com on a similar CPU/GPU combination), but expect your frame rate decrease by about 20-30% with a glass cockpit from the default planes and maybe cut in half with with a complex add-on. Add to it that you're running everything maxed (traffic?) and I wouldn't be surprised about the 7fps.Try again with slider in a "Medium-High" setting, maybe some fsx.cfg tweaks and less AA/AF and I am sure you will easily hit 20 fps - which would be an absolute dream for me.Pat
  5. There is a difference between a rumor and an announcement. In case of AirlinerXP, it was broadly announced (even to online and print flight sim media) and this announcement can be considered a "future commitment to deliver", because in 99% of all cases, announced products will actually come out as an actual product or service or else we call it "vaporware".Of course, no money has been exchanged and no harm has been done to anyone. But where would we end up, if companies just decide to announce something that will never ever see the day of light? This is not nonsense at all, unless you as the consumer will digest anything that is being presented to you. I don't think it's useless banter.What, if I would announce today a brand-new flight simulator and claim that it would totally blow away any competition, set up a webpage with screenshots and make people drool over it and then the project will never see the light of day? That's right. I would totally ridicule myself (see "Duke Nukem").Pat
  6. I would expect your system to get at least 30fps with default settings and the Cessna 172 sitting on the runway at a busy airport with medium-high settings across the board.- Delete fsx.cfg (as suggested earlier)- Make sure drivers are updated- Play with settings (medium-high should be fine, water maybe 2.x Low, traffic 30%)- Check different resolutions- Set AA/AF on the driver to enhance FSX settings- Defrag (not a huge performance booster, but might help)- Get a freeware benchmark (SiSoft Sandra, Vista Ultimate benchmark, etc.) and compare your benchmark to similar systems to ensure that FSX is the problem, not the OS or DirectX.Good luck!!Pat
  7. Amen to that. Great post.I feel exactly the same way. It's time that developers stop leaking premature information about products that haven't even entered alpha stage yet. I am not totally blaming the FS add-on developers, because they're just following a very annoying trend of the game developers in releasing and pre-hyping their products years ahead. Duke Nukem was probably the first title that introduced this pre-annoucement syndrome, but there are many recent titles, including Spore. Or Crysis. Gee, I was hearing about Crysis two years before it was released. Boring. To me it generates more of an adverse effect, because after staring at sheetshots and almost being intimately aware or every aspect of the development cycle, I don't feel the need anymore to actually buy it, because the novelty is already somewhat gone.FS developers need to keep in mind that FS version usually have a shelf-life of about 2-3 years until the next version hits (the average life cycle of an FS release is 2.4 years to be exact). I am not saying that FS11 is around the door, but we're already well 14 months into the FSX life cycle and at some point, speaking of me, an add-on that I can use only for a few months doesn't make a whole lot of sense anymore.I very much appreciate developers, like HifiSim and the developers of GEX (in fact all Flight1 products) who "just comes out with a product when its done".Noone wants to read or even hear in every other forum post "Is it done yet? What about now?... Now?" and canned messages of slightly annoyed developers or community managers with messages of "When it is done, it's done!". No kidding, reeeallly?In the case of AXP, I stopped counting how many times the project has been pushed back, but I guess reading this thread explains it all. I am all for a careful, diligent and professional development cycle, but this pre-pre-pre-annoucing has to stop.Pat
  8. The short answer is: No, it does not work with DX10.The long answer is: It might work, but would require some recompiling of textures into a different format and the level of complexity and success may vary.Check for some other threads in here to make textures DX10 compatible (sorry, I don't have a link ready and would need to search myself).Pat
  9. A power supply in the range of 450-550W should be sufficient for your needs. Contrary to popular belief, the power supply does play a significant role in your computer setup and for power supplies usually the rule applies: The more expensive and heavier, the better. I am not saying that you should get a $100 power supply, but don't go with a really cheap one either. Cheap ones either tend to suffer from significant voltage fluctuations or, well, have a short lifespan -or- in the worst case blow up, because of cheap capacitors (really!).I have a 550W X-Clio power supply with my setup and have never been disappointed.My favorites are the X-Clio and CoolerMaster, that offer a good price/quality. Fortron Source is also a renowned supplier. I am sure there are various others. Look for reviews on newegg.com of hardware review sites.Hope this helps,Pat
  10. I think that FeelThere is well aware of the problems with Wilco.I would be very surprised, if there wasn't any contractual/legal agreement, which prevents FeelThere from parting ways with Wilco. After all, Wilco without FeelThere wouldn't leave a whole lot....Pat
  11. The Peryn quad-cores will absolutely be the best that will available for FSX at an affordable price (expect for the Quad Extremes), but who knows when they're going to be available (latest was Q1 2007). Last I heard and read in here is that the quad will definitely show some improvements over the dual-cores and I think that the comparable quad (Q9450?) for $266 would be a good alternative in the future. We'll see, if dual-cores with higher clock speeds or four-cores at lower clock speeds prevail.For a sub-$200 price tag the dual-core will perform just fine and still a very good (top five) performer. I think I read an article recently that had FSX benchmarked on the E8400 (default settings, 4GB, 8800 GT, not overclocked) with 60 fps, which is certainly not shabby at all. If I can get 20fps out of it with a complex add-on, high (not ultra) settings and some 50% traffic, I will be jumping for joy.Pat
  12. Oh yea, with the Level-D you should consider yourself blessed to get those kind of fps. I am sure you'll be able to squeeze out some more. I don't think that's a bad rate at all. If anything that I run in FSX would run at 20fps, I would be jumping for joy. And, remember, 15fps was something that was almost unreachable with a highly modded FS9 and a $900 Athlon FX CPU just about a year ago. ;)The tweaking guide is very extensive indeed, but it is absolutely worth reading. I'm sure you'll learn a lot about your hardware and OS.Good luck!!Pat
  13. FSX does take advantage of four cores as per published benchmark in Computer Pilot (12/2007).Pat
  14. Hm, I fly SID/STARs all the time. Just last week I downloaded the latest AIRAC with terminal procedures from Navigraph and had no problems with it whatsoever. I also never had a CTD. *shrug*.Granted, I never flew into CDG. I also heard the problems with the AIRACs earlier, but to my knowledge they have been ironed out way before the offical forums got closed.I totally agree with anyone that the FeelThere and Wilco alliance has its problems, that it is almost a tradition of Feelthere/Wilco to release their products unfinished and with many very, very obvious and simple to fix bugs, but nonetheless I have to give them some kudos to actually come out with an (FSX) product; something that seems to be more a rare occurrence nowadays.Pat
  • Create New...