Spud128

Sorry to bump this but any opinions on my conundrum would be greatly appreciated by anyone with knowledge on the subject. Thank you. Spud

Hello everyone, About 4 years ago I built my own system with an i5 2500k processor (overclocked) and GTX 570 video card. I have been happy with my machine and it runs P3d @ 1920x1200 at a consistent 25-35 FPS with the type of flying that I do and settings on the high end. The reports on Avsim and elsewhere for P3d in 4k look impressive. My issue is that since building my own machine I have been out of touch with technology and therefore I am curious if someone with more technical knowledge would be able to answer the following question pertaining to a potential upgrade: Would I simply be able to replace my older GTX 570 with a newer GTX 9xx (or similar) video card in my existing build and be able to run 4k at a reasonable FPS or should I be getting back into the books so to speak and focus on a new build if I want to move to 4k? I think I would be fine with a slight loss in FPS if it saves me the time and money of an all new build. Also, if the advice is to upgrade my current machine, what video card might be recommended with my set-up? I have been planning on a new build in the coming years but would prefer just to upgrade now if possible to have 4k capability. I know it won't be the same as a new build, but can this path still produce good enough results to hold me over for another 18 months or so? Thanks for any and all advice. Spud

I've had the P-51 and DCS world installed for a couple of months now and I'm having fun with it. I am a regular FSX user as well and 700 hour pilot IRL. Here is my pros and cons list for DCS world and the P-51, these are only my opinions whether right or wrong: Pros: -Excellent flight dynamics. There is no comparison here in my opinion, DCS blows FSX away. Stall and flight characteristics are highly accurate and realistic side to side friction and momentum on the ground are notable aspects. -Sounds: My favorite thing to do is fire on a ground target and then push F3 to lock the camera in front of you while you wizz by. Their rendition of the RR Merlin is pretty much spot on. I'm guessing the DCS engine has much newer technolgies than FSX for sound implimentation as well which makes this possible. -Systems programing: I'm not a P51 pilot but everything seems like it's there and functioning as it should. -Graphics and game engine: Leeps ahead of FSX (of course it's newer also). Anyway, I can turn everything up to nearly max on my system and rarely get even 1 studder. Cons: Scenery: DCS world is based on modern warfare and it is limmited to Georgia (not the USA Georgia either). Thus there are no 1940's period scenery to fly in nor can you fly in the US or Europe though I think there's a Las Vegas area coming out or maybe it's been released already I don't know. Anyway, as the sim grows, I expect the scenery areas to grow also. Battle scenarios: Aside from dogfighting the AI P-51, there aren't any other realistic battle scenario's for the P-51, yet. If I'm missing something here let me know but when I use the quick mission builder and get close to my target I get blown away by modern day helicopters. I expect this will develope over time though. Tough learning curve: I think I crashed over 10 times before I finally got it in the air, probably crashed on my first 20 landings too. You really have to stay ahead of this plane and fly it the whole way. I haven't mastered this thing yet but I've improved greatly in all phases. I guess it's not really a con, but it is a bit frustrating at first. Lack of customizable conditions: I'd like to have more control over weather settings, time of day, etc, and be able to change this mid flight without having to reload the sim. FSX beats DCS in this aspect in my opinion. So, I figured I'd post this for the benefit of others. I like the potential that DCS world has and I'd like to see it grow. For now, quite honestly, there's not enough variation for me in DCS so I still mainly fly FSX. However, from time to time when I want a more realistic feel, I load DCS. Note: The above bullet points are my opinions only, feel free to let me know if I am missing something. Also, I do not own the A2A aircraft, so I cannot compare DCS with that product.

Upper level winds are likely the main driving factor as stated above. If you want a general snapshot of the latest jet stream I have this site bookmarked: http://virga.sfsu.edu/crws/jetstream.html . The latest maps will give you a good general overview of current wind patterns at 300MB (about 32,000 feet). Another factor I think is worth mentioning and could be the reason why airliners sometimes take the southern routes is due to abnormal levels of radiation at the upper altitudes further north. I don't know how many airlines look at this information these days but there's a good possibility that their dispatch department may route them further south or fly them at a lower altitude to avoid high exposure areas. Like a say, I'm not sure if all the airlines consider this but I think some of the larger ones do. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. Not that this would be at all a factor in FSX but for what it's worth.

Awesome, thanks for the helpful advice, i will give it a try as outlined above. Best regards, Spud

Hello,I'm looking for some help from the experts. I recently built a SB computer and think I may have made a mistake regarding the allocation of my programs. I put W7 and FSX on my 80GB SSD because I like the quick load speeds. But now I'm running out of room with ORBX, REX, ETC and I'm wondering if it's possible to keep further scenery installs on my 1.5GB HDD while maintaining FSX program files on SSD? Will there be any conflicts or loading problems if I were to do this? Also, are there special configuration tips that anyone may have? I've got two other NA scenery's from ORBX that i'd like to install and i'm down to less than 10GB on my SSD so I'm pretty much maxed out. Would like to avoid an FSX re-install if at all possible. Thanks in advance.Spud

I'm happy with the pricing model they chose. I can learn how to operate the plane properly (long process I'm assuming) with the base pack at a VERY reasonable 70 dollars. Then a few months or whatever later I can add the expansions for a mere 30 bucks if I want. But then again, I'm one who would've paid probably a lot more than what they're asking for that beautiful bird :)

I was having the same debate with myself on my recent build. Couldn't justify the 580 from a cost perspective so I split the difference and went with the superclocked 570 by evga. I don't know how much (if any) gain over the 560ti it was but I'm happy with the decision I made however as the graphics exceeded my expectations within FSX. I also came from an 8800GT so i'm sure the 560 couldn't have been a bad decision either.

Ok wow, I didn't know that. I should've researched more, the positive reviews on the card were probably 3 years old LOL. Many thanks for your reply and I'll give the shader mod a try. Still wondering about the goofy menu letters if someone can explain? Spud

Hello all, I am hoping someone who knows more about this stuff than I can assist me. I had an 8800GT graphics card that worked great until it stopped working on me about a month ago. In a haste, I bought (what I thought was) a temporary replacement to get me through the summer months before I decide to upgrade my system with a Sandy Bridge around October (when the weather gets cold again!). The new card I bought is an ATI 4670 1GB (128bit - low end i know!). Now admittedly it was probably a dumb purchase, but is there any chance it should be working better than it is? *Please see screen attached* I have been getting goofy letters on the menu bar and the terrain mesh is loading slower and slower with every minute that goes by in the sim. Should i possibly need to re-install everything to get this to work right? I remember a post by PMDG Ryan who said he had to re-install to get things to work correctly on a new graphics card. OR is there a possibility a problem with my motherboard or power supply caused the old card to fail in the first place and hence a problem still exists? I'm getting ok frame-rates with add-on planes and orbx scenery (16-18fps) but the picture isn't anywhere near as fluid as it was with my old card (24fps+ always with mid settings) and the slow terrain loading is driving me nuts. My system is a 3+ yr old Gateway q9300 @ 2.5ghz, 4gb ram, nvidia mb, ssd 100gb. Should I try a new MB or Power Suppy or did I just make a really dumb choice on this $79 card? Any help would be appreciated greatly. Thanks all, Spud

I'm hoping realair does a b200 - if it's half as good as the duke I'll be pleased. I may purchase the c90 by carenado to thank them for the effort but ditto to the posts above regarding the likely technical/performance side.

This happens to me a lot as well when I switch to other programs while in the sim in full-screen mode. What fixes it for me is to alt-tab through all the open programs 1 time until the FSX button is highlighted, then hit enter and it comes back most of the time. I just repeat these steps if it doesn't and it always returns eventually.

Anyone have any guesses on how this will compare with the Real Air one? I own RealAir Spit and thoroughly enjoy flying it from time to time. I'm sure the A2A one will be good as well judging from the videos but was just wondering about the key differences? I don't own anything from A2A yet so if someone could shed some light?

Would love to see RealAir do a B200 or even a C90 would make me happy. FSX desperately needs one or the other! Especially if they've nailed the PT-6, seems like the next logical step but maybe I'm biased :)Oh, I'll be upgrading to this version of the Duke too of course.

Wow is right! Great work guys. Never thought this sort of thing was even possible in FSX. Not really my thing but cool none-the-less. Neat video too!