f4f4wildcat

Can you elaborate ? What's the TODO file? Thanks

Nothing has changed for FSX users with these new CPUs... Not worth it if you have a CPU from 2012 or newer...

I'd dare to say that the problem is with the gauges themselves, I've seen the same happening in some freeware aircraft made for FS9 but also "compatible" with FSX... They don't look that great neither...

I've been also using NI for years, first in DX9 and now in DX10. Parameters as indicated in xxxxx's guide. Currently using a GTX970 graphics card. Very intrigued now to see what else (if anything) can be improved from the Nvidia's graphics settings... never bothered to go check there really.

Good one Kuragiman!!! poor FSX donkey! We'll have to find a really fattier one! :-)

What you're saying then implies that not only legacy FSX but current/future versions of Prepar3d, XPlane or any other sim are pretty much limited (doomed for a better word?) with the current or foreseeable technology - at least if we want them with all the bells and whistles that require insane mathematical calculations instantly. We'll gonna need an actual quantum leap in computing (if that ever happens !) Anyway, pretty clarifying Nuitkati! Thanks for the explanation. Usually one does not stop to think about all the stuff poor old FSX has to be "crunching" when you're just landing that pretty Carenado plane in the fancy LEBL with photoreal scenery around, AI aircraft, real weather, etc, etc, etc.. and probably Mediterranean moisture too.. !

You're absolutely right Jim, my apologies. It's in my signature now. And yep, I've learnt about Carenado's issues the hard way. Although my first one from them was the C185 and it manages to keep good frames pretty well. With the Beech C90 not so much, it's another type of beast... Being there right now! Light props and tprops are my thing (don't see myself changing anytime soon). Just not getting close to a big city, usually there's a big airport there! Those two first points are the key.... so not much can be done really. We'll have to enjoy our sim as it is... Regarding the 3rd point, I'm not even trying ! What I do find odd is that MS (ACES) didn't see it coming in 2005-2006. I imagine that what they were thinking was that in 2-3 years CPU speeds would be about 5Ghz or more... They completely missed it there. Thanks to everybody for the replies!

Hello, don't get me wrong people, I love FSX, and I've been more or less using it since it was released in 2006 but... How is that today's most powerful computers can't barely maintain 30 frames around big airports? And you have to work hard for that (best hardware money can buy, dx10 fixers, tweaking, more tweaking, some luck... and a little bit of tweaking probably next day). Just when you need maximum precision, when you're landing, everything drops! Try landing Carenado's C90 at LEBL with Aerosoft Barcelona X installed and you'll know what I mean. You can always lower your graphics settings, using default scenery and aircraft only, killing AI flights, staying away of big airports, clearing the weather... but where's the fun in that? A fully addon loaded FS9 would be much better and keep happily 60FPS... Am I the only one who thinks that that shouldn't be happening at all, that frame-rate should be flying nowadays (no pun intended!) when using a piece of software that was created between 2003 and 2006...? What worries me most is that these new "updated" versions don't seem to be improving much on it. I admit I'm not using Steam Edition or P3D, but following AVSIM's forums nobody seems to be able to have solid 60FPS with decent addons. Not much seems to have changed... I don't know, just my two cents about it... Greetings from Catalonia (And please, excuse my English, really trying my best with it)