trevcjohnson

I found it ran better under Windows 8.1 than Windows 7, better frame rates.

Hi I haven't made any assumption the built in frame rate counter confirmed better performance by quite some margin over 10fps running under windows 8.1 compared with Windows 7. Using the SIM is it noticeable smoother so subjective as you say was definitely better backed up by sim itself. No idea why but Windows 8.1 runs P3D V2 better on my PC compared with the previous Windows 7 install. I haven't had any USB issues although I know someone who did, solved by removing the motherboard manufacturers drivers. I installed FSX on Sunday and it runs without any issues on 8.1.

My recommendation would be Windows 8.1 I've run P3DV2 on both Windows 7 64bit and Windows 8.1 64bit with 16GB RAM. I found performance to be significantly better on Windows 8.1 with the exact same specification of computer. Both fully patched and latest drivers installed.

Something is a lot better optimised in windows 8 by the looks of things. My windows 7 install was very minimal so I don't think its anything to do with clean install. I have read that the scheduler is much improved in Windows 8 which might explain how it has improved performance. An improvement I found in FSX on WIndows 7 was to give it 100% of one of the cores, made a massive difference in windows 7 on FSX.

I've recently upgraded my OS from Windows 7 to windows 8.1 and it seems to have bumped my frame rate up to over 30fps from 20fps at best if lucky (1920x1080). This is on a G860 dual core 3.0 GHZ CPU and old GTX 460 1GB graphics card so basically a PC that cost very very little to put together. I was looking at an upgraded CPU and GPU but seems no point. Note sure why the performance has changed so much for the better yet still experimenting.

Ive got a fairly lowly spec pc and old gtx460 graphics card bought p3dv2 for a month, its good but I won't be rushing to buy a pro license. I play FSX literally just play for an hour to fly between one aerodrome to another using ORBX england and REX as addons. I uses planes like the the Cessna 172 and Mooney and it probably does what I need it to do and difficult to justify spending hundreds to run P3Dv2 better. At the moment my addons don't work and I don't want to go back to default scenery. Another thing, the graphics engine doesn't feel fully optimised to me yet, considering the quality of graphics my lowly PC can run from big block buster software houses it feels to me like the whole engine needs more work to allow it to perform as it should, having to buy GTX780 to run a flight sim isn't right in my opinion. This might the problem with trying to drag a relatively old graphics engine into a more advanced era.

Unless the laptop has great graphics capabilities it won't run it. I have an i5 Vaio (oldish equiv to current i3) with dedicated AMD graphics which can run FSX but it got no more than 5 fps when I tried P3DV2.

We'll I guess you There is nothing particularly wrong with P3D v2 seems no more buggy than FSX and in fact from what I've seen it has less graphical bugs. My gripe is I can't use the couple of Add-ons I bought for FSX and won't be buying it until they become available, If the developers try and charge again for these just to install again I won't be pleased, having said that the weather scenery supplier already charges to install into the V1 version of P3D.

Great opportunity to developers to charge even more money for their products. Frankly I'm quite amazed the amount of money that devs charge for products for relatively small areas of coverage or a small model plane. Makes the big blockbuster games on consoles and PCs look fantastic value.

I've been playing with P3D v2 and FSX tonight, P3D graphical is so much nicer no horrible glitches like I seem to get on FSX. Looks lush with the new shadows. Screenshots don't do it justice. I bought a 1 month option just to try, waiting for ORBX to fix up their scenery before buying outright.

What sort of difference? I'm interested as I'm still on a very cheap lowly configuration of G860 (dual core 3.0Ghz) and GTX 460 1Gb, I get about 20fps at 1920x1080 pretty much maxed out, was considering an upgrade.

Bought a months sub to try it out, side by side it's a better sim, no doubt, far few glitches than FSX but my PC needs an upgrade really to get above 20fps (G860 and GTX 460) and won't be buying until my ORBX add-on works on it. Definite improvement over FSX so well dome LM

Has anyone tried Prepar3D on an AMD processor I'm currently running a Intel G860 dual core and it runs FSX ok, looking to move up processors and buy Prepar3D v2 but the cost of an i5 seems excessively high to be considering it's a mid range processor. AMD looks good value but I know their performance is lower than Intel. With the move of load off the CPU to the graphics card would AMD be an OK choice?