prepar3d

[Will]

FSX runs really well on a Core i7.

Have we finally reached the day when FSX works fairly well on a standard off-the-shelf computer?

[John Golin]

No - it works REALLY well

[Richard McDonald Woods]

I am still an avid supporter of FSX as a world simulator. Problems can arise when aircraft modules are added due to tuning issues. This is why I am still eager to get my hands on PSX and VisualPSX!

FSX has by far and away the most airport scenery software available. Replicating these development efforts in other architectures will always remain a massive task.

[frumpy]

No - it works REALLY well

Are you saying the smallest i7 (2,5 GHz) with a good graphics
card will run REX2 and London Heathrow at 25+fps? Or is there
a minimum processor speed of an i7 to work really well?

[frumpy]

Looking for increasing fps on FSX, I found this pretty neat
(and a little paradox too):

http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=30796

[John Golin]

No - it works REALLY well

Are you saying the smallest i7 (2,5 GHz) with a good graphics
card will run REX2 and London Heathrow at 25+fps? Or is there
a minimum processor speed of an i7 to work really well?

Missed this, sorry.

That  document in your subsequent post is very good.  FSX is VERY PROCESSOR AND DISK bound. Fast disk -> fast scenery load, fast CPU -> frame rate, graphics card = pretty graphics.  Chuck RAM in there just to help the CPU and prevent disk access.

AS he mentions, Your Milage Will Vary depending on what your system is doing, but good (great) frame rates are easily attainable.

[frumpy]

I changed the settings as explained and even got a
few extra fps :-o I always thought DX10 is slower.
Changing the priority of fsx.exe in task manager from
"normal" to "high" also gave me about 5 fps. Neat, indeed.

[the mad hatter]

okay so whats the skinny on the OTW view pd3 ? or MSFX I have been looking at xplane 10 and that has some serious considerations... the cool thing about pd3 is you can create much of what you want but then time becomes a consideration... the other factor is for 200 bucks for a professional licence and can do what ya want... no else allows that as far as I know

[asboyd]

I have tried FSX against P3D V2 and due to the support of DX11 in P3D V2 the frame rates are greatly improved.
E.G. frame rates in FSX with sliders all the way up and using ORBX Aus with YMML V2 I get around 5 FPS.
With P3D V2 using the same I get around 15 FPS...
I have an AMD 8350 with 64MB RAM and a Nvidia 660 graphics card.
I have tried a 780 (3G) and the FPS jumps up to 25... (in P3D, no change in FSX)

In my opinion, P3D gives a smoother faster scenic rendering, however, it is designed and licensed for training, not desk top Flight Simming.

I have just started to get ready to install X-Plane 10 64 bit, but as I prefer the ORBX scenery that could be a bit of a problem to use for comparison.....

The Steam version of FSX is just the old version in a different delivery method. We shall have to wait until the developers have had a chance to start modernising the code before we see any real improvements (eg 64 bit, DX11/12, extended memory, networking capabilities, etc)

I am sure there will be plenty of developments to keep us testing, playing and building for years to come...

Cheers,
Alex B

[CarlBB]

.....

I have just started to get ready to install X-Plane 10 64 bit, but as I prefer the ORBX scenery that could be a bit of a problem to use for comparison.....

....

Hi

Mainly using XPlane here for the visuals. Slowly    downloading the new Mesh files (v3)

It will be interesting to see how the customer & developer take up goes for these relatively new platforms.

Carl