FSX SP1 News:Intel quote


Today Intel announced their new 2.93G QX6800 Quad Core processor here.


As part of this press release, Aces Studio participated with a quote about our improved multi-core support in SP1. The quote stated


The latest version of Microsoft Flight Simulator* X, Service Pack One (SP1), due out later this month, is a great match for the extreme multi-core processing delivered by the new Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core processor”


and


“Flight Sim X SP1 greatly increases multicore utilization and will scale as more threads are available leading to reduced load times as well as frame rate improvements and greater visual complexity during flight. The Flight Simulator team at Microsoft is pleased to work with Intel to provide our end users with a great gaming experience."


And I wanted to take some time and explain what this means for FSX and FSX flyers.


 


Our multi-core support will take advantage of both 2 and 4 cores today, and more cores in the future when they become available via a config setting. This is for both Intel and AMD processors.


 


At load time, we run the terrain loading on threads across the cores. This can result in reduced load times, the actual percent reduction can vary but it could be reduced by as much as 1/3.


 


At render time, we run the terrain texture synthesis on threads across the cores. During flight on multi-core machines, as terrain and terrain textures are loaded you will notice significant multi-core usage. As all tiles are loaded, the multi-core usage will fall off, this is expected. As the terrain is re-lit, approximately every minute, you will see multi-core usage increase. As you bank and load terrain tiles, or as you fly forward and force a load of more terrain tiles, you will see the multi-core usage increase.


 


At render time, we now perform more extensive batching of objects to reduce our API Draw calls. The batch rebuilds are also performed on a thread and scheduled on cores.


 


For those of you on single core machines, we did do some performance work to benefit you as well. The batching work will help even on a single core. Plus we made some changes to animations to make them perform better and we modified how we draw trees to reduce API SetTexture calls.


 


So we really tried to hit all the wickets with our performance work. I still don’t want to make any final FPS gain claims, and will stick with my conservative 20%. We expect it to be more, but we need to get Beta2 out and see where we are.


 


As far as the release date for SP1, we need to get Beta2 out and see what remains. The last day of April is still possible, but any significant Beta2 bugs will cause us to fix them and delay – we want SP1 to be right for the community and are not tied to a date.


 


Note - hyperthreaded is not multi-core. Our current plan is to treat HT machines as single-core since we noticed extensive collisions between threads which caused stutters.

Comments (34)

  1. vmthiede says:

    Keep up the Good Work on FSX!! I’ve been an FS user for 12 years now. The FS9 version really got me going with the PMDG 737-600 which I fly all over the world in real time. As an Egineer myself I am amazed at how far the software has come in such a short time.

    I’m looking forward to the FSX SP1 update and DX10. I’ve been perusing the latest and greatest Dell and Alienware PC’s and soon will make a major purchase so I can continue to enjoy FSX. My current Dell is almost 5 years old and it’s time for a new one.

    It’s to bad there are so many impatient whiners out there. This product just gets better and better and I know you guys work very hard to make it so.

    Thanks for all your efforts to push the realism and performance of this product!

  2. blueflamer says:

    Approx Release Date – Check

    Legal copy of FSX – Check

    AMD Dual Core Processor, with 256Mb graphics Card – Check

    Standing by, awaiting for final clearance from Team FSX SP1

  3. dkeller says:

    This simulator is so beautiful now even with some shutters and slow frame rates. I can’t wait so see it run smooth on both my cores. I just upgraded to my new core 2 duo system a month ago. I may have to go upgrade my processor to a 4 core just for this simulator.

    E6700, 2GB, 8800GTX

  4. Palebushman says:

    Well done to all in the ACES Team,

    And especially to Phil Taylor, God bless him, who has managed the whiners extremely well.

    FSX is a fantastic product and so too are human beings, the rest of that analogy is self explanatory.

    Well done to all of you.

  5. jsolomon says:

    Hi Phil,

    I thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, namely for your simple explanations of programming complexities and genuine good will. With that said, I have two concerns, the first being more general and the second more specific, which may in fact be demoted to a support issue, like a student asking about one problem on a test. Still, they are related.

    1) Recently I transitioned to Vista and noticed a siginificant drop in fsx performance. Frame rate was lower overall and dense autogen became sparse. More important, a few complex add ons no longer ran so well even with autogen off. Now this may be an issue with nvidia drivers but since the program is not so gpu bound, and other ATI owners are experiencing a similar phenomenon (though acknowledging that their drivers are not mature as well), I wonder otherwise. I have also noticed that those with conroe chips have experienced less of a relative hit, probably due to the os threading itself across the other cores. Obviously SP1 will improve the situation, more so on XP, however. Do you think a directx 10 update will be able to close the gap between operating systems, more precisely is that what ACES hopes?

    For now I’ve reverted to keeping fsx and xp on another drive.

    2) Many of us running single cores, I gather, are choosing to wait for the next jump to 45nm technology before upgrading. Is it worth it to buy a cheaper pentium D 940-50 in the meantime, assuming money is a tolerable object, but not no object.

    Much appreciated,

    jsolomon        

  6. jsolomon says:

    Hi Phil,

    I thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, namely for your simple explanations of programming complexities and genuine good will. With that said, I have two concerns, the first being more general and the second more specific, which may in fact be demoted to a support issue, like a student asking about one problem on a test. Still, they are related.

    1) Recently I transitioned to Vista and noticed a siginificant drop in fsx performance. Frame rate was lower overall and dense autogen became sparse. More important, a few complex add ons no longer ran so well even with autogen off. Now this may be an issue with nvidia drivers but since the program is not so gpu bound, and other ATI owners are experiencing a similar phenomenon (though acknowledging that their drivers are not mature as well), I wonder otherwise. I have also noticed that those with conroe chips have experienced less of a relative hit, probably due to the os threading itself across the other cores. Obviously SP1 will improve the situation, more so on XP, however. Do you think a directx 10 update will be able to close the gap between operating systems, more precisely is that what ACES hopes?

    For now I’ve reverted to keeping fsx and xp on another drive.

    2) Many of us running single cores, I gather, are choosing to wait for the next jump to 45nm technology before upgrading. Is it worth it to buy a cheaper pentium D 940-50 in the meantime, assuming money is a tolerable object, but not no object?

    Much appreciated,

    jsolomon        

  7. Bikedude says:

    I happen to have two Opteron 244 CPUs powering a struggling 7800 GTX GPU. If I turn all settings down, I can manage about 20-25 fps @ 1280×800. This is exactly half the resolution and half the fps I’m gunning for…

    To upgrade to a contemporary CPU, I’d have to dump 4GB memory down the drain, so, could you give me an idea of what performance gains we’ll see with SP1?

    Should I buy two Opteron 254 (single core @ 2.8GHz) or two Opteron 280 (dual core @ 2.4GHz)?

    Or will a 8800 GTX be the way out?

  8. SimSamurai says:

    Hi Crew, Im a real pilot, ~1000 sim hours over 2000,2002,2004 and 300real. I just rebuilt my whole PC (self-wrenched) and installed Vista and FSX this past week (April 7 2007) on separate hard disk. Vista is on C (80gb SATA C drive for OS only and minimal OS related programs, Office, etc..and just installed FS9 and then FSX on F (new SATA II 300gb now labeled F – Flight Disk) My specs are Gigabyte Quad Royal 4xPCI-E, Pentium D 945 3.4ghz, 2gb OCZ 667 DDR2 RAM (installed properly for 2x bandwidth), a BFG 7800gtx 256MB, and a BFG 1000 watt power supply with dedicated 20amp circuit. Drivers are microsoft autoload Nvidia 97. something as the 101.65 and 101.45 drivers are J-U-N-K. (for my 7800 at least) I experienced the same driver lock and crash as many other Vista owners have.

    FS9 installed fine on my F drive but FSX doesn’t have a core folder within F:Program Files / Microsoft Games. All its folders are spilled out and not in a main or primary folder like FS9 is. Why???  Also it is not shown via short cut on desktop (I created my own) and it is also not listed in the programs log under Start menu on desktop. (all of FS-9s stuff/links to exe or uninstall, read me etc is shown though on C!) I also selected Vista Basic, and turned off font shadowing, and did the FSX.exe disable desktop directions as outlined in the FSX read me file.

    PERSONAL BENCHMARK: I then flew both sims on 4 KSAN-KPSP test flights with the stock (non G1000) Baron 58 for all 4 flights. Time for all tests 11am PST and weather was real world with minimal clouds, clear skies and 50+ mile visibility. (I live in San Diego) I also made sure to first set both my displays in Vista to 85Hz, and 1024×768, 32 bit color as well set boths sims to this (1024×768). Lastly I Set FPS lock to Unlimited.

    I basically set up a very worthy, well balanced and well checked test scenario.  I also do not use SLI as I eventually will have 7 LCDs and a projector (my mobo supports 8 monitor output at 4 x 8x). For the past 3 years and in all tests I use the second 19" CRT monitor for undocking the radio stack and GPS to second monitor. To do this I always fly 2-D cockpit in windowed mode with avionics undocked. Also while in windowed mode (alt+enter) if I select the VC cockpit the undocked avionics remain displayed in the second CRT monitor. Thus a great set-up for landing and using the GPS as backup reference.

    The first two tests (one FSX and one FS9)  were with all graphic sliders and checks fully off (full left / no checks) and then flew 2 tests (again one FS9 one FSX) with all sliders at medium and traffic at 25%.  In all cases FS-9 blew away FSX with leaps and bounds with sliders off or on. In the "medium zone slider test" in level flight at 11,500 FSX performance was about 14-18fps (weaaaak) and FS9 was about 80-100fps! (boo-yow) (now I’ll just reinstall all my 100 free add on aircraft and my 5 mega scenery packs so I can knock FS9 back down to 20fps and wait 10 minutes for the sim to load!…Ohhh Yeah!    

    ANYWAY……..A: should I reinstall FSX because it didn’t register properly (even though it flies…however sadly…it still works) B: What are the best over the counter tweaks (that I haven’t done already..see above) and C: yes Im ordering 2 more gigs of ram this week! Lastly D: Any news on patches or packs? and how to make use of my dual core Pentium D?

    —-So.. What next, a 512 card.. why don’t I just go ahead and sell a kidney? I would reconsider chip and mobo upgrade but I just got this stuff a few months ago and rebuilt it over Christmas. On a side note I was running 2000 Professional prior to this with just a low end 5500 PCI 256 card and it did great with FS9 and all my add-ons. Even turned off or set low I still fear Vista is way too much of a system hog. Pair it with FSX and its like watching two hungry dogs fight over a bone! Id be interested in someone flying my same tests with XP and the two sims with all off / medium sliders for the same 4 test comparison.  – Hopefully I can fly it soon before the next "lets chase elephants" version or wowie zowie chipset comes out!!

  9. Bikedude says:

    …and while we’re at it: How about a x64 version of FSX? A 64-bit executable should boost performance by 10%, possibly more if FSX can appreciate >2GB memory space and large continuous blocks of memory. (but yeah, there’s plenty of optimizations that should be done first, but recompiling well-written code can be a cheap way to achieve a quick boost)

  10. rapsta says:

    Hi Phil,

    I think you was not getting me in avsim so I wil post it here 😉 I´ve written:

    Very good news. Hope SP will be out end of the month. But further testing is much better than a buggy SP  

    You´ve spoken about the core 2 duo and quad cpu´s in your blog.

    I have an "older" d945 3.4 Dual Core Pentium. Will this CPU also take advantage of the Dual Core ability of SP1?

  11. Phil Taylor says:

    If the CPU reports multiple physical cores, we will schedule threads on it.

    Logical cores, eg Hyperthreaded, we will not schedule threads on.

  12. Firefighter1 says:

    I have a dell xps 410 with the demension HT cpu how will the sp1 affect me? I think the SP1 should concentrate on thoughs who cant afford extravigant cpus ( computers at that) . Its bad enough with having to tweak the FSX just to get 20 , 19 fps if that. Anyways , i feel that there was a way to do all things FSX is capable to do and have FS9 qualitys……………. MS truley new how to lay one into the community and force byers to upgrade , upgrade , upgrade .   🙂 oh well , thats the COMP bizzz right. I still love FSX and cant wait and hopfully i too , can benefit from SP1 ….though im alomst certain it wont. Enlighten me if you will. After all this is a blog 🙂 .

    Funny thing ,  MS told me via telephone tech support that running FSX on vista was almost a must to get the best performance and all i got was sta…..da……..dr…….. will there be anything new as for as Vista goes? I took vista off cause i couldnt pull at the least , 11 FPS and i know i have the ram , the GC , and a decsent CPU not great but descent to pull it off. Anyways , thanks for any and all who read my post. I am not in anyway shape or form downgrading MS im just confused at the fact that support wont be BASED to thoughs who really need it.

    Best regards,

    nater

  13. Bikedude says:

    Firefighter1, make sure you have the latest drivers for Vista. In addition, try to run FSX with stuff like Defender and AV switched off. I have a core2duo at work, and before switching off various extra services in Vista, the mouse cursor would often freeze… No CPU activity at the time, but the cursor simply froze. I disabled a few "security"-related services, and it has been smooth sailing ever since. In addition, today you need 2GB memory minimum.

    _That_ said… The FSX box says 1GHz CPU as minimum requirement… As I mentioned above, I have two CPUs that are both almost twice as fast (1.8GHz with ample L2 cache). I would hate to see the 1GHz slideshow with FSX… (Perhaps this is why Phil isn’t commenting on performance numbers, because he must’ve caught a lot of deserved and undeserved flak because of this)

  14. SimSamurai says:

    Do you guys think that XP (any version…home…media….pro…or pro64) will and or does perform better than Vista for either FS-9 or FSX? I was debating setting up one of my empty drives with Windows 2000 Professional to see if I could install FSX on it for a test. Thinking that 02pro is such a stable bare bones NTFS "grandaddy" it might just do the job better than XP or Vista leaving much more system resources for the simulator. While is isn’t labeled to support it…it just might!

    I know FS9 really screams on 02pro as that was my previous OS. I’ve never even tried XP (yes…living under rock…)  I flew FS9 today in Vista at 75% sliders (some even full) and was ~90% dead locked on 35fps. Nice and smooth. 60 degree sharp turns in Baron 58 too over San Diego at 2,500. For a further test I opened 4 post card size windows in my second monitor (left,right and 2 diagonal views) and FS9 STILL ran at 9-11fps…STILL outbeating FSX when Im running it at just 25% sliders!!! (and looking ugly)

    I guess they really made one we can grow, and chew…and chew…and chew on! So… Im buying 2 more gigs of ram this week and will start shopping for a 512mb card! Maybe then I’ll be able to squeeze 20fps out of FSX over a sparse desert! —64 support would be great if the sim(s) could take advanatge of it as I feel my Pentium D 945 3.6  is only half awake! Should I even bother with ordering the x64 upgrade disc for Vista home P..? Only if they make the rivets flush.! Wave of the future…future.

  15. Bikedude says:

    SimSamurai: Vista and x64 XP both suffer from a lack of (optimized) drivers it seems. 64-bit Windows also takes a performance hit as far as memory usage goes (native integer and pointer size is suddenly 8 bytes instead of 4), so the fun starts at 2GB physical memory.

    I’ve read through Mark Russinovich’ technet articles on Vista’s kernel improvements, and I don’t understand why published benchmark scores consistently yield worse results compared with XP. I _guess_ added features such as Defender has something to do with it. I believe a stripped down Vista (no firewall, no AV, no Defender and perhaps no UAC) should compete quite well with XP, but I have no means of confirming this. (and the outcome depends in large parts on the availability of good device drivers)

    As for Win2k, it is no longer actively supported (or support is about to expire soon). In addition, it has no Direct-X 9 support IIRC. The lack of DX-9 might actually improve fps (now I’m guessing again) since FSX will most likely scale back to DX-8 and simpler graphics. That said, XP made numerous kernel improvements that should help, rather than hinder, performance. In addition, XP is Hyperthreading aware, Win2k OTOH treats HT as another core (which can be bad).

    In conclusion: Use a modern OS for modern hardware. I suspect XP (or Win2003) is the better choice now, and then we’ll see about Vista as the DX-10 patch is made available (together with more DX-10 supporting hardware of course)

  16. Firefighter1 says:

    Thanks Bikedude. Glad to see that knowone took what i said to literal….i was jsut stressing a valid point 🙂 . I am thinking of trying that , but i dont remember the Vista having defender on it. Or does it ? And you can , disable thoughs things? well im thinking of giving it a try i have hdv FSX on vista running great at 1 time but that lasted as long as it lasted LOL…..

    thanks ,

    Nater

  17. Firefighter1 says:

    Thanks Bikedude. Glad to see that knowone took what i said to literal….i was jsut stressing a valid point 🙂 . I am thinking of trying that , but i dont remember the Vista having defender on it. Or does it ? And you can , disable thoughs things? well im thinking of giving it a try i have hdv FSX on vista running great at 1 time but that lasted as long as it lasted LOL…..

    thanks ,

    Nater

  18. Jon Patch (why is this bloke not a MVP yet) pointed out that Phil’s and Paul’s useful FSX

  19. SimSamurai says:

    Thanks for the tips Bike. I actually like Vista (even though I’ve shut most everything off now!…even my backdrop is a lovely flat black!) I flew the Grumman Goose tonight at Wake Island for a few laps and then manually flew a pattern in the RJ-7 (try coming in from the side with the tree on short final..I set down about 1/2 way and luckily stopped before the nose got a drink) FSX did ok here ~20-25 with all settings at medium. I have locked FPS at 30 and that really seems to do well. The water boost is certainly the big dipper though. As soon as I open an exit and try too see my reflection it all goes to hell! :0 Yesterday my yoke and pedal actually blinked out and I had to re-calibrate them both but other than that….I might just extend downwind with Vista before I retro-grade anything. (aka i f I did..I’ll have to go out and purchase XP whereas I’d rather just purchase 2 more gigs of DDR2 and max out the deck. Time to bring the heat!

  20. Firefighter1 says:

    I will have to say i found a unique something this afternoon. First off , do not be affraid to try diff settings. LOL, I get horrible frames 15- 20 if that……well i used some tweaks as i have in the past and seemed to get about 10 fps worth out of them so i can get 20 -30 now. Well heres what i found.

    If you have the graphics turned all the way up, the aircraft slider at medium high  traffic off except road traffice to about 10 , very low weather , and turn scenery texture , mesh water up you can get a boost outa your fps……..cant explain how but it wrks, i even reset all setting and tryed it again and sure thing i was pulling 40 -60 fps .i can explain more another time, im tired and must sleep.

    Thanks for listening.

    Nater

  21. bjorlando says:

    What does this mean to Pentium D users? I feel that FSX is not making good use of what I have.

  22. Firefighter1 says:

    I will say that i myself have a pentium D ( HT ) and its ok . as i explained above i have goood frames and nice looking scenery by using tweaks . One tweak i find very useful is the default xml file in autogen folder. There is a file that has been tweaked itself floating around on the internet that just does wonders. heres some changes on can do toy help performance and or the over all pipcture.

    1.)TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=400 change 40 to 400 or change it period to 400

    2.)uunder Terrain : add >     TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=500

                                                TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=300

    thoughs that seems very low , in all realtity it pretty high. FSX renders so many diff trees its just not funny. And useless really but thats a DX10 thing anyway.

    3.)Buffer pool :     add to the bottum of CFG file  

    [BufferPools]

    PoolSize=2500000  

    you will have to play with this as its very testy but helps out in the panning around depart ment  it can smooth it out more the higher the number. But be careful as it will use excess ram so 2500000 is a good number and a good starting point is 500000

    4.)  Now under Main of CFG file :   add

    FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.11

    you will need to play with this one as well.

    SUmmary::::

    you will just need to play around . i know , if your like me you have no time to sit for hrs to find your PC’s sweet spot. I just had a bomb squad call last night( lasted4  5 hrs ) very tired , so i understand . But sit down and start adjusting. I have a HT cpu at 2.80 ghrz , 2 GB ram , 128 Mb shared to 512 which takes away my ram and still was able to pull off nice scenery a very good looking aircraft that slider is alll the way up.

    My settings…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    graphics: global all the way up , FPS set at unlimited using Trilinear

    Aircraft : Medium High

    Scenery :Level of detail ( radius)   Large  , Mesh complexity 91 ,Mesh resolution 1 m  ,texture resolution 7 cm  , water effects at a very nice Low 2.x   looks awesome !!!!

    Under scenery objects:

    scenery complexity ( very dense )

    autogen density ( Dense )

    under special effect low. I am not sure what can come of this but it really lowers frames at times. Though i say these wrk wonders they do , but keep in mind where you fly is a big determinant of how your FPS will react.

    Weather :  very low, even though its very low , in missions and online you are still able to have rain storms , snow ice etc…  

    use simple clouds

    traffic :   All turned off except road traffic which i put 10 . As i stated before , you can still get boats cars etc… even though you turnerd way down it s a matter of how far the main slider is

    """ also that is a big diff there, make sure you use what has been giving you the best posssible FPS then tweak the custimize settings.""""""""""

    Well i hope this is of some help to any and all who visit this blog , i apologys if this was way off topic , but i thought i would put out what i have learned and share some things that will help us all enjoy this great FS .

    Happy landings,

    nater 🙂

  23. Firefighter1 says:

    Im not sure i understand. I understand what your saying….. but whats it matter. Theres nothing we can do, except save our money but to late… Anyways, i was simply helping others by giving my advise and personal findings of FSX , and i agree altitle on the programmers thing.

    " they could have easily gave the same performance as they the did w/ FS9 to FSX with the new features FSX has . Anyways,  nobody here is sorry, goodie goodie , weenie  Saito48 , its like buying a new car theres things that youlll love and theres things you will hate……….but we all love that new car smell. Right"? relax……. its a hobby not a contest , its for fun not life or death , were not all buisness man , and quiet frankly your the only one wining here…….   🙂

    relax…..

    P.S.

    I hope i made for some hilarious reading  🙂   🙂

    you get it fixed

    im sure thats……long over due !!!  😉

  24. SimSamurai says:

    I for one appreciate the fact that the program offers alot of customizable features in the display and now virtual view arenas but also feel the product was pushed to market too soon and because of that it obviously falls short in some areas, much like Vista still does with the current driver issues for 7, 8 series card support. I think both MS and Nvidia are still scratching heads and pointing fingers and we the consumer are unfortunately the most in the dark when it comes to getting it all to work right.  Maximizing performance also depends on what sytem you have (as well all differ) and THUS WHY THEY HAVE OPTIONS OF CUSTOMIZABILITY. The needs of the many outweight the needs of the few, or the one. (unless you are Spock there…Saito.:(

    So we are inevitably left with becoming armchair "re-config" programmers who begin supplementing our own tweaks. While it can be fun and interesting, it is at times its VERY frustrating! I too would certainly rather just fly than tweak files because…well..Im no tweaker either…Im a pilot!  In both cases the more you learn the more you can get into trouble too. It can be fun..or not. Its all about what your view is from your own own foggles.

    While the config adjustment allowability is a great option for those who DO know how to use it properly, the big issue (and One the FS series programmers should take more into consideration) is that in this issue FSX was supposed to be directed more towards newcomers, novice pilots, and perhaps kids wanting to learn how to fly A-Z in a very lush, scenery rich environment. In creating such a monster (15gis!) and the rush to get it in people hands I can only assume that as a result they have lost many peoples trust . DUE TO THE FOLLOWING A: It is supposed to be "Vista optimized", (I laugh….we’ll see in 6 months..) and B it should play well "out of the box". (My first flight was sad at <10fps and Im now up and running at~20fps…finally….but with more stutter and less gravy than FS9!) and C: It should really offer alot more than FS-9 did. Aside from the scenery and water detail upgrade and a few G1000 aircraft it is pretty much the same. The new planes are no better than what I download for free. I could think of at least 5 other cool and unique things it could have had. How about a better way to view aircraft performance stats in flight or a dedicated FMS you could use with all aircraft or prehaps a virtual E6-B too???

    In all areas of performance, compatability, and uniquness it has its problems just as all software does. Even with my own ample system and computer savvyness I can’t imagine how some other less fortunates cope! (hardware..or..headgear?) FSX is also an obvious push towards the latest and greatest in graphics capability and while I thought I was on the front of the wave with my Pentium D and 2 gigs of ddr2 three months ago, I will certainly be on the back of the wave again in a few months more. (and then I’ll get a 512MB video card) In short…you cant stop progress ..there….Saito.  So either don’t buy the hype, or if you do….pre-plan to upgrade and plan to tweak!  

    As far as loyallty to the big picture which for me is F-L-I-G-H-T. I will take it however I can get it whether in simulation or the real world as Im deep in it.  Me….I’ll be on VATSIM tomorrow night flying my King Air 350 in the BC range on my 26th hop southward of a self created 350 stop mountain world tour. (a.k.a Flights of Deth!)  Also as a final word ….As a real pilot I keep reminding myself from time to time that I should only need 4 things: the gauges, radios, a hot stewardess, and a clean view of the lights at the DH or MAP…..whichever you prefer.  

    Keep the greasy down weezy. 😉

  25. Firefighter1 says:

    HAHA yeah i agree. The less fortunate <<<<< me , lol, i am glad for the tweaks and seem to understand why , whats going on too so keeps me outa trouble and helps me get the things i want. Those tweaks do wrk and yes they are very PC based . You need to know what your pc can do before aplpying although if you screw up just delet the FSX.cfg and restart fsx. It will re – create the cfg and no harm no foul. little tip 😉 ,  so as i said , dont be affraid to try these there are very many success storys about these tweaks all over the net .true you dont need the eye candy just a realistic flight engine ( aircraft ) , gauges , and a semi yoke – joystick – key pad 2 or at lest 1 finger and your good to go . But eye candy makes for some good fun .

    thanks all,

    Nater

  26. Saito48 says:

    This game still not fixed yet?  Would you buy gaming software for your Xbox 360

    or Playstation 3 from these guys?  They got my money, money I thought was for

    a final release, not a beta.  Kinda odd how its taking forever to even get a patch going.

    When was this software released?

  27. Saito48 says:

    This morning I went to both FutureShop and Best Buy.  Talked to their managers that they

    have software on their shelves that isn’t working properly, no matter what you have for

    hardware.  Both managers said that they had heard about the problem.  Because I made a

    formal complaint, both managers have in-store policies where formal complaints have to be

    forwarded to head office.  I was also given addresses, phone numbers and email addresses

    in the event i would like to reinforce both complaints to both head offices.

    I hate being ripped-off !!!!!!!

    My question again, would you first, trust these guys again when they try to sell you a final release?

    And second, would you buy expensive gaming software from these guys for your expensive

    Xbox 360 or PlayStation3 ?

  28. Saito48 says:

    Dad:  Happy Birthday Son !!!!!!!!!

    Dad:  Guess what I got you for your birthday?

    Dad:  I got something I know you are really going to enjoy!!

    (son looking on with excitement in his eyes)

    Son:  What dad??!!  What did you get me??!!

    Dad:  I got you that Microsoft Flight Simulator X you told me about

             that you really wanted.  I even got the Deluxe version!!!

    Son:  Aaaaah cool Dad, you are the best !!!!

    Son:  I can’t wait to try it out !!!!!

    Dad:  But wait son, there is more.

    Son:  Really Dad ??!!

    Dad:  Yeah son, I thought you should also have the best of the best

             in hardware also, after all its your birthday right?

    Son:  Huh?? !!

    Dad:  Well son, since you have been doing so well in school also,

             I got you a brand new computer.  It has the latest CPU.

             the best videocard money can buy, a superfast harddrive,

             and tons and tons of ram.

    Son:  Wow dad, that is so incredible.  You are the best !!!!

    (24 hours go by.  My son is playing Call of Duty3)

    Dad: Hi Son.  How come I never see you using FSX?  I thought this

            was the simulator you raved about and really wanted?

    Son:  Well, I’d like to dad, but its almost unusable.

    "And now you know………………..the rest of the story"

  29. SimSamurai says:

    Yup, that about sums it up! Thats why they should leave the flying to those who are

    mature enough to handle all the pitfalls of an underplanned, overstocked program.

    As far as Call of Duty…Just to see what Vista would do I installed both COD, CODUO,

    and COD2 on my machine last night and while they all installed ok when I click on

    the exe shortcut or the exe diredtly from the folder I get a "Cannot Locate CD-Rom"

    promt that says Please Install correct CD-rom, select OK and restart application".  

    This is also after having been promted to update my macromedia flash player which

    I did so but this didn’t elp any either…….

    I’ve tried all the run CDs in both of my cd drives, one a Sony rom, and one a Sony

    DVD rom.

    No luck with either….I also can’t find much help or any patch files for this on the

    internet. Thankfully though FS9 installed beautifully and is working well in Vista.

    But……if thats going to be the only program I can run properly I might as well just

    re-install Windows 2000 professional. At least then I know I can install pretty much

    anything I throw at it as most software in majority of circulation says 2000/XP.

    You would have thought any XP certified game or program WOULD run in Vista..

    Im starting to think that the 100 I spent on the Vista upgrade (which installs clean

    over 2000) and the 75 I spent on FSX through an advanced purchase promo offer

    with PCAviator were both a waste of money and now my patience. If I can’t get

    these few —what should be SIMPLE bugs to fix—fixed by tomorrow night Im going

    to reinstall 2000 and put all my sims / games on that OS…and finally get a good nights

    sleep after two weeks of trial and error benchmarking and senseless hairpulling!

    ALSO—Is anyoe else reading this thread and having it chop off the last few words

    of every line on the right side? Is this just me, the internet, or Vista???? The thread

    width keeps shrinking…and shrinking?

  30. Firefighter1 says:

    Any news on the FSX SP1? I am very very curious myslef to see if they even took the time to help thoughs with HT cpu. Bank they have not , but hey never know. Anyways, so when MS says april they mean , May ?

  31. philby says:

    So am I, has beta 2 testing finished? otherwise it looks as it will be May before we see it.

    That’ll make it 6 months since FSX came out.

    I don’t about others here, but there seems to be very little add on scenery etc for FSX compared to FS9 ad I wonder if performance has something to do with it and add on devlopers either free or payware are waiting to see what the SP does.

    Not trying to look as I’m complaining, as I can get FPS of 10 to 15 depending on what I’m doing and settings no where maxed out and that is one third  of what I used to get with FS9

    Anyway Phil, thanks for keeping us in the loop.

  32. antonism96 says:

    Will SP1 of FSX support SLI or Crossfire graphics?

  33. Phil Taylor says:

    Antonism:

    did you see my blog post about SLI? Same is true for Crossfire.

Skip to main content