FSX Perf Benchmark

Gary ( Reset MCP Alt ) at AVSim has an excellent FSX benchmark and from that has deduced some quite interesting bits about FSX perf on dual and quad cores. Basically if you dont use add-ons, a dual-core CPU is good enough. If you do use add-ons, then a quad-core CPU is likely what you want.

The orignal post is here.

The post announcing his benchmark is now downloadable in the AVSim library is here.

Highly recommended, nice work!

Comments (8)

  1. ArchCarrier says:

    Very intersting benchmarking Phil, but do you actually think they prove anything other than the fact that FSX runs poorly on most machines, particularly those running the simulator in DX10 and Vista?

    FSX was supposed to be one of MS's flagship products for Vista and DX10, but its turned out as a product that shows all that is wrong with Vista, DX10 and ultimately MS.

    I'm getting a bit fed up with the positive spin you keep trying to put on things. Do you think if you do it enough we'll believe that FSX is a great product and delivers what was promised?


  2. Suma says:

    > SP2 DX10 is 25% slower than SP2 DX9

    This is what I was asking about before, and unfortunately it seems to confirm what I was afraid about: one of the features which new DX10 Vista driver architecture was supposed to bring was a better performance for the features already available. It seems this does not work as expected.

    Based on review I have read, no game released so far performed any better in Vista DX 10 than in XP DX 9 with the same perceived visual quality.

    It is not clear yet if the Microsoft OS is to blame, or the IHV drivers, or the game developers (Microsoft in case of FSX).

    I am really sorry to see this, as from purely esthetic point of view, the DX 10 API really seems to be designed very well and I hoped it really can bring the performance. Now I am afraid this hope will not come true.


  3. jerm138 says:

    "I'm getting a bit fed up with the positive spin you keep trying to put on things."

    What spin?  He said that some guy did some benchmarks and that they're interesting and that the article was nice work.  I read them.  The article IS interesting, and it IS nice work.  Where's the "spin" you speak of?

    To add something constructive to this post, I'd like to point out that Jordan Moore over at Hovercontrol.com recently posted and excellent article on video card specs and their effect on Flight Sim.  You can see it at http://www.hovercontrol.com/artman/publish/article_90.shtml

  4. ArchCarrier says:

    "What spin?"

    Just look at some of the headings:-

    "More Reasons Not To Worry About DX10.1" - Spoken like a MS employeee.

    "FSX Perf Benchmark" - Apparently we all need dual core processors and preferably Quad Core processors to run FSX satisfactorily. I thought the minimum specs were (and I quote MS FSX website):-

    Windows XP SP2 / Windows Vista

    Processor: 1.0 Ghz

    RAM: Windows XP SP2 - 256MB, Windows Vista - 512MB

    Hard Drive: 14GB

    Video Card: 32MB DirectX 9 compatible

    Other: DX9 hardware compatibility and audio board with speakers and/or headphones

    Online/Multiplayer Requirements: 56.6 kbps or better for online play

    "FS9 Games That Work In Acceleration" - He fails to mention the fact that most of the planes textures don't work in DX10 mode.


  5. ArchCarrier says:

    I'm going to bow out of participating in the blog for the moment. I am not by nature a negative or critical person, but I am passionate about FS in all its versions and an obsessive computerphile.

    I am disappointed about how FSX, Vista & DX10 has turned out, and I have vented that here because Phil has given us all the opportunity to let our feelings known.

    I don't like having these negative views and accordingly, from now on I am going to participate quietly from the sidelines and not let my heart rule my head.


  6. Phil Taylor says:


    My post about DX10.1 is due to the fear-mongering and blatant misunderstanding about what the 10.1 release means.

    Some people are claiming 10.1 will not run on 10.0 hw, which is just flat out wrong, as it will run in "10.0 mode" and only if you have a game that requires 10.1 will that specific game not work on 10.0 hw. This is no different than the 8.1 vs 8.0 release.

    So that title is meant to counter the rumours and nothing more.

  7. Li Anpu says:

    Phil, thank you for the link which I found very helpful and interesting, Christoph

Skip to main content