And what about night flying? I have both FSX and P3Dv2.5 and there are several shortcomings in P3D compared to FSX:
- Distant AI traffic beacons/strobes are almost or completely invisible at night.
- Custom lights at addon airports do not show.
- Runway/taxiway lights are misplaced/hovering up to 3 Ft in the air at many airports.
The Holy Grail is not out there...
64bit will not solve everything for everybody
I think it's great that people 'knock' something without even trying.
Do people realise that going 64bit means a whole new program? Add-ons being 64bit compatible?
What must be realised is that FSX & P3D MUST be considered as 2 different programs. One sold for entertainment & the other not! Yes, there is an exchange of add-ons, but not all!
The last version of one is 8 years old, since upgraded, the other, since upgraded, about a month old.
A 64bit Sim will go a hell of a long way towards 'the Holy Grail' ....darn sight closer than Indiana got...Originally Posted by zswobbie1
To have a maths-intensive program access more than a piddly couple of gig whilst cramming it all into one core....
I have 32 gig of 2.666 DDR4, a GTX980, an i7 5960x in an X99 LGA2011 v3 with the OS and FSX on a M.2 x4 [that's like a PCIe drive only faster] and still FSX wants to cram itself into one core...out of 16.
At the moment, other than a XEON and/or a second 980 in SLI you cannot get a faster/more powerful machine.
In a 'real benchmark' for gaming...namely the DX10 Benchmark ver of Resident Evil 5 it averages 250.8 fps.
My previous i7 920 with a GTX590 could only manage 144.4.
That's getting on towards double. FSX? Nope...could care less. Yes it's better, but not gob-smackingly so, thanks to an ancient program written at a time when modern hardware was sheer fantasy.
Any game I have loaded has easily run at max. I can even do it whilst running a VM of Win 7 Ult borrowing a quarter of the ram.
But not FSX. If it were aware of modern systems [and coded accordingly] it'd be utterly insane...
...and still be wanting more hardware thrown at it...
This does seem to be the prevailing view around P3D - it's just a bit surprising to hear it so bluntly expressed at SOH. I guess I worry too much...So tired of folks citing the licensing issue. Get over it folks.
For sure 32 bit cpu bound FSX is not really interested in going much faster with modern graphic horsepower. I have three 980's and with DSR at 4k can make it stutter and jerk at O'hare airport with minimum traffic. My 5930k cpu helps a little but even if I overclock it to 4400 FSX still laughs at it.
If P3D really does go 64 bit I would be first in line.
...or you'll be standing looking at my back...
I would make the jump to P3D, but Windows XP does not support DX10 and certainly does not support DX11. My computer is old, so old that upgrading is simply not a good option, so that means a new build and I cannot afford a new build at this time. Perhaps by the time I do build a new computer, P3D may have gone to 64-bit architecture.
My computer: ABS Gladiator Gaming PC featuring an Intel 10700F CPU, EVGA CLC-240 AIO cooler (dead fans replaced with Noctua fans), Asus Tuf Gaming B460M Plus motherboard, 16GB DDR4-3000 RAM, 1 TB NVMe SSD, EVGA RTX3070 FTW3 video card, dead EVGA 750 watt power supply replaced with Antec 900 watt PSU.
I beg to differ! Your PC will run Windows 7 64 bit easily! The only thing you would need is to double the RAM and at a later state a new GFX card.
BTW, Windows XP, although it is a proven OS, is a security menace nowadays!
Just my two € cents of course.
Dumonceau
Look at it like this: P3D is sold to anyone who can afford it. LM knows its being used for entertainment. MS just had the EULA written the way it is, because at the time, they still needed to sell the FS franchise. That has been done now.
The whole licensing thing is a dud. I can't see anyone ever being taken to court for using a damn sim for entertainment.
Johan
My FSX install is pretty much stock, except for a few add-on aircraft. I fly Dino's F-35B, and Flying Stations Westland Wyvern fairly often, but that's it. FSX is just entertainment for me, My FS9 install is AWESOME, over 200 add-on aircraft and scenery packages and it runs like hot butter.
Flight simming is a hobby for me, not an obsession, so as it stands now, P3D isn't a consideration.
BB686
"El gato que camina como hombre" -- The cat that walks like a man
Except that Microsoft did not sell the FS franchise. They sold a license to the technology and the rights to sell an online version of FSX; just as they sold a license to the ESP technology. Microsoft still retains all rights to ESP and FSX and will probably see more future dollars by selling the technology to other large companies with deep pockets.
<link href="chrome://s3gt/skin/s3gt_tooltip.css" type="text/css" rel="stylesheet">
Mike Mann
Simple... Microsoft licensed FSX to Dovetail for re-release as an entertainment product. So, Microsoft gets rid of an 8 year old game & saves on world-wide distribution, manufacture & inventory cost. & Dovetail cannot mode the core, unless to mod it for theSteam system.
Microsoft licensed ESP to Lockheed Martin for development, Not for entertainment. Thier EULA is written to differentiate between a game & a training tool. So, if you want to play a game, you go to a gaming distributor!
Obviously, Dovetail has released FSX:Steam as a precurser to their own sim, that some say will be based on Flight! & coming from a gaming distributer, is targeted to newbies that want a plug 'n play game. If so, my biggest worry is that this will be a closed game, with add-ons only via DLC's.
So, we have choices....
Stick with the old, change to the re-release, go for the latest.
Having said all that, there is still a huge community out there that are still using FS2004, (I am one of them, but also have P3d), & still will not change to anything else!
Actually, reading all the above, I'm realising I have gone off topic. Sorry for that.
+10 to Blackbird686.
Same as myself, except I have P3D, but fly my FS9 as well as my Golden Wings version (regressed scenery & planes to 1930's low's & slows etc) far more.
For my, also a hobby.. although at times, I do get carried away & I keep telling myself, & others at my VA club.. 'Chill guys, it's only a game!'
I don't have a credit card.
Not if you're a P3D user.
Mike Mann
This thread was started for adversarial purposes. I think it's funny to be so butt hurt about something that even seeing people talk about it angers some. There is still plenty that P3d has in common with FSX, so what's with the constant insistence that any mention of it should be banished to a subforum... 95% of FSX add-ons run in P3d, so you'll have P3d users continuing to pay attention and comment in this forum. If you don't like it, roll the little scroll wheel. I don't see why it's such a huge agitation for some people.
I'm not even running P3d yet, and it's never pissed me off to see people talk about it. On the contrary, I've enjoyed listening to what it offers... Nice to see the simulator grow into something that is supported and advancing rather than old, stagnant and dropped by its' creators. If it weren't for all the dedicated third party developers, FSX would have been completely written off as soon as Microsoft threw in the towel.
True, Mike, but, at our VA, we do not use P3D.
Well said Mike. Nobody is making them read the posts, but just the idea that the post is on this forum seems to be enough to get the hackles up for some. Pretty funny really.
Actually, it was started in reaction to the impression management tactics used by P3D adherents; and also because I thought it would be fun as a Reversal Theory exercise.
Mike Mann
It's what got me interested enough to purchase it...though I am yet to install...as FSX is still running whilst I'm reworking a paintkit...
Still waiting for a profile on Nvidia Inspector. Purchased it the day it came out deleted it after 2.2. The AA is disgusting on my system.
I would switch but I understand that my lowly dell laptop would not run P3D v2 very well.
i5-3210m cpu @ 2.5GHz 2.5GHz
GForce GT 630M
8.00 ram
windows 7 Professional
I would appreciate any insights the group may have. I want to make the switch, but I am not in position to buy a new computer at the moment......
Well, for starters: your laptop isn't that lowly IMHO. For a laptop those specs look good. But I'm afraid you wouldn't be able to run P3D well. I imagine that no laptop would (except for those horribly expensive gaming laptops). But in all honesty, I wouldn't run FSX from a laptop either. FS9 maybe.
But the above is because I like to see my FPS at least in the double digits. The way I have set it up right now, FPS hardly ever drop below 30 FPS.
Johan
One simple reason not to switch for me: I don't want to get a credit card to buy P3D. If they would accept Paypal (Which they don't and have no plans to do so.) I would have bought it already.
Intel i9-13900 Raptor Lake , Be Quiet! Dark rock slim cooler, 32 Gb Corsair DDR5 RAM, MSI Z790 Tomahawk motherboard, Asus RTX 4060Ti 16Gb, Thermaltake 1050 Watt PSU, Windows 11 64-bit 1 m2, 4 SSD, 2 HDD.
One simple reason for me too though if I think about it, there are more.
While my i5 2500K/GTX560Ti runs FSX at an acceptable level.. I really can't see it running P3D any better.
I noted early on that many P3D users ran for 4gig graphics cards (this seems to be a pre-requisite) and I can't justify buying one. So.. much of the smoother flying experience and improved graphics I read about has only been achieved by buying a new graphics card.
I'm not totally impressed by having to purchase each new 'full' version either. I know that incremental updates are free and it's nice to know that LM are in a position to listen to users and update accordingly but I really can't be doing with the hassle of a re-install every few months.
P3D has promise for sure but not for me.. yet
ATB
DaveB
Members who have read this thread: 1
Posting Permissions
FSX
Bookmarks