Simviation Forums

I was reading a post in another section of the forum and someone mentioned something I had never thought of - running FS2004 instead of FSX. It makes some sense; instead of upgrading your PC for tons of money to run FSX well, just switch to FS2004. Does FSX really require that much more RAM/CPU power, etc. than FS9? My specs:

Intel Quad core @2.66GHz
4 GB RAM
Nvidia GeForce 9800GTX+ (512 MB)

I can get 30 fps with decent settings on FSX, but I have to keep the traffic low and there are definitely tradeoffs. How much better would my system run FS9?

I would greatly appreciate anyone's input.

Yes, FSX uses much more than FS9. I run both (and CFS2) on my specs, listed below, and can max out FS9. Like you, I have to make tradeoffs in X.

They will happily co-exist on the same computer, each oblivious to the other..

With a rig like that you should be able to max FS9 without any trouble

With a rig like that you should be able to max FS9 without any trouble

Sweet! Thanks to both of you for your replies!

With a rig like that you should be able to max FS9 without any trouble

Sweet! Thanks to both of you for your replies!

Thanks for the question and those replies. I got my copy of FS9 in the mail today. I run FSX fine but I want to see the differences first hand.   

Massive performance difference

the default scenery in FS9 will look like junk compared to what you get out of the box with FSX... but as mentioned before, with all of the upgrades, addons, and everything that is available for FS9, you will have something that looks close to FSX, but runs 1000 times better.

the default scenery in FS9 will look like junk compared to what you get out of the box with FSX... but as mentioned before, with all of the upgrades, addons, and everything that is available for FS9, you will have something that looks close to FSX, but runs 1000 times better.

That's great to hear, I'm really pretty excited about trying this. I got UTX and REX and hopefully I'll have it all up and running today.

Quick update on this little project - GREAT idea. I would recommend to ANYONE who is struggling to get good results with FSX on their current rig, instead of thinking about which $2,000 computer can run it well, just "upgrade" to FS9. Once you get Ground Environment and Ultimate Terrain and such installed, it's really pretty close to the FSX scenery, and it runs like gangbusters. I've got every setting completely maxed - completely maxed - and adding add-on scenery by the hour, and this sucker runs without any of the stuttering I get in FSX. I'm so glad I did this.

Glad to see you're enjoying it. FS9 has an impressive amount of freeware stuff available, may it be sceneries or airplanes, so you'll need quite a while before you can explore everything

Now, about the recommendation to "upgrade" to FS9 instead of buying a powerfull computer, that will depend on what kind of addons you're looking for. Switching to FS9 will prevent you to enjoy some experiences like precise photoreal sceneries, crisp ground sceneries,moving aircraft carriers or ultra immersive aircrafts like Accusim stuff.

If you focus mainly on IFR flight from major airports, then yes FS9 is definitely an upgrade compared to FSX which can never be happy over anything bigger than a medium airport But for those who focus on VFR flights, the needs are totally different, and switching to FS9 is definitely NOT an upgrade, in that case.

Glad to see you're enjoying it. FS9 has an impressive amount of freeware stuff available, may it be sceneries or airplanes, so you'll need quite a while before you can explore everything

Now, about the recommendation to "upgrade" to FS9 instead of buying a powerfull computer, that will depend on what kind of addons you're looking for. Switching to FS9 will prevent you to enjoy some experiences like precise photoreal sceneries, crisp ground sceneries,moving aircraft carriers or ultra immersive aircrafts like Accusim stuff.

If you focus mainly on IFR flight from major airports, then yes FS9 is definitely an upgrade compared to FSX which can never be happy over anything bigger than a medium airport But for those who focus on VFR flights, the needs are totally different, and switching to FS9 is definitely NOT an upgrade, in that case.

Yeah, I have noticed that the graphics, particularly the ground scenery, is somewhat lacking (although I am installing Ground Environment Professional as we speak). Once I get some more addons installed and tweak the settings I'll get a better idea of what it's going to be like. That being said, I enjoy flying IFR stuff as well, particularly the 737, so I think I can have a lot of fun doing that. The main bonuses I see so far are actually being able to have traffic. In FSX I could have 25% of either GA or airline traffic before noticing a huge hit in performance; in FS9 I have it at 100% traffic (and 100% everything else, for that matter  ) and I'm still doing perfectly with framerates set at 30. I'm going to go unlimited once I get GE Pro installed and see what it wants to run at frame-rate wise. But I will take less eye-candy for a more realistic flying environment.

Happy New Year

If you like the 737, try "Moach's" 737 Experience available at SV along with a group of repaints. It's one of my favorites. Also I'm a fan of "Howard's Mix" scenery package also available at SV.

Dave

If you want VFR scenery, go to http://blueskyscenery.com   :o   they do not cover the entire FS9 world, but they do have a few areas like California, Colorada, Arizona, Yellowstone, and Glacier National Park.


i have yellowstone and Glacier Nat. Park..... and a few others..

Alpha-Blackhawk-Mammoth-Yosemite.jpg


Beavering Yosemite
https://www.simviation.com/phpupload/upl ... 181150.jpg

+1 for BlueSky! L.A. looks amazing!

Thanks Capt,

I'll check it out this afternoon 

Dave