Simviation Forums

Buhbye FSX, hello FS9. "Why would I sell FSX?" you say, because my FPS was less than 10, all graphics on minimal ( zero mesh, too) and it just looked bad. My computer was made in 2004 with all the bells n whistles, should work DECENTLY with FS9. And when I get a new computer I will run FS9 with much ease. The list would go on and on if I listed all the things better about FS9 than FSX. Anyway, I won't be visiting the FSX forum much anymore, goodbye!  ;D

For a second there, I thought MS had announced yet another Expansion Pack for FSX...

Good to hear you're coming over to the sunnier side of Flight Simulation

Be interested to hear what spec computer you were using for FSX. But at over 3 years old I wouldn't expect it to run very smoothly to be honest.

Sean

yep, my current desktop system is atleast three and a half years old also, and i'm not going to even bother with FSX untill I get my new computer (See Hardware Forum)...

This computer I was running it on had a pentium 4 processor just BARELY enough memory to run it and a radeon ATI 345.0 The main issue is its REALLY low on memory and that crashes FSX a LOT. fs9 just has more features i like. I've already purchased it and my FSX game is on ebay currently

my old computer has 448MB of ram currently, my future computer will have 3072MB of DDR2 RAM. That, is a large improvement

  I guess I'm just fortunate enough to be able to run both sims.  I'm running an Intel 3.2, 2 gig ram, ATI PCIXpress 512mb 1950 pro, 240g HD plus other goodies.  It would seem to me that a sim would be released that the majority of the systems could handle reasonably well, instead of future machines.  I would think that when the common technology of the average user catches up with the demands of FSX the sim will be found in the bargain basket.  It just doesn't make financial sense.  Have a great flight with FS9, and your eyes on the horizen.

please, stop going about sayiong that fs9 has better features or more stuff you like...it is not true!! FSX has everything fs9 has and much more, it just is much better than fs9!

since I installed fsx I never played again fs9! don't need to...what I can get in fs9 I can get in fsx much better!! If  people stop playing because of performace issues I totally understabd, but please don't tell me fs9 is still beteter than fsx because it is not!!

cheers

[quote]
since I installed fsx I never played again fs9! don't need to...what I can get in fs9 I can get in fsx much better!! If

If you have that computer that can run FSX on full settings with 40+fps, then yes FSX is much better than FS9. But, I have a system (built in 2004) that runs FS9 with settings maxed with 10FPS or mid settings with 30+ FPS. A much better improvement than FSX cause I ran FSX on ALL settings on 0 or minimal. (0 mesh) And got a steady 7FPS. Good scenery, good graphics, better FPS, or, bad scenery bad mesh and VERY bad FPS only with a new game. Which would you choose? If your stupid you'd pick FSX to run on my system (FSX was a gift, I did not buy it, I sold it) if your smart you'd pick FS9 for my computer (also a gift, not selling.) But I DO have to admit, I miss the views of FSX and the 737-400 on FS9 is terrible (for me). But, FS9 has way more addons than FSX because it is much easier to do repaints. (From what I've heard.) Bottom line is: if you have a computer that runs FSX nice, then keep it. If you don't, stick with FS9 until you smash open that piggy bank and take the cash to the store. (Or newegg  ;))

you dont need 40 frames in FSX.

FSX is not like FS9 and even FS9 does not need 40 frames

FSX does just fine on 22 and higher. If the system is set up correctly you wont tell the difference between 22 and 32 in FSX.

Anyone who can has a messed up system to begin with.

But when you get to those areas when your FPS drops down, having a 40FPS go down to a 20FPS wouldn't be too noticable and wouldn't screw up your landing too bad. If not at all.