STAY with FS9 or upgrade to FSX

[dobbo999 0]

Hi everyone, new to the site so i apologise if i am in the wrong forum.

 

I am after other like minded peoples advice and opinions on the pros and cons, if any in upgrading to FSX.  Currently i am still using FS9 which i have noticed is getting less and less suport from developers but still has a large fan base.  I am certainly one of them.  I am curently running An XPS 630I with a brand new graphics card inside (ASUS GTX750TI-OC-2GD5) installed.  It is purely a flight sim computer running Flight Simulator 2004 as the core game with many addons, most being AEROSOFT Airport liveries and FS GLOBAL.

My aircraft are the original IFLY 737, PMDG 747 and MD11 all with FS2 CREW, WILCO Feel there 737 PIC with CALL, LVLD 767 with FS2 crew and WIlco AIBUS EVOLUTION Vol 1 and 2 with FS2 crew. I also use FS passenger which i love.  Most of these are compatible with FSX with the exception of the IFLY and PMDG addons and their associated FS2 crew.  Although i have just purchase German Airports Vol 1-4 i am still conflicted with the thought of upgrading.  I would love to know others opinions on whether it is best to stay with my VISTA and FS9 or if biting the bullet and upgrading my computer and flight simulator are the way ahead.

 

Thanks

 

Simon

[FraPre 89]

Hello,

this is a difficult theme. I´ve change from the FS9 to FSX, because some new szeneries at that time, what i like it,  are only for the FSX (ENGM, EKCH) and alway less addons are for FS9 are announced.

With the change, i would need an new PC, but i´ve not regrets this change, but i´ve also satisfied with the FS9 before.

 

Now, with the FSX, i can use wounderful addons, how Aerosoft Airbus, Majestics Dash 8, iFly 747 ans many new szeneries. The drop of bitterness is, with Win8 i cann´t use the LevelD 767 and the CS767 isn´t an replacement for me.

 

Frank

[mopperle 4162]

As you have already realized, FS9 is a dead end for good reason. But upgrading to FSX (or IMHO even better to P3D) would only make sense in combination with a new PC, as your Dell is also very outdated and FSX simply asks for CPU, CPU and CPU and at least a PC with 8GB RAM.

Of course with FSX you can use some of your old addons, but you also want to go for other far more advanced addons and those addons in combination with each other need a very good hardware.

So if you are currently happy with what you got, simply stick to FS9 until you can buy a good PC.

[dobbo999 0]

2 hours ago, mopperle said:

As you have already realized, FS9 is a dead end for good reason. But upgrading to FSX (or IMHO even better to P3D) would only make sense in combination with a new PC, as your Dell is also very outdated and FSX simply asks for CPU, CPU and CPU and at least a PC with 8GB RAM.

Of course with FSX you can use some of your old addons, but you also want to go for other far more advanced addons and those addons in combination with each other need a very good hardware.

So if you are currently happy with what you got, simply stick to FS9 until you can buy a good PC.

 

I am seriously thinking of just popping into PC World and getting a made to spec Gaming PC specifically for FSX.  Saying that I am hearing alot of talk regarding this P3D.  What is it exactly?  Is it better than FSX and if so how/

 

Thanks to both of you, very much appreciated.

 

Simon.

[mopperle 4162]

Lockheed Martin made a special license agreement with Microsoft allowing them to further develop a simulator based on FSX primarly for commercial use. Officially it is not meant as a consumer product, but there is an Academic License for trainees etc. (and are we not all trainees? ). Up to now they implemented a lot of improvements, especially a far better memory management avoiding OOM issues. Best have a look here: http://www.prepar3d.com/

[dobbo999 0]

I. think I will give FSX a try, I only need t find out which OS to go with. I am not a big fan of WINDOWS 10 which I use on my laptop, wished i stay with windows 7 TBH.

 

What are others using?

 

I am keen to have compatibility with the usual add ons from AERO SOFT particularly their AIRPORTS and terrain but also FS passenger and IFLY products such as 737 an 747.

[omera60 79]

I say Win7 64-bit is the best so far.

[dobbo999 0]

37 minutes ago, omera60 said:

I say Win7 64-bit is the best so far.

 

Thanks omera60, Is WIN 7 still available commercially?

[PatrickZ 300]

36 minutes ago, dobbo999 said:

 

Thanks omera60, Is WIN 7 still available commercially?

 

Yes, it is.

 

https://www.alternate.nl/Microsoft/Windows-7-Professional-Software/html/product/1126496?tk=9&lk=17561

 

I'm still running Windows 7 myself and eventough M$ keeps pushing me to update to Windows 10 I don't intend to do so. I've tried Windows 10 and didn't like it. Windows 7 does everything it's supposed to do, it works great. I'll stick to Windows 7 for as long as I can.

 

PS when it comes to FS I'd say upgrade! I did so years ago and never had any regrets. Of course you lose some add-ons that aren't compatible, but on the other hand there are a lot of great add-ons available for FSX that aren't available for FS2004. Certainly when it comes to aircraft, the PMDG 737NGX (for FSX) is far more advanced than the old PMDG 737 for FS2004.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

16 hours ago, mopperle said:

Lockheed Martin made a special license agreement with Microsoft allowing them to further develop a simulator based on FSX primarly for commercial use. Officially it is not meant as a consumer product, but there is an Academic License for trainees etc. (and are we not all trainees? ). Up to now they implemented a lot of improvements, especially a far better memory management avoiding OOM issues. Best have a look here: http://www.prepar3d.com/

 

And Lockheed has always said they consider us indeed students of aviation and there is absolutely nothing wrong or shady about using it. Look at it from their side...  we 'hobbyist' pay for the development of this sim so it can be made better and better for their professional customers. It's a win-win-win.

[thumbliner 202]

I certainly vote for an upgrade to P3D. Most of the add-ons you named, are available as P3D compatible versions. So it will be a bit hard on the wallet, since you will even need to upgrade some hardware. But it is totally worth it. The bottomline is... either stay with FS9, or go to P3D. FSX is grey.

[Vernibob 0]

Hey Dobbo!

 

       I bought myself a "gaming and entertainment" laptop about 5 years ago as i used to move around the county. It had an I5 at 2.4ghz, a GT540M GPU and 6gb of ram and it worked well for a while with FSX and then after while with new releases it just wasn't enough. I have literally just bought a full on gaming rig for FSX and DCS (a combat flight sim). I REGRET NOTHING!!

 

As other people have said above it seems that your CPU may be lacking a little bit to give you a really satisfying sim experience. Most sims do want a lot of CPU and if I'm not corrected I'm pretty sure its with all the calculations that your PC needs to with the movement of your aircraft, the height, the thousands upon thousands of SIDS, STARS, VOR's and so on. 

 

Not to push my opinions on you too much as it is your sim at the end of the day. I ended up spending a fair amount of money on my PC and i do not regret it one bit. I would always save (or even finance if you don't mind lending) for a good system and then update as the years go by. That way once you have your system you may find yourself spending about $200-$300 on new components an $1000+ on a new Rig.

 

Not digressing too much. FSX and P3D are both worth it and both better! its good to stay with the times. What i used to do when i was a little younger is i used to looks up PC's i thought i could afford, write down their specs and look at forums and YouTube videos on how those systems performed on those games (or sims). If i liked what i saw i took the risk.

 

So to put a long story short and just expressing my opinion , here's what i would do: 

 

1. Pick a budget and see what sort of gaming rigs with decent processors you can buy (dont worry about your Graphics card too much as you can swap it for the 750)

2. Look at how those specs perform on FSX/P3D on YouTube or on forums

3. If you like what you see, buy it? and if the GPU is better in your new rig then sell it on Ebay!!

4. Install FSX and all your other addons.

5. Send us a pic on how happy your face is the first time you take off! i'm sure you'll be like me and never regret it

 

hope this helps and i hope you don't find me too pushy! just my opinion

 

 

 

 

[Jon_aus 6]

Why change? Nothing runs as smooth and as easy as FS9. Along with EVO textures, fs9 has never looked better. 

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Yes, it might look as good as FS9 ever did, but that does not mean it is up to scratch to a 'modern' simulator. There can be many arguments to keep on using FS9, but looks are not one of those. See this image, this is how FSX looked a few years ago.

Please login to display this image.

[Chris Bell 144]

FSX was the next generation after FS9; and so on P3D is the next generation of FSX,
Though it is run under a new company (imo much better suited for the job) Lockheed Martin and a new name Prepar3D;
It is essentially FSX code at this point in time that being updated to support the latest hardware and take advantage of the most advanced software capabilities now available,

No sim platform has made such advances in the past two years; or intends to make further drastic change in the future,
At such point in time one will no longer be able to say P3D is based on FSX code as that will change soon;

Lockheed’s initial goal is to perfect the 32bit platform first; and only after its perfected; they will likely to introduce a 64bit platform,
No company prior to LM has such big plans for our sim future; maybe one did venture but unfortunately is currently stuck in a technology dead end,

For us simmers it is a bountiful times; with two big companies actively developing each its own market niche sim platform,
Lockheed has an open door policy with their dev team; we get to ask for features and directly communicate and give feedback;

Would you pay for a new computer today with P4 Core Due processor? or you’ll go for the latest 6^th gen i7?
FS9 and FSX sadly belong on the history shelf’s from  now on; it’s time to move on with times,

 

[Jude 190]

I don't recommend PC World for any Fightsim machine - they will sell all sorts of rubbish just to increase their sales

Have you considered building a machine yourself?

[Sonhospa 0]

Hi Simon,

 

I did change to FSX two years ago and never regretted it, despite having to update my machine royally (i.e. from dual-core to i7 etc.). Still it remains a bit annoying that you really have to dive into techinical issues if you like to increase FSX realism without spending hundreds on add-ons, and that you always have to fight for every single frame of better performance. As a result I'm seriously contemplating already to purchase Prepar 3D soon. Maybe you already saw some videos, but looking at these you might feel encouraged to skip FSX:

• Prepar 3D vs. Reality
• Prepar 3D is Amazing
• Prepar 3D Awesome Realism

Please note that the makers of these videos still use fast computers, and surely P3D will as well have some drawbacks. But considering the investment I guess it would be a much more future-oriented decision which you might otherwise consider in 2 years (just like me).

 

Good luck & happy landings

Mick

 

[PatrickZ 300]

I remember when I was still running FS9 many years ago. I always thought it looked good (I was using some add-ons for that as well) until I upgraded to FSX. What a difference! And with the current add-ons like ORBX FSX looks even far better than back then. Since then I've never used FS9 again. With a lot of add-ons FS9 may look as good as FSX does by default, but definately not as good as FSX with add-ons.

[ArtMan 8]

I should never buy a complete pc at a store but made one myself with A-components or ask a good friend with more knowledge to do it.

 

And why invest again in an old platform like FSX? FSX is on a dead end, take P3D V3.x. The graphics with Dx11 are much better and you get less oom errors by better memory management.

Please buy a PC with an Nvidia graphiccard. Most of the flightsims run better on Nvidia then ATI.

 

//Arthur

[musefan 363]

7 hours ago, ArtMan said:

I should never buy a complete pc at a store but made one myself with A-components or ask a good friend with more knowledge to do it.

 

And why invest again in an old platform like FSX? FSX is on a dead end, take P3D V3.x. The graphics with Dx11 are much better and you get less oom errors by better memory management.

Please buy a PC with an Nvidia graphiccard. Most of the flightsims run better on Nvidia then ATI.

 

//Arthur

I may be missing something but as I understand it, the video card has little of no relevance as to how well FSX runs.

[ArtMan 8]

You can read in several fora that a program like Nvidia inspector is a great advantage for tweaking your graphics card. A lot of people have shimmering when they fly in p3d (and FSX:SE) and me as well. Thanks to Nvidia inspector it is possible to tweak this out.  There is no Nvidia inspector like program for ATI cards as far as I know.

Some other sims like DCS prefer Nvidia as well.

 

It is just an advice not a must.

 

[musefan 363]

On 2/11/2016 at 8:11 PM, ArtMan said:

You can read in several fora that a program like Nvidia inspector is a great advantage for tweaking your graphics card. A lot of people have shimmering when they fly in p3d (and FSX:SE) and me as well. Thanks to Nvidia inspector it is possible to tweak this out.  There is no Nvidia inspector like program for ATI cards as far as I know.

Some other sims like DCS prefer Nvidia as well.

 

It is just an advice not a must.

 

Sorry, I assumed you were talking about overall performance, as opposed to graphical quality.

[Lesp 0]

mopperle, "As you have already realized, FS9 is a dead end for good reason. But upgrading to FSX" Hmmm good reason? let's have a look. Fs9 has got much better frames. FSX doesn't. Fsx claims support dx10 but it's not in real. Even with dx10 scenery fix. And i can easily make changes in cfg files especially aircraft.cfg, panel .cfg (vingview settings). I can't see so much difference between FS9 version with FSX version of many many sceneries. Well why FS9 decreasing from the market cos' the scenery makers force to simmers to buy FSX or P3D. By not making a scenery for fs9. And the scenery makers don't make a new game, don't make a new game engine they only making a scenery for existing simulation. And i think scenery makers shouldn't force simmers to buy a new simulation except they don't work for Microsoft, Lockhead etc. But unfortunetly they act like they do. Some guys always say that you need a better pc for fsx to fs9 users. lol, ok my rig is Cpu: Core i7 4930K Gpu: GTX780 Ram: DDR3 1600 Mhz Motherboard: Asus Rampage 4 Formula.

And with this rig you can play Witcher 3, Fallout 4, Dying Light, Gta V etc games that needs powerful rig, with ultra settings. FSX? not so lucky. I have to set lower settings even then fs9. So why do i have to "UPGRADE" as you say, from fs9 to fsx? And if FS9 is dead so FSX is also dead. P3d (which is upgraded FSX we can say) and X-Plane r alive.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

Well Lesp,  you clearly prefer FS9 and that's fine.  There are many people like you. The problem is that they are not willing to invest in new add-ons so commercially FS9 is dead. FSX is most certainly not dead as that is still the vast majority of the customer base. 

 

I feel that an important thing in our hobby is the constant evolution, where people feel challenged. For that new products are needed (thank god for that) and for FS9 there simply are very few new products.

[WingZ 3]

On 05/02/2016 at 11:56 PM, Mathijs Kok said:

There can be many arguments to keep on using FS9, but looks are not one of those. 

 

Correct it's ultimate resolution is limited but that doesn't mean it doesn't look good.

It can look good enough to provide all the immersion you'd want in a simulator, and more important, there are no performance issues.

I run it on 10 year old Core 2 Duo, and quite like what I see. These shots are reduced to just just 1024x768 for the forum upload but if you have doubts I have the original 2560x1440's available!

 

Payware Bonanza VC

Please login to display this image.

 

Payware Dubai + freeware WOAI 

Please login to display this image.

 

Best of all, much of it is excellent freeware, and there's a great deal of it available.

While that might not excite the commercial vendors, it represents a challenge:

Your product must meet or beat the best freeware available, otherwise we won't look at it!

 

Freeware from LHSimulations, freeware EC135

Please login to display this image.