!! Windows 7 no longer supported !!

As Microsoft will stop supporting Windows 7 on Jan 20th we will be unable to test any of our
products on that platform. It may work, or it may not, but no guarantees from our side. 

Jump to content
worldted

Have FSX, but JUST Ordered FS9

Recommended Posts

Hello All,

I currently have FSX on a "low end" gaming computer. FSX runs "okay," on my system but not great. I've been advised to get FS9, and just ordered a new copy from Amazon.com (didn't think one could still get this software). By the way, here are my computer specs:

*Dell XPS M1710

*Intel Core 2 Duo Processor T7200

*2GHz/667MHz/ 4MB

*256MB NVIDIA GeForce Go 7900

*4 GB Ram

*320GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive

*Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition

Again, FSX runs "alright" on my rig, but I certainly canNOT run complex scenery or fly high-end planes, etc, unless I want frame rates in the low single digits! eek.gif

So...my question: Is this a good move for me? I assume it is, but I need advice. With FS9, will I be able to purchase more complicated planes and more complex scenery and still have decent frame rates? Will the overall quality of the scenery be improved over what-you-can-imagine I'm getting now with FSX on my circa 2006 gaming computer? Is this maybe a "no brainer" for someone with my computer specs? I've heard so many good things about FS9, and since it's apparently still available (this was a surprise to me), I thought this just might be the ticket for me.

Thanks for any advice!

Sincerely,

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
Hello All,

I currently have FSX on a "low end" gaming computer. FSX runs "okay," on my system but not great. I've been advised to get FS9, and just ordered a new copy from Amazon.com (didn't think one could still get this software). By the way, here are my computer specs:

*Dell XPS M1710

*Intel Core 2 Duo Processor T7200

*2GHz/667MHz/ 4MB

*256MB NVIDIA GeForce Go 7900

*4 GB Ram

*320GB 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive

*Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition

Again, FSX runs "alright" on my rig, but I certainly canNOT run complex scenery or fly high-end planes, etc, unless I want frame rates in the low single digits! eek.gif

So...my question: Is this a good move for me? I assume it is, but I need advice. With FS9, will I be able to purchase more complicated planes and more complex scenery and still have decent frame rates? Will the overall quality of the scenery be improved over what-you-can-imagine I'm getting now with FSX on my circa 2006 gaming computer? Is this maybe a "no brainer" for someone with my computer specs? I've heard so many good things about FS9, and since it's apparently still available (this was a surprise to me), I thought this just might be the ticket for me.

Thanks for any advice!

Sincerely,

Ted

Hey,

Fs9 (fs2004) will run perfectly on your pc and you should have easily about 30fps.Please make sure that once you receive it you update it to version 9.1 before installing any addon. Mine is an AMD athlon X2 at 2.2GHZ, nvidia 7600gt 256 and 160gb harddrive, 3.5gb ram and i have no problems what so ever. If you want to fly complex airliners with high quality addons this is the best flight simulator out there on the market. However if you fancy VFR i think fsx is best suited for that need because of the higher ground resolution. If you are like me and prefer to use fs9 for vfr, you can still do it by downloading satelitte pictures at 4.5m resolutions and still look good above 2000ft.

One thing you have to remember though, if you want to make fs2004 you will have to purchase third party addons to enhance the environment. I also have fsx but gave up as i've already got fs2004 full with addons and am saving up for some real flying lessons and a car driving licence

Hope you enjoy it as much as i do.

Share this post


Link to post

Well as the fans of FS9 are very active in defending their choice of simulator there will be many that will say you made a good decision and I more or less agree with them. You need software that's as old as your hardware.

The problem that you might have is envy. Sounds strange but it is true, we see it daily with people why want to stay with FS2004 or are forced to stay on FS2004. They see all the great stuff being currently developed and then want it as well. It is hard to explain to them that many things are just not possible in FS2004. As long as you do not visit our preview forum to look at the new aircraft but stick to what you know will work for FS2004 you will probably be very happy with the sim.

Share this post


Link to post

Hello,

:rolleyes: Using the same hardware on my Dell Lapto, but not anymore for playing FSX, just surfing for FSX addons. You will be able to use more complex airliners with FS9, but do not think you can max out all sliders with Addonscenery and Addonliners. The resolution of your display is 1900x1200, this is quite a lot, I played FSX with 1024x768, that looks not really sharp, but improves Framerates. I would not buy any FS9 only addons any more, just addons for both sims, so you can easy switch, when you buy your next computer.

Many greetings Thomas

Share this post


Link to post

With all the add-ons available for FS-9 you can have a nice flying experience. I use both FSX and FS-9. I use FSX 80% of the time. FSX Just so much better with default airports and scenery and the "views" available! I just love to watch a FSX airport with the jetways working and the support vehicles running around! Nothing like it in FS-9! If you move to a Core-i-7 PC you will not even remember FS-2004! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
With all the add-ons available for FS-9 you can have a nice flying experience. I use both FSX and FS-9. I use FSX 80% of the time. FSX Just so much better with default airports and scenery and the "views" available! I just love to watch a FSX airport with the jetways working and the support vehicles running around! Nothing like it in FS-9! If you move to a Core-i-7 PC you will not even remember FS-2004! ;)

Yeah, I think I'll probably just stay with FSX right now. After all, it DOES run "reasonably well." Sure, there are addons I canNOT get, but that can wait till I upgrade my computer at some point. I'm still not sorry I purchased FS9 for $20 (brand new too). Who knows, might come in handy someday.

Thanks to everyone who responded!

Sincerely,

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
Yeah, I think I'll probably just stay with FSX right now. After all, it DOES run "reasonably well." Sure, there are addons I canNOT get, but that can wait till I upgrade my computer at some point. I'm still not sorry I purchased FS9 for $20 (brand new too). Who knows, might come in handy someday.

Thanks to everyone who responded!

Sincerely,

Ted

Right mate! FSX all the way! I am not too thrilled with it on my rig too--A Duo-core 1.8 Mhz! I hope to go to a Core i-7 this year! But all the fab Aerosoft scenery is going to be FSX only! One more reason to stick to FSX! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Right mate! FSX all the way! I am not too thrilled with it on my rig too--A Duo-core 1.8 Mhz! I hope to go to a Core i-7 this year! But all the fab Aerosoft scenery is going to be FSX only! One more reason to stick to FSX! ;)

No no... most certainly a lot of the German airport scenery will be for FSX and FS2004. It's only when the project really benefits from the new features of FSX that an FS2004 version will be hard or simply impossible.

Share this post


Link to post

You should have both. I have both, and use 60% FS9 and 40% FSX. I usually play with small a/c on FSX (general aviation and wilco e-jets) and larger airliners on FS9 (e.g. PMDG MD-11, CLS a330/340). My computer usually have 12+fps on FSX playing with the CLS a340 but the bad thing are the slow motions sometimes while landing or in an airport, in the air i get 20-30 and even 40fps. I plan to buy a new Alienware by summer and once Warsaw's new scenery comes out will move to FSX definately.

Share this post


Link to post

Guys here are some of my screenshots on FSX in Madeira and Chicago, don't know much about computer game performance or fps but I don't think this framerates are bad at all. 25.0, 24.3 and 24.3 again on the last shot

post-17573-1235434435_thumb.jpg

post-17573-1235434444_thumb.jpg

post-17573-1235434451_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
No no... most certainly a lot of the German airport scenery will be for FSX and FS2004. It's only when the project really benefits from the new features of FSX that an FS2004 version will be hard or simply impossible.

Come on with these comments already. it is enough, Aerosoft's spokesperson does more to fuel the FS9 v FSX war than anyone on these boards...

If an organization like PMDG can make the MD-11 for both FS9 and FSX and the differences are in animations and visuals but the FDE is identical, the systems are identical, both sims are fully operational then yes it may be hard but don't say it is impossible... PMDG has proven you CAN develop for both sims at an exceptionally high level and I don't here too many MD-11 users raving about how much better it is in FSX. In fact, most were excited to get the MD in FS2k4 and be able to use ActiveCamera and all of our other wonderful FS2k4 add-ons with a phenomenal product deigned for FS2k4 and maintain 40+FPS under even the densest situation even with 3 monitors... Not to mention alot of us have Thousands of dollars invested in FS9 add-ons (alot purchased here) that still provide immense enjoyment, I am not just going to scrap them because there is something new if the old still pleases us... It is this lack of loyalty and bashing what got us where we are that I can not fathom. We are not treated subservient at PMDG but to the contrary we are embraced and PMDG has seen the benefits as a result with probably the most loyal FS9 AND FSX user base opposed to repeatedly alienating one group in favor of another. Constantly making these FSX superiority comments is going to do nothing but isolate a good portion of your customer base.

If you have taken the option to phase out FS2004 products and sales that is fine but don't repeatedly imply that the only products that can be made for FS9 are inferior and please stop assuming that those who stick to FS9 do it for HW reasons. Most of those of stay with FS2004 are simply "heavy" fliers who appreciate FSX for GA but repeatedly state that when it comes to flying our heavies with all of our add-ons and every slider pinned FSX cannot match up to FS2k4... How many times do we have to point to the forum surveys that show a 2-1 FS9 to FSX usage rate amongst heavy fliers before people understand that there is a divide in the market based on your usage type more than anything else...

To say FS9 users don't buy as much anymore is just ludicrous when you are not putting out products on a level playing field. If you put out 10 FSX releases for every 1 FS9 release then yes the numbers will show FSX users buy more add-ons. When you consider the amount of add-ons currently available for FS9 that we have ALREADY purchased then of course we will be buying less now, especially when there are less choices. But when you look at AES oliver has proven that FS2k4 users are loyal and very willing to spend our money with a developer that supports us!!! So to your business decision, I respect it, as for the way you verbalize your message to your customers I think Aerosoft should take a long hard look at HOW things are said and ensure there is no further alienation of the users who supported you for so many years and without whom there would be no Aerosoft...

Please please please stop with the whole FSX v FS9 comparisons and either embrace the FS9 user base or just stop bashing us with backhanded insults in the process.... Some of us have ZERO FSX envy trust me and the more you continue to view us as secondary citizens the more we will find other places to purchase our FS9 add-ons....

Just my .02 but every FSX is better comment gets further and further under my skin. Some of us just CHOOSE FS9 as difficult as that may be to understand...

All the best to everyone for a great day!!

-Paul

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Paul

You perhaps not reading "between the lines" a bit too much here? You come across all offended at what you perceive to have been said, as opposed to what was actually said. When compared to Mathijs' comment it is you who seem to be the one fueling this stupid war between FS9 vs FSX...

Konrad

Share this post


Link to post
Hi Paul

You perhaps not reading "between the lines" a bit too much here? You come across all offended at what you perceive to have been said, as opposed to what was actually said. When compared to Mathijs' comment it is you who seem to be the one fueling this stupid war between FS9 vs FSX...

Konrad

Hi Konrad,

I 100% respect your opinion and I will never claim to be 100% right by any means... There is always room for middle ground and yes I could be reading into this too deeply.... Please also understand this is not intended as a personal attack on anyone and is being expressed with the utmost of respect. This is not meant to be disrespectful or rude in any way, I am just trying to express my feelings on this matter. That also does not make me right by any means, I am just vocalizing... Again, please accept that whatever I say I say with the utmost respect.

But when the spokesperson for an organization such as Aerosoft makes comments such as:

"Well as the fans of FS9 are very active in defending their choice of simulator there will be many that will say you made a good decision and I more or less agree with them. You need software that's as old as your hardware.

The problem that you might have is envy."

Comments like this are volatile arguments waiting to happen. What does needing software as old as hardware have to do with a personal choice about which sim we prefer? Does my choice look like a Hardware issue or choice LOL...

When you are doing PR for an organization you better take into consideration how people are going to read it "between the lines." I am far from the only FS2k4 user who is starting to feel like there are constant digs against us in this forum with a lot of them coming from Aerosoft themselves, this is just one more example... I would expect a group like Aerosoft who still sells products for both sims to be showing the highest levels of balance and political correctness but that is not the case...

Never forget the people who got you where you are (ie) all us FS9 users who spent years investing in thousands of dollars in add-ons... I don't mind what they are saying at Aerosoft, I mind how they repeatedly say it...

Cheers,

-Paul

PS

From my perspective there should be no battle or war and I would think my post is more in lines with trying to stop these battles than argue why one is better or worse, it is personal preference and FSX has led to great applications for FS9 like ASA for example and vice-versa. The PMDG MD-11 was delivered for both sims without a single negative insinuation or comment by the developers, wouldn't it be nice to see that same political correctness applied here? I also love FSX for GA, I have nothing against FSX nor do I have any reason too LOL... It is a sim...

Each sim has its own market right now IMHO and it has nothing to do with HW so again, stop making the connection between FS9 and inferior HW in these forums... There are guys going out and getting brand new I7's and still CHOOSING to return to FS9 for their style of simulation (Heavy vs GA)

Share this post


Link to post

edit: I have erased my comments as I do not wish to enter into any more FS9/FSX posts. While I am on your side Paul I would suggest you do the same....it is simply valuable simming time wasted IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
You need software that's as old as your hardware.

Ok. I have a core2d E8500 overcloked 4,2 ghz with a pretty evga GTX280 FTW. I get 15 frames in fsx, so I can imagine that I need an old sofware like my hardware??

BTW, with my specs I can play all games and sims without problems. I am not very smart, but perhaps the problem is FSX instead of the hardware

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

"Constantly making these FSX superiority comments is going to do nothing but isolate a good portion of your customer base."

You do know that FSX came after FS9 and that it actually has a lot of new features? To claim anything else is simply absurd.

One of the most important features for me, found in FSX and not FS9, are the support of multiple processors. Last night I flew around FlyTampa's TNCM with a Piper 28. It was raining, the runway was wet and reflective. Very nice feel.

My FPS count was at about 40-60 fps. Most sliders set to full. FSX SP2's autogen batching is superior to any previous version, and I usually run autogen at very dense, without any noticable decline in FPS compared to the sparse setting !!!

My system is fairly moderate I belive:

E6600 (2,4 core 2 duo)

2 MB ram

GT8800 gfx-card

I do miss a good 737 in FSX, but thats all.

Share this post


Link to post

If you want to have fun and fly go FS9!!

If you want to enjoy slideshows go FSX!!

There is not a system out there that is good enough to run FSX with all sliders maxed out and all 3rd party senery running to land at (example) FSDT KJFK at 60FPS. Including full AI traffic... When this is possible and for under $2,000 then I will go FSX.

You can already do all this with FS9 for under $800 these days. FSX has very nice features but they are features I can very much live without for the time being.

Share this post


Link to post
You should have both. I have both, and use 60% FS9 and 40% FSX. I usually play with small a/c on FSX (general aviation and wilco e-jets) and larger airliners on FS9 (e.g. PMDG MD-11, CLS a330/340). My computer usually have 12+fps on FSX playing with the CLS a340 but the bad thing are the slow motions sometimes while landing or in an airport, in the air i get 20-30 and even 40fps. I plan to buy a new Alienware by summer and once Warsaw's new scenery comes out will move to FSX definately.

Yes, that's what I'm thinking I should do, but I'm not sure I can live with that. I think I'm the type of person where it's either all FSX or all FS9. Again, FSX runs okay for me, but I'm "somewhat limited" in the complexity of the addons I can purchase since my computer is a 2006 gaming rig. FSX does fine on my computer flying GA aircraft, but if I want a PMDG or LD planes a major airports...well...I can't have that. Wouldn't even try. Wouldn't want to see FPS as negative numbers! :lol: The thing is, I'm not 100% sure I want the big planes. The GA-type stuff is fine for me. I just don't know. It's tough because my FSX is "just okay." Definitely not bad. Not at all. The thing is, it's not good either. It's right in the middle. Also, I have a ton of addon products (mostly airplanes that work on my machine, and photoscenery). Takes up a lot of disk space. If I install FS9, I'll probably want it "full-featured," not just minimally set up.

So, in the end still don't know what to do. :( I'll figure it out at some point!

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
Well as the fans of FS9 are very active in defending their choice of simulator there will be many that will say you made a good decision and I more or less agree with them. You need software that's as old as your hardware.

The problem that you might have is envy. Sounds strange but it is true, we see it daily with people why want to stay with FS2004 or are forced to stay on FS2004. They see all the great stuff being currently developed and then want it as well. It is hard to explain to them that many things are just not possible in FS2004. As long as you do not visit our preview forum to look at the new aircraft but stick to what you know will work for FS2004 you will probably be very happy with the sim.

Hi Mathijs...that's a good point you make. I just have some thinking to do. I hope you don't mind, but I have a quick question about hard disk space. How much of the total hard disk space should be used? 80% of total hard disk space? 85%? 90%? Here's my current hard disk space reading:

Used Space: 174 GB

Free Space: 118 GB

Capacity: 293 GB

Now, I supposedly have a 320 GB HD, but it says the capacity is 293. Is it actually 293 GB? If I shouldn't have my hard drive filled up more than 85%, then 85% X 293 GB (hard drive capacity) = 249 GB (should have no more than this used). 249 GB - 174 GB (used) = 75 GB (left to use). Do I have this right?

Ted

Share this post


Link to post
If you want to have fun and fly go FS9!!

If you want to enjoy slideshows go FSX!!

If you hate FSX that much, then fly FS9 and - with respect - leave us alone. The amount of FSX bashing by uniformed simmers like you is really getting most annoying ...

If you are honestly interested in learning about computers, read this:

http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=21858 or a similar hardware guide and then think again about your frame-claim. That quote of yours is actually sort of embarrassing ...

What is it actually that guys like you want? If you are so happy with flying FS9, then, why not just do it and be quiet?

Share this post


Link to post
If you hate FSX that much, then fly FS9 and - with respect - leave us alone. The amount of FSX bashing by uniformed simmers like you is really getting most annoying ...

If you are honestly interested in learning about computers, read this:

http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=21858 or a similar hardware guide and then think again about your frame-claim. That quote of yours is actually sort of embarrassing ...

What is it actually that guys like you want? If you are so happy with flying FS9, then, why not just do it and be quiet?

That is what I would say to uninformed FSX users......please be quiet and enjoy your Sim. B)

Share this post


Link to post
That is what I would say to uninformed FSX users......please be quiet and enjoy your Sim. B)

In case anybody cares:

I am leaving this board now. I will still enjoy Aerosoft products as I believe they are making the best for FSX there is at the moment and the support is great, but I will not read or post here anymore. This place is crawling ... I have read about enough here by computer illiterates, morons, trolls, or whatever other FSX bashers plaguing this board ... my final advice to those:

If all you can do about your endless frustration about Aerosoft producing most of its great new add-ons for FSX-only (except AES, which will be FSX soon) or that you are still stuck with your ancient rig is ranting, lying, throwing tantrums and trolling, then I suggest you go see a shrink. No one takes you seriously. This was fun for a while, the frame completes were even true for some time, but not any more ...

See you all around ... and happy flying ... I'm off to a troll-free place. Tolerance is fine, but methinks, the staff is overdoing it here.

Marc, signing off.

To staff: Keep up the excellent work, looking forward to the next release! :)

Share this post


Link to post

The bigger problem here is that folks ACTUALLY react to stupid comments like "if you like slideshows then get FSX". Sorry Marc, but you took the bait hook, line and sinker there mate. The more people react to these types of comments the more encouraged people are to regurgitate them.

Leaving the board is not a solution Marc - this type of stuff goes on inside every FS forum you may care to visit. Trolling (on forums or on the open ocean) is only viable if there is a chance of actually catching something... not so?

Konrad

Share this post


Link to post
Come on with these comments already. it is enough, Aerosoft's spokesperson does more to fuel the FS9 v FSX war than anyone on these boards...

If an organization like PMDG can make the MD-11 for both FS9 and FSX and the differences are in animations and visuals but the FDE is identical, the systems are identical, both sims are fully operational then yes it may be hard but don't say it is impossible... PMDG has proven you CAN develop for both sims at an exceptionally high level and I don't here too many MD-11 users raving about how much better it is in FSX. In fact, most were excited to get the MD in FS2k4 and be able to use ActiveCamera and all of our other wonderful FS2k4 add-ons with a phenomenal product deigned for FS2k4 and maintain 40+FPS under even the densest situation even with 3 monitors... Not to mention alot of us have Thousands of dollars invested in FS9 add-ons (alot purchased here) that still provide immense enjoyment, I am not just going to scrap them because there is something new if the old still pleases us... It is this lack of loyalty and bashing what got us where we are that I can not fathom. We are not treated subservient at PMDG but to the contrary we are embraced and PMDG has seen the benefits as a result with probably the most loyal FS9 AND FSX user base opposed to repeatedly alienating one group in favor of another. Constantly making these FSX superiority comments is going to do nothing but isolate a good portion of your customer base.

If you have taken the option to phase out FS2004 products and sales that is fine but don't repeatedly imply that the only products that can be made for FS9 are inferior and please stop assuming that those who stick to FS9 do it for HW reasons. Most of those of stay with FS2004 are simply "heavy" fliers who appreciate FSX for GA but repeatedly state that when it comes to flying our heavies with all of our add-ons and every slider pinned FSX cannot match up to FS2k4... How many times do we have to point to the forum surveys that show a 2-1 FS9 to FSX usage rate amongst heavy fliers before people understand that there is a divide in the market based on your usage type more than anything else...

To say FS9 users don't buy as much anymore is just ludicrous when you are not putting out products on a level playing field. If you put out 10 FSX releases for every 1 FS9 release then yes the numbers will show FSX users buy more add-ons. When you consider the amount of add-ons currently available for FS9 that we have ALREADY purchased then of course we will be buying less now, especially when there are less choices. But when you look at AES oliver has proven that FS2k4 users are loyal and very willing to spend our money with a developer that supports us!!! So to your business decision, I respect it, as for the way you verbalize your message to your customers I think Aerosoft should take a long hard look at HOW things are said and ensure there is no further alienation of the users who supported you for so many years and without whom there would be no Aerosoft...

Please please please stop with the whole FSX v FS9 comparisons and either embrace the FS9 user base or just stop bashing us with backhanded insults in the process.... Some of us have ZERO FSX envy trust me and the more you continue to view us as secondary citizens the more we will find other places to purchase our FS9 add-ons....

Just my .02 but every FSX is better comment gets further and further under my skin. Some of us just CHOOSE FS9 as difficult as that may be to understand...

All the best to everyone for a great day!!

-Paul

Agree at 100%. Well done for speaking up

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...