Nice blog entry

[Stewart 134]

This is a very nice article and sums up my sentiments on FSX nicely.

http://flightsimulatorxworld.com/component/content/article/922/484

[awesome 22]

I'd still prefer an FS11 from Microsoft. But yeah what he says totally makes sense.

[Chris_327 42]

I agree with this completely. I'm on the verge of upgrading to an i7 and loving the fact that I'm safe in the knowledge that my system will be fine for the foreseeable future, with the ability to buy some of the frame rate stealing addons that I've always wanted!

Next system upgrade, Aerosoft Flight Simulator 2012!

[Gaura Mohana 23]

Thanks for the link.... It was a very interesting read!

But is the i7 really able to give such good FPS?

[Chris_327 42]

Well I've read several different posts concerning the i7 and I think that while it may not show a massive increase in FPS across the board, it seems to definately provide stability of frame rates, especially in large urban areas (I'm only going to dare buy London X once I have an i7). Most of it seems to depend on sliders aswell.

Mathijs posted a fantastic guide here which is based on the i7. 25fps average at mega heathrow with the PMDG MD-11. http://www.forum.aer...showtopic=30796

As it says in the original post for this thread, I'm tired of completely avoiding areas like Manhattan and London because of the fps hit.

Chris

[WEA-JHD 1]

Interesting blog, but he is wrong about the hardware to run FSX, it will never, ever be able to run at it's max settings, simply because it's optimized mostly for sheer clock speed than multi-core CPU's.

So no matter if it's 5 years, or even 10 years in the future, FSX will never run at all settings set to 100% with all the resource demanding addons we have today, for not to mention those we will have in the future.

I personally don't see FSX as a worthy replacement of FS9, it's simply based on a much too old technology, it has it's roots more in the past and is not focused and optimized for future hardware at all. It's too bad really that we're stuck with a half-baked product as the only option after the addon companies drop FS9 completely..

Simply put: FSX have no place in the future as a good flight simulator option..

[etien 16]

Hello,

On the latest i980X 6 core + 480GTx OC at 4.4 FSX seems to be running at 35 fps solid, even with a big plane with lots of traffic in the middle of NY.

First, since the SP2 version FSX is somewhat multicore, but what has really improved lattely are the video drivers and DX10 which are now really multi core, each time boosting FSX.

The future is sadly on the xbox 360 where MS is activelly writing FS11 (using Live stuff, so I guess some kind of flysim MMORPH), plenty of stuff on that on the web. You can even apply for job in MS to work on it at the moment...

Maybe aerosoft should have a deep rethink about writting a new FS, because this FS may be good and kill any hope for boutique competition. (dont underestimate how deep the pockets of MS are).

Btw: I hate console.

Etienne

[Sharrow 107]

Console + Flight Simulation = Fail. No even half serious simmer will ever consider replacing his pc with a console and [gasp] xbox controller. In my opinion the two are pretty much mutually exclusive. If only there was actual proof (as opposed to speculation) that MS were developing a new flight sim for the xbox I suspect that Aerosoft could in fact breath a sigh of relief.

[Stewart 134]

Whether or not they develop for the PC or Xbox, I am pretty sure (reading between the lines of their various announcments), it is going to be aimed at the online "pay as you play" market. So as long as Aerosoft dont go down that route they should be ok.