Recently we have seen a lot of codes used to unlock our products being offered for discounted prices. Almost all of them are bought using stolen credit cards. These codes will all be blocked by our systems and you will have to try to get your money back from the seller, we are unable to assist in these matters. Do be very careful when you see a deal that is almost too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

magnum37

P3D vs. The unstable FSX

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

There is an important question I have to make to all of you simmers concerning the best FS platform for 64bit Windows 7 system. I have had the FSX since from the beginning and nowadays I have tons of different addons (sceneries, cities, planes etc) installed on it. Since win 7 it has been A VERY UNSTABLE program. Despite all of the tweaks and fixes I still tend to crash on desktop (after a longer flight) and in addition to that; 'playing' with the different windows-on-top running makes my FSX graphics dissappear! I'm talking about the missing buildigs and black screen problem. This also happens at times when the night textures with cocpit lights turn automatically on when dusk... I think I have done it all there is people have told to do but I just cant make it stable anymore. It's not fun when you never know if FSX will work or not when you make an IFR, on VATSIM especially.

Sooo.....talking about the newer P3D: Has all the known FSX win7 related problems been fixed in P3D? Secondly; my addons are mostly Aerosofts, so will the oldest scenery releases work on P3D too? This is naturally the reason I find it almost impossible to turn for X-Plane 10.

Share this post


Link to post

Most of them will work in P3Dv1, wich is basically FSX SP3. P3Dv2 is a whole other issue however as it's a whole new version of FS. Most older add-ons are not P3Dv2 compatible. P3Dv2 runs very stable, but there are only a limited number of compatible add-ons.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, I can say that I have found exactly the same situation regarding the apparent increase in "instability" of Microsoft FSX. I have installed Prepar3d v2 and I must admit that at present I think it is more stable than FSX although I've only been trying it out for a couple of months. I am currently operating the excellent Aerosoft A318/319 in both simulators and with this aircraft FSX has "seized up" three times out of four and Prepar3d has run very smoothly three times out of three! I'll keep comparing performances over the next month or so. My OS is Windows 8.1. Prepar3d has never crashed on me with other aircraft I have used in it, but it's still early days and I haven't installed anything like the number of add-ons that I have to FSX.

Share this post


Link to post

I can't get AES to run in P3D, but I think there are plans in pipeline to get it to work eventually (check the AES forum). I did use the PMDG 737NGX, 747 and 777 but, as these don't work properly either, have deleted them until PMDG release the P3D versions.

It does seem more stable but it does still occasionally CTD for me. However, the graphics and performance are much better than FSX in my opinion.

W7 64bit

Intel i7 - 3.4GHz

16GB RAM

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for your responses everyone! I was expecting just this kind of feedback - More stable than FSX but some add-ons don't mach up with Prepar3D (version 1). Kind of a disapointment to hear the PMDG NGX and 777 do not work well yet on P3D. But I think I might seriously consider of purchasing the Prepar3D for the Aerosoft Airbus A318/A319. The change of simulator software looms in the future no matter what so why not start now for I've pretty much given up on trying to "fix" the FSX and Prepar3D seems to be something that will have a future.

I must add; this oldtimer me is a little confused about the licensing of the P3D. There is various types of licenses and I really did not quite get the information given. I want a single purchase product/license without any monthly payments so is the Academic License the right choise?

Share this post


Link to post

I purchased the Academic License and it seems to run just fine. I'm teaching myself new things on it everyday! Updates are announced by Lockheed Martin and are straightforward to download, albeit it can take quite a time. Prepar3d v2.4 has recently appeared on the scene so I will update soon. If you are buying Prepar3d for the first time, no doubt you will be offered this latest version to download.

Share this post


Link to post

That's the licence that I bought. There are plenty of opinions on which licence is right for your circumstances but ultimately the choice is yours.

Share this post


Link to post

Ok! Thanks. Now it's just a question if it will be the version 1 or 2. Because of the default graphics and other updates it would be the v2 without a doubt, but going back with the question about my dear old Aerosoft sceneries - being able to install them makes me doubt some. :big_boss_s:

Share this post


Link to post

Backwards compatibility has made a big step with V2.4. Lights work better, glass displays now have glass in front of them etc.

Share this post


Link to post

I recommend Prepar3D v2.4.

The A318/319, UK2000 scenery and Orbx make me very happy indeed.

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder how many people will stay with FSX. I cannot make a decision, as I heard 64 bit could come next year. So, maybe to keep FSX for this time. I'm sure 64 bit would not be upgrade, but separate purchase.

Share this post


Link to post

Unstable FSX ??? I have had the same FSX install for 2 years now, without a glitch. I would not call that unstable.

Share this post


Link to post

Unstable FSX ??? I have had the same FSX install for 2 years now, without a glitch. I would not call that unstable.

Okay, but it does not have many fine features as cloud shadows, a far more capable DX11 engine etc.

Share this post


Link to post

Those cloud shadows are just awesome. It gives the sim such depth and a real feeling of altitude that I could never really sense in FSX. Don't get me wrong, I loved FSX but since taking the plunge into P3D I just can't turn back. The A318/9 and A320/1 work beautifully for me in P3D, the light moving across the cockpit makes it look so real. Like Jude I use ORBX FTX and ASN v2.4 and it's working well, with reasonable frame rates even in scenery intensive airports, UK2000, FSDreamteam and Aerosoft Mega Airports. I'm a very happy bus pilot at the moment. Happy flying.

Share this post


Link to post

The best platform?

Fs9 by a fair margin, who uses fsx an p3d? Ugh. I prefer my flying to be trouble free and smooth. Not full of OOM's, ctd's and low fps.

Each their own i guess!!

Share this post


Link to post

FS2004 does indeed run very smooth, but the downside is that it can never be as beautiful as FSX or P3D. It's just too limited for that. It's those limitations that make it run smooth, but smooth isn't everything either.

Personally I'm running FSX and it's smooth enough for me. Of course you need a good computer for that and you got to keep an eye on what's running in the background, but I wouldn't want to go back to FS2004 anymore. With the right hardware and well managed software FSX doesn't give any OOM's or CTD's either, and the FPS are also quite reasonable. But the problem is some people don't look at anything and assume it'll just work. That may be the case with FS2004, but certainly not with FSX.

Share this post


Link to post

I prefer fs9's 'organic' look rather then fsx's 'cartoon' look anyday. And with the new World Textures by Sascha, fs9 has never looked better and I prefer it way more then my fsx which never gets a look in anymore, I even prefer the 'new' fs9 for vfr.

But each their own. :)

Share this post


Link to post

FSX isn't unstable, imho, as long as you treat it with respect (how stupid does that sound?! :))

P3D is just FSX on steroids and I compare it to the series 'pimp my ride'. LM changed a lot and added a lot but still it's not a new flight sim on a 64bit platform. I like the shadows of the clouds and the cockpits but I'm not even close to impressed by anything else. LM is imho beta testing FSX again with all the glitter and glamour people want yet they state it's not for entertainment purposes but ask the whole community, of which many use it for entertainment, for input (I'm lost on that one)

I like the effort though from LM, they are at least trying harder then Microsoft did lol :)

(just my 2 cents)

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe Version 12 is. Now it's a joke full of problems and poor performance,

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder how many people will stay with FSX. I cannot make a decision, as I heard 64 bit could come next year. So, maybe to keep FSX for this time. I'm sure 64 bit would not be upgrade, but separate purchase.

I have P3D 2.4 but seldom use it. The UI is still absolutely atrocious and some of the quirks are still there.

As for a 64bit version, it will indeed be a separate purchase. Also, people need to keep in mind that a 64bit version of P3D will break every addon out there. Food for thought.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe Version 12 is. Now it's a joke full of problems and poor performance,

Poor performance? That's a surprising comment as on my machine is is able to show 6 to 8 times as many polygons at the same FPS as FS2004.

And I can assure you it it very popular among our customers, for some products 50% of the downloads are for P3D versions. I expect P3D add-ons to outsell FSX add-ons next year.

Share this post


Link to post

100% with Mathijs on that one.

P3D is our future platform

there's an active, very talented development team working on it,

its our dream come true; but it has it grow pains which should disappear in the near future

Share this post


Link to post

And that's what everybody said about fsx and a ten years later still heart ache and pain for everyone.

But must be one of the rare few, Mathijs. Plenty of users having problems even with all the latest hardware.

But if you get good performance, well done. In the meantime, I'm waiting on the new iFly 747 so fs9 ain't dead yet!

Share this post


Link to post

And that's what everybody said about fsx and a ten years later still heart ache and pain for everyone.

But must be one of the rare few, Mathijs. Plenty of users having problems even with all the latest hardware.

But if you get good performance, well done. In the meantime, I'm waiting on the new iFly 747 so fs9 ain't dead yet!

Every user with a multicore CPU will get better performance in P3D if you simply look at what is being displayed. Not only is P3D (and FSX for that matter) simply more efficient per core, it also can use multiple cores. So if you show EXACTLY the same amount of objects, FSX/P3D will be a lot faster. The problem, certainly with P3D, is that it allows you to show so many more objects. Even default P3D is able to draw tens of thousands of trees at it's max settings and of course that will be slow things down. You just need to understand what you are asking of the simulator. And once you seen the cloud shadows it is hard to go back!

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...