FSX Performance - Test in Demo

[JonARNZ]

Gudday everyone,

Like everyone I have been taking a keen interest in the forums around the world on FSX performance, or lack of it depending on who you listen to. While I wait for the official release next week here in NZ, I have been slowly upgrading my computer and decided to give the demo another run yesterday after installing a new MSI NVidia 7900GTO card with 512Mb ram.

What follows is a series of screenshots showing a glimpse of what FSX is capable of on a reasnoble machine. I need to state up front that I have applied the 'tweaks' discussed on the avsim forum, these being:

Renaming default.xml to default.bak in the AutoGen folder

Adding these variables in the fsx.cfg

TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=400
TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=3000

Unlike some I have not disabled shaders, however the true test will come with the release version, so the jury is still out as far as I am concerned. I will say that I am very happy with the results I was able to acheive with the demo, the screenshots really tell the story. Before we move onto them here are my system Specs (Note, the GTO card is effectively a GTX - $600 delivered):

PROCESSOR - NEC Intel® Pentium® D CPU 2.80GHz - Architecture 64-bit - Internal Clock 2.8 GHz
GRAPHICS - MSI NX7900 GT/GTO (NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GT/GTO) Driver 9.1.4.7 - Direct X 9.0c
RAM - Total Physical Memory 2.00 GB
MONITOR - SONY MFM-HT75W
HD - Maxtor 6L200M0 200GB

Ok, on with the show. The screenshots have been taken in various weather conditions and times of the day. I have also adjusted the water effects from 2.low to 2.max, hopefully you will see the difference. Some are external in spot view, some from the VC. I have also taken some running FSX in window mode to test what impact running Paintshop Pro would have with 100 screenshots sitting in ram. All screenies feature the CRJ700 aircraft as its the biggest and no doubt most framerate heavy of those available. I have also resized the FPS info on each shot so it is easier to read. The shots were originally 1280x786, they are presented here in 700x420.

Enjoy.


















Lightning flashed just as I took this one..














Water 2.max



Water 2.low

[Ian Warren]

SUPERB ! Jon This really shows how good FSX really is at minimal cost , Framerates look and will keep lotta people happy GREAT! , good to show workin weather , I do believe FSX is not a flop , ( word s of 65 years back ) "WE HAVE WOKEN A SLEEPING GIANT" I think is tru with this program as i see more off it . B)

[Zöltuger]

finally- someone who isn't whining about how they're not getting the same framerate as they did FS9.

just one question: which version of the demo are you using: the pre-release or the final?

[ZK-MAT]

Hmmm, this and Robin's review has made me think again about FSX. Great stuff!

[Jimmy]

thats just soo butitful and 30fps on finals, you have a very nice system, I never get above 8fps on finals in fs9 lol

Thanks for posting all those pics Jon, and not making them to big a file too ,didn't take to long to load on my dial up

James

[JonARNZ]

finally- someone who isn't whining about how they're not getting the same framerate as they did FS9. 

just one question: which version of the demo are you using: the pre-release or the final?

Thats a good question, I didnt know there were different versions. How would I find out?

[JonARNZ]

When FSX is finally released next week people might want to look at this site, lots of tips and ideas to help us out fine tuning.

http://www.fox-fam.com/wordpress/?page_id=41

[Alex]

Looks nice, but it looks like the waves seem to have a really noticably incorrect scale at some heights... Hopefully be fixed in patch 10.1.

Alex

[Zöltuger]

just one question: which version of the demo are you using: the pre-release or the final?

Thats a good question, I didnt know there were different versions. How would I find out?

have a look at the name of the installer file you downloaded- is it fsxpreleasedemo.exe or fsxdemo.exe ?
obviously the first is the pre-release version (based on the beta) and the latter is the version based on the final code (aparantly).

[JonARNZ]

just one question: which version of the demo are you using: the pre-release or the final?

Thats a good question, I didnt know there were different versions. How would I find out?

have a look at the name of the installer file you downloaded- is it fsxpreleasedemo.exe or fsxdemo.exe ?
obviously the first is the pre-release version (based on the beta) and the latter is the version based on the final code (aparantly).

Ok, I have the final demo release. It came on the APC cover DVD.

[ardypilot]

Daym, those shots look good Jon!

The only things that ain't up to spec are those fs9 clouds, that before used to look o-so realistic!

Thanks for sharing

[Charl]

Ahh, ARNZ lives!
Welcome Jon, thanks for the insights.
How about news of RJX and how that looks in FSX?

[JonARNZ]

The RJX/146 is interesting in FSX. I havnt played around with textures in it at all, so I was surprised when..well pictures speak a 1000 words..


For a start FSX automatically adds vortex streams..



But look at this, all is not quite right unless I forgot I made the model with perspex!



Hmm, maybe the way the alpha channel is done in FS9 impacts in FS10...you think? The more shine the less you see (or more you see depending on how you look at it)



But see through or not, I still love her!!