C
Crashwoody1
Guest
I don't know, but when A game allows me to build detailed add ons like this, I feel no other reason to move.
Tom/Crashwoody
Tom/Crashwoody
I have seen the dark side.....
- Thread starter OBIO
- Start date
Some kiss the ground FSX walk... I really don't understand them. For review reason (I used to collaborate to a FS site that made reviews of payware add-ons) I have had FSX installed for a while, on my old Athlon Xp 2600 (did not take the time to waste 18Gb+ installing it on my new Athlon 64 X2 6000) and up until I upgraded the memory from the original 1Gb to 1.5Gb with a memory stick I was given by a friend I could not get it above 15fps, no matter how many details I shaved to make it look worse than FS5. After the memory upgrade the fps magically got around 20 and could use a moderate (nicer way to say minimum settings, but only if shaved by manipulating the options in the FSX.cfg) autogen... I guess it wanted more memory... 
The real problems though began there, because beside a somewhat slicker appearance... a more realistic water than FS9, but that is worlds heavier than the X-plane V9's water while managing to look worse... and I guess on more powerful rigs (than those we have today, no less, making me wonder what kind of rigs did the beta testers of FSX own three years ago to give the green signal to it) a little more autogen... FSX didn't give me NOTHING more than FS9 and only got us saddled with unreasonable CPU/Mem/GPU power demands... :isadizzy:
I guess having finally the earth being spherical is a step forward, somewhat, but the price asked in exchange under the demands of of PC power does not justify, even today, after three years... maybe in other 10 years or so it will... maybe... making at the same time FSX a heavier simulator than its rightful predecessor, FS2000... but not now.
What did it left us with? Some less € in the bank account, a box full of DVD we can use as mirrors while shaving and a bitter taste in the mouth.
A false step, FSX. Like FS2000. I used to hope for FS11, but M$ got scared... I'll have to keep FS9, try and sell off FSX recovering part of the money thrown away to buy it and intensify my escapades on X-plane's territory, that's all folks.
The real problems though began there, because beside a somewhat slicker appearance... a more realistic water than FS9, but that is worlds heavier than the X-plane V9's water while managing to look worse... and I guess on more powerful rigs (than those we have today, no less, making me wonder what kind of rigs did the beta testers of FSX own three years ago to give the green signal to it) a little more autogen... FSX didn't give me NOTHING more than FS9 and only got us saddled with unreasonable CPU/Mem/GPU power demands... :isadizzy:
I guess having finally the earth being spherical is a step forward, somewhat, but the price asked in exchange under the demands of of PC power does not justify, even today, after three years... maybe in other 10 years or so it will... maybe... making at the same time FSX a heavier simulator than its rightful predecessor, FS2000... but not now.
What did it left us with? Some less € in the bank account, a box full of DVD we can use as mirrors while shaving and a bitter taste in the mouth.
A false step, FSX. Like FS2000. I used to hope for FS11, but M$ got scared... I'll have to keep FS9, try and sell off FSX recovering part of the money thrown away to buy it and intensify my escapades on X-plane's territory, that's all folks.
Naismith
Charter Member
I liked FSX so much I bought it twice, original release and the Gold version. Hated it at first then ran dual FS9/FSX setup, now I rarely if ever run FS9. With just a few, mainly free enhancements FSX is miles ahead of FS9. What are we comparing here?
FSX out the box was OK but some of the textures were dire, especially when compared to a matured FS9 with oodles of enhancements. But a mature FSX beats FS9 hands down.
Sure it takes an age to get up and running, but that is why we invented coffee pots.
Fundamentally it boils down to horsepower, if you have the PC to run it FSX is great, if not stick with FS9 which is also great. Aside from that quit moaning.
FSX out the box was OK but some of the textures were dire, especially when compared to a matured FS9 with oodles of enhancements. But a mature FSX beats FS9 hands down.
Sure it takes an age to get up and running, but that is why we invented coffee pots.
Fundamentally it boils down to horsepower, if you have the PC to run it FSX is great, if not stick with FS9 which is also great. Aside from that quit moaning.
M
MCDesigns
Guest
And here I thought FS9 was the 'dark side". As mentioned above, I guess I kiss the ground that FSX walks on, LOL.
I fired up FS9 (fully loaded with addons) a few weeks back at a buddy's house for the first time since FSX came out and the performance got me REALLY excited at first, very fast and smooth with so much headroom for FPS, but after awhile of flying I realized how dated and drab that world was and how static it was compared to my FSX install (few addons).
I could easily point out the increased detail that is available when developing (FS9 makeMDL has a poly limit, FSX does not), or the superior resolution of textures (7 cm/pixel goodness), especially photoreal, or the vastly increased autogen (FS9 maxed=FSX normal) but I digress. Bottom line is that everyone has a sim that they are happy using and gives them what they want.
I just wanted to post so that any newcomers to FS and the forum didn't see this thread and think that you guys experiences with FSX are the norm
I fired up FS9 (fully loaded with addons) a few weeks back at a buddy's house for the first time since FSX came out and the performance got me REALLY excited at first, very fast and smooth with so much headroom for FPS, but after awhile of flying I realized how dated and drab that world was and how static it was compared to my FSX install (few addons).
I could easily point out the increased detail that is available when developing (FS9 makeMDL has a poly limit, FSX does not), or the superior resolution of textures (7 cm/pixel goodness), especially photoreal, or the vastly increased autogen (FS9 maxed=FSX normal) but I digress. Bottom line is that everyone has a sim that they are happy using and gives them what they want.
I just wanted to post so that any newcomers to FS and the forum didn't see this thread and think that you guys experiences with FSX are the norm
C
Crashwoody1
Guest
You know guys I have to retract a bit of what I said, mainly out of ignorance because I have really not used fsx yet because of the rata project and now the big beech project.
So I just wanted to varify My claims, so I threw my beech 18 im working on into fsx and Bingo a few big problems I was having with my beech 18 are now mysteriously working properly.
One is the reflection in the glass, It now reflects the gauges, and the flight model is working much better and the chrome is much improved. These were things I was hex editing to work properly in fs9 but I could get them to Start up so to speak. In fsx how ever all my editing with my hex editor shows through AND... NO ERRORS!
So this will of course delay the Beech 18 release a bit but to have it fully funtional in fsx with no errors and looking as good as she dose.. to me that is golden!
For me as a designer it is nicew because my addons can be used in a wider playing field and Im pretty happy about that.
So the Beech 18 will support Fsx 100% and it will work well in fs9, there will have to be 2 beeches one for fsx and one for fs9, but hell all my hard work is paying off!
Check it out!
Oh yeah the sliders are all the way up and the Beech is delivering better frames in fsx..
Just telling you the truth guys from whats happening here..and Im very gratefull that this post came up you just by accident helped me "Fix" a big problem in my project...:ernae:
Tom Wood/Crashwoody
So I just wanted to varify My claims, so I threw my beech 18 im working on into fsx and Bingo a few big problems I was having with my beech 18 are now mysteriously working properly.
One is the reflection in the glass, It now reflects the gauges, and the flight model is working much better and the chrome is much improved. These were things I was hex editing to work properly in fs9 but I could get them to Start up so to speak. In fsx how ever all my editing with my hex editor shows through AND... NO ERRORS!
So this will of course delay the Beech 18 release a bit but to have it fully funtional in fsx with no errors and looking as good as she dose.. to me that is golden!
For me as a designer it is nicew because my addons can be used in a wider playing field and Im pretty happy about that.
So the Beech 18 will support Fsx 100% and it will work well in fs9, there will have to be 2 beeches one for fsx and one for fs9, but hell all my hard work is paying off!
Check it out!
Oh yeah the sliders are all the way up and the Beech is delivering better frames in fsx..
Just telling you the truth guys from whats happening here..and Im very gratefull that this post came up you just by accident helped me "Fix" a big problem in my project...:ernae:
Tom Wood/Crashwoody
I don't know what you guys are talking about when you say FSX needs an i7 and dual core graphics cards.
I've got a Q9550 and a GTX280 and I'm getting 60 FPS in most situations. It performs just as well as FS9 does for the flying I do. It sure looks better too! I reinstalled FS9 for the VRS F-18. The thought of using it for anything else has never crossed my mind. FSX is just as smooth and looks ten times better for me.
A P4 obviously won't play FSX, but a decent core 2 duo or quad will handle it very nicely.
I assure you, it does not.
Just my couple cents.
I've got a Q9550 and a GTX280 and I'm getting 60 FPS in most situations. It performs just as well as FS9 does for the flying I do. It sure looks better too! I reinstalled FS9 for the VRS F-18. The thought of using it for anything else has never crossed my mind. FSX is just as smooth and looks ten times better for me.
A P4 obviously won't play FSX, but a decent core 2 duo or quad will handle it very nicely.
I assure you, it does not.
Just my couple cents.
heywooood
Mayor Emeritus of Taco City
Hi - I use FSX only....some of these are default planes, some are ported FS9, and some are payware FSX models....
Some scenery is default some is freeware and some is payware...
I use REX for environments along with GEX (payware)
and FS Water Configurator (freeware)
With new developers and some old FS hands contributing to FSX it is getting better and better
my rig is modest by most FSX'ers standards but it is serviceable
P4 3.4 dual core, 4gigs ram, zotac 8800gt512 GPU and lots of tweaks (none recently though so thats good)
Some scenery is default some is freeware and some is payware...
I use REX for environments along with GEX (payware)
and FS Water Configurator (freeware)
With new developers and some old FS hands contributing to FSX it is getting better and better
my rig is modest by most FSX'ers standards but it is serviceable
P4 3.4 dual core, 4gigs ram, zotac 8800gt512 GPU and lots of tweaks (none recently though so thats good)
IF I had a rig to run FSX smoothly and consistently with the level of detail that I like...I am sure FSX is a great sim. But, with only a P4 3.0 gig, 2 gig RAM system that I am very fortunate to have (was given to me by a fellow site member when my old one...which was also given to me by another site member...died)....FSX isn't in the cards. Will I ever have a system that will run FSX to the level of performance and looks that I want....maybe when I'm 80....so all you FSX designers...you have 40 years to produce all the freeware planes I can handle.
To be honest, there were things that I saw during my brief foray into the Dark Side that I did like....the autogen tree density was breath taking, unfortunately to have that density my frame rates were 5 and less. I like the extra external view of the aircraft....was flying the Beaver and it looked like I was standing on one of the floats...that was neat. Some of the stock sound packs in FSX were definitely worth copying out to another folder....the Goose sound files are now fully incorporated into a FS2004 friendly sound pack and I LIKE it.
OBIO
To be honest, there were things that I saw during my brief foray into the Dark Side that I did like....the autogen tree density was breath taking, unfortunately to have that density my frame rates were 5 and less. I like the extra external view of the aircraft....was flying the Beaver and it looked like I was standing on one of the floats...that was neat. Some of the stock sound packs in FSX were definitely worth copying out to another folder....the Goose sound files are now fully incorporated into a FS2004 friendly sound pack and I LIKE it.
OBIO
This will sound crazy, but I think FS9 has only come into her prime. With some updates and ground texture improvements, increase texture size restrictions in the sim, that thing would run circles around FSX.
I dont mean to bash FSX, but its buggy and runs horrible on 'standard' computers, unless you turn everything down. And thats with most tweaks.
Its an awesome sim... I love the traffic, how you can have double size textures, the oceans animations, the stock planes.. But I cant run it smoothly and I am so tired of those little minute jump things it does all the time..
FS9 runs like glass, and I really appreciate that.
This is a personal statement on which sim I like the most. Nothing more. I use them both daily as I am in the biz.
Bill
I dont mean to bash FSX, but its buggy and runs horrible on 'standard' computers, unless you turn everything down. And thats with most tweaks.
Its an awesome sim... I love the traffic, how you can have double size textures, the oceans animations, the stock planes.. But I cant run it smoothly and I am so tired of those little minute jump things it does all the time..
FS9 runs like glass, and I really appreciate that.
This is a personal statement on which sim I like the most. Nothing more. I use them both daily as I am in the biz.
Bill
CG_1976
Ret. US Coastie/RCAF
Oh Yay the battling Sim neighbors syndrome. Here is my take I cant live without my FSX or Fs9 weekly medicine for the brain. I get excellent performance from both sims. I keep my W7 64 on its own drive and Piggy FSX on a Terabyte and now have Fs9 on its own terabyte. Now ive got maxed Ai in both with all sliders maxed fluid and im satisfied 35fps in FSx and unknown # fluid in Fs9 no matter what I throw at the sim. I proudly support both Sims on my computer and give 110% support to any payware developer who builds for both sims and same in Freeware. I'll even support and help a Fs9 developer make the scenery or AC work in FSX be it ported. I installed Pablo's Clouds for Fs9 in FSX and got a serious boost. So you see both sims can help each other out.
Wing_Z
Charter Member 2011
I think you may have cracked it in that case.
No-one I have heard of can run FSX maxxed with full AI.
You'll have to post the video of how and where you get those frame rates, together with the solution manual.
Fame awaits...
txnetcop
Charter Member
I just can't help myself here. There have been countless guides, videos and help via Nick N on how to get FSX at high frame rates using full AI. Like Nick Needham says the problem is not FSX it's your computer. Do you have to spend a fortune to get what you want-NO!
There is an old General in here, WH61 on the forum, who runs great frame rates with tons of AI via Ultimate Traffic and My Traffic 2010 all on full with an E8400, Gigabyte X48 motherboard, an ATI HD3850, 4GB DDR2 1200 RAM most sliders full right except Autogen at DENSE that I built two years ago. His secret to running high fps with full AI is simple. Get rid of the defualt AI and replace with the new AI offered on MyTraffic and Ultimate Traffic.
I run high fps all over the place, in New York in a storms etc., with a Gigabyte X48 DQ6, OC'd Q9550 running @ 4 GHz, a GTX 260 Black Edition OC, 4GB Patriot DDR2 1200 RAM again all sliders right 70% AI (because I use default FSX AI) that I built over a year ago. I have posted the pics and sliders countless times. It isn't rocket science. There are countless others, but you guys that are stuck on the notion that FSX needs a super computer are just wrong. (by the way these are locked fps, on unlimited you can run a true 60 or better in most places, but it will dip running unlimited in places)
Lionheart is trying to run FSX with a 128 bit substandard video card on a MAC notebook using Bootcamp which sucks his resources dry. I repair and build PCs and MACs I know what they will do and won't do. If you want to run a MAC get a MAC with a Xeon Quad and the new GTX285 or HD4890 video card for MAC. You'll spend a fortune with a MAC but at least you will have a MAC that runs FSX very well with the new Snow Leopard OS
http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html
Look, the guides are on the FSX side if you want to learn. Nick N's guides are at simviation forum if you want to learn. I am not saying that FSX is the end all do all, but most developers now will tell you they only build FSX because it has the most potential. Take a look at what A2A has accomplished with Accusim and some of the new realistic modelling that REAL AIR and others are doing.
Default FS9 and FSX basically suck from a scenery standpoint, so you can't just point a finger at FSX default and say it's lousy-so is FS9 with it's stupid leopard spots on the ground. It takes addons to make these two sims really shine. We have great addons for both now and they do look great especially when compared to X-Plane, Flight Gear and host of other wannabes-although X-Plane is catching up fast with better looking aircraft, scenery, and AI traffic.
If you like FS9 stay there, if you want both FS9 and FSX you can have both and it doesn't cost a fortune. But bashing FSX and saying it isn't as good as FS9 is just simply in error. FSX is a better product in many ways, especially from the developer side. Now that Microsoft has announced no FS XI there has been more time to develop for FSX without the pressure of obsolescence.
Approach FSX like you approached FS9, with an open mind, and get help when you need it and you may find it to be a great experience. I remember all the bitchin' with FS9 came out from all the guys that were still using FS98 and FS2002...remember? The FS2002 guys were saying how slow FS9 is, and how bad the scenery looked compared to FS2002. Looks like history is repeating itself again! I'll get off my soapbox now.
Ted
There is an old General in here, WH61 on the forum, who runs great frame rates with tons of AI via Ultimate Traffic and My Traffic 2010 all on full with an E8400, Gigabyte X48 motherboard, an ATI HD3850, 4GB DDR2 1200 RAM most sliders full right except Autogen at DENSE that I built two years ago. His secret to running high fps with full AI is simple. Get rid of the defualt AI and replace with the new AI offered on MyTraffic and Ultimate Traffic.
I run high fps all over the place, in New York in a storms etc., with a Gigabyte X48 DQ6, OC'd Q9550 running @ 4 GHz, a GTX 260 Black Edition OC, 4GB Patriot DDR2 1200 RAM again all sliders right 70% AI (because I use default FSX AI) that I built over a year ago. I have posted the pics and sliders countless times. It isn't rocket science. There are countless others, but you guys that are stuck on the notion that FSX needs a super computer are just wrong. (by the way these are locked fps, on unlimited you can run a true 60 or better in most places, but it will dip running unlimited in places)
Lionheart is trying to run FSX with a 128 bit substandard video card on a MAC notebook using Bootcamp which sucks his resources dry. I repair and build PCs and MACs I know what they will do and won't do. If you want to run a MAC get a MAC with a Xeon Quad and the new GTX285 or HD4890 video card for MAC. You'll spend a fortune with a MAC but at least you will have a MAC that runs FSX very well with the new Snow Leopard OS
http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html
Look, the guides are on the FSX side if you want to learn. Nick N's guides are at simviation forum if you want to learn. I am not saying that FSX is the end all do all, but most developers now will tell you they only build FSX because it has the most potential. Take a look at what A2A has accomplished with Accusim and some of the new realistic modelling that REAL AIR and others are doing.
Default FS9 and FSX basically suck from a scenery standpoint, so you can't just point a finger at FSX default and say it's lousy-so is FS9 with it's stupid leopard spots on the ground. It takes addons to make these two sims really shine. We have great addons for both now and they do look great especially when compared to X-Plane, Flight Gear and host of other wannabes-although X-Plane is catching up fast with better looking aircraft, scenery, and AI traffic.
If you like FS9 stay there, if you want both FS9 and FSX you can have both and it doesn't cost a fortune. But bashing FSX and saying it isn't as good as FS9 is just simply in error. FSX is a better product in many ways, especially from the developer side. Now that Microsoft has announced no FS XI there has been more time to develop for FSX without the pressure of obsolescence.
Approach FSX like you approached FS9, with an open mind, and get help when you need it and you may find it to be a great experience. I remember all the bitchin' with FS9 came out from all the guys that were still using FS98 and FS2002...remember? The FS2002 guys were saying how slow FS9 is, and how bad the scenery looked compared to FS2002. Looks like history is repeating itself again! I'll get off my soapbox now.
Ted
I'd love to run FSX, but the main reason for me not doing it is time. It took me probably an entire year of on and off tweaking to get FS9 to look and run the way it does. I just dont have the energy to do it again. Plus i rarely even play with FS9 anymore....too many other cool games out there now. PC gaming has evolved to amazing levels in the past 2 years....the XBOX360 has really helped the PC side (everything gets ported over)
With all the new addons, FSX looks amazing. Some shots i've seen on Tim's (REX) website are jaw-dropping! He's screenshots make me wanna install FSX! I'm sure my machine can run FSX fine, but again, just don't have the time to tweak, re-buy addons, tweak some more...etc..etc.
-feng
With all the new addons, FSX looks amazing. Some shots i've seen on Tim's (REX) website are jaw-dropping! He's screenshots make me wanna install FSX!
I'm sure my machine can run FSX fine, but again, just don't have the time to tweak, re-buy addons, tweak some more...etc..etc.-feng
txnetcop
Charter Member
That is another reason I could never give up FS9, too much time and money invested and I remember going through the same thing you are about putting so much effort into a new sim. It paid off and I have been very happy having both. I just recently added GW3 last year and that was another rewarding experience. Now I am going to start Rise of Flight after Christmas. Ya just can't have enough simulators!
Ted
Ted
Z-claudius24
Banned
Hi,
Henry
Retired SOH Administrator
Well here we go!
i remember a few years ago when cfs3 came out
my pc could not run it, after a while i got another pc
wonderbar it woiks
i enjoy fs9 and fsx
love the no waiting times in fs9
but love the overall in fsx
i do not have state of the art pc
but it runs fsx fairly well
in fs9 i do not care if there is a vc or not
in fsx i do
its to me anyway like comparing CFS 1,2,3
they all have good and bad
personally i believe its up to the individual
as to what you want
and how much hd space you want to use
could i be without fs9 or variants of it
no, do i use it as much as fsx, no
i like the plusses in fsx
more than its downfall
thats just me
obviously others vary
H
i remember a few years ago when cfs3 came out
my pc could not run it, after a while i got another pc
wonderbar it woiks
i enjoy fs9 and fsx
love the no waiting times in fs9
but love the overall in fsx
i do not have state of the art pc
but it runs fsx fairly well
in fs9 i do not care if there is a vc or not
in fsx i do
its to me anyway like comparing CFS 1,2,3
they all have good and bad
personally i believe its up to the individual
as to what you want
and how much hd space you want to use
could i be without fs9 or variants of it
no, do i use it as much as fsx, no
i like the plusses in fsx
more than its downfall
thats just me
obviously others vary
H
Naismith
Charter Member
Txnetcop speaks the truth. The way I regard both sims is, they are both just "engines" or a basis on which to add to. Straight out the box, each sim is adequate at what it does. With appropriate add-ons both can be spectacular. Sure it can mount up expense wise, it all depends on what you want to achieve.
U
Unit453
Guest
I have both. I spent probably 1 week in FSX and the standard aircraft just weren't cutting it for me.
I ended up switching back to FS9 simply because I knew the layout and my add on aircraft were way more important to me. I didn't want to lose all my aircraft. I have some really awesome add on files, as I'm sure do many of you guys. Besides, my system didn't run FSX real well anyways.
I have an old system, custom built back in 2002 and upgraded time and time again since. I dont even know if I can copy and paste my entire FS9 library onto a cd or something so that when this system fails or I decide to drop a grand on a new computer, I'll be able to bring everything with me or start over from scratch.
I'm not even running any scenery upgrades. I haven't found hardly any that I was interested in. I would like some realistic roads or highways. I do tend to shadow those quite a bit and I tend to stick to local Florida scenery, (Sarasota-Orlando, Cape Canaveral), upstate NY, (Syracuse-Watertown-Wheeler-Sac) and Aviano AB in northern Italy into Munich. The point is that I have way too many aircraft installed to start over.
I dont post here much but I do find this forum a wealth of knowledge. The links, the downloads everyone here provides is incredible and much appreciated. I'm so in love with the Connie that its not even funny. I have a sickness for props, especially the deep, throaty, high horsepower ships that make my digital 6.1 surround piss off my neighbors.
You guys who create these models really do works of art. I want you to know that you guys touch a lot of people when you create these things. That first 5 minutes into a new aircraft when you say to yourself, "man, this thing is awesome", really makes my day. I'm more than willing to donate or pay for models, just as I've done in the past.
Didn't mean to get off on a rant because I dont post much. I have my own forum and it stays pretty active but I do enjoy checking in here a few times a week to see whats new, see some cool screen shots and maybe check out some of the latest downloads.
If the FSX community has as many upgrades as FS9, I'd be happy to switch but until this computer dies, looks like I stick with old trusty. Or if anyone wants to build me a good system for a reasonable price, please let me know.
I ended up switching back to FS9 simply because I knew the layout and my add on aircraft were way more important to me. I didn't want to lose all my aircraft. I have some really awesome add on files, as I'm sure do many of you guys. Besides, my system didn't run FSX real well anyways.
I have an old system, custom built back in 2002 and upgraded time and time again since. I dont even know if I can copy and paste my entire FS9 library onto a cd or something so that when this system fails or I decide to drop a grand on a new computer, I'll be able to bring everything with me or start over from scratch.
I'm not even running any scenery upgrades. I haven't found hardly any that I was interested in. I would like some realistic roads or highways. I do tend to shadow those quite a bit and I tend to stick to local Florida scenery, (Sarasota-Orlando, Cape Canaveral), upstate NY, (Syracuse-Watertown-Wheeler-Sac) and Aviano AB in northern Italy into Munich. The point is that I have way too many aircraft installed to start over.
I dont post here much but I do find this forum a wealth of knowledge. The links, the downloads everyone here provides is incredible and much appreciated. I'm so in love with the Connie that its not even funny. I have a sickness for props, especially the deep, throaty, high horsepower ships that make my digital 6.1 surround piss off my neighbors.
You guys who create these models really do works of art. I want you to know that you guys touch a lot of people when you create these things. That first 5 minutes into a new aircraft when you say to yourself, "man, this thing is awesome", really makes my day. I'm more than willing to donate or pay for models, just as I've done in the past.
Didn't mean to get off on a rant because I dont post much. I have my own forum and it stays pretty active but I do enjoy checking in here a few times a week to see whats new, see some cool screen shots and maybe check out some of the latest downloads.
If the FSX community has as many upgrades as FS9, I'd be happy to switch but until this computer dies, looks like I stick with old trusty. Or if anyone wants to build me a good system for a reasonable price, please let me know.