britfrog 180 Posted April 28, 2015 Report Share Posted April 28, 2015 Having unmercifully slagged off FSX SE in earlier postings in the course of a review this morning I noticed something interesting I had started it at Miami (KMIA) and i was configuring it to use photoscenery , no top drawer airport just the default airport as supplied by M.S. and i noticed i was getting a pretty decent frame rate of about 55fps so i thought i would check my fsx installation used for testing stuff so set it up with the same settings and only got 38fps Now this is with text max load at 4096 , and LOD radius of 8.5, 0 autogen , traffic at 36%, but using dx10 however in the case of SE without steves fixer, all sliders to the right except water at 1+ however the exterior view dropped to low 40's in Se and low 30's in fsx both sims are on the same hard drive. so then i tried the same setup on my main IFR version of fsx on another drive this gave me 40fps from inside and 37fps outside now this version of fsx is at least 500gb in size and hasnt been renewed for several years so it compares well with the new version on the earlier drive just to check i then fired up my vfr version of fsx on yet another drive and got 34fps inside and 36 fps outside, this drive is ancient so i was not surprised at its slowness then i fired up P3D which is on the same drive as FSX SE and got: 34 fps inside and 23 fps outside the interesting thing of note in all cases was taking the settings from default to 4096 tex max load and 8.5 lod radius actually improved frame rates using my photoscenery so there you have it P3D with very little in the way of a/c and scenery is well beaten FSX SE also with little in the way of enhancements (but more than P3D) knocks spots off them all!! maybe their upgrade of last week really did do something for the performance???? Food for thought Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.