Jump to content

Why FSX over FS9?


Max50

Recommended Posts

What you are saying is that FS9 with all the add-ons that you have is better for you, and you are the first I've seen in this thread to admit that your comparison includes all those add-ons in FS9, then compare with a default FSX?!?!

 

You haven't read my posts.

 

I am comparing both sims fully pumped up with the best add-ons available today.

I have suggested FS9 is the better sim because if you pump up both sims, the visual difference is little but the performance difference and enjoyment difference is immense. I don't have to worry about how long I fly or worry about making sure I've turned scenery or detail down enough so hopefully I can finish my flight without the sim crashing. I never have these things to worry about. My FPS is locked and my frames never move from the locked value no matter what plane or scenery I am using. Battling FPS, stutters, VAS, this takes away huge enjoyment of flight simming for no real benefit.

 

Of course people may be drawn to a sim because of particular add-ons. That's fine and totally understandable. My point is, if you look at and compare each sim from an overall and general perspective, FS9 is the better sim. I totally stand by this statement because it appears I am the only one who has compared both sims with modern add-ons.

Edited by Max50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You haven't read my posts.

 

I am comparing both sims fully pumped up with the best add-ons available today.

I have suggested FS9 is the better sim because if you pump up both sims, the visual difference is little but the performance difference and enjoyment difference is immense. I don't have to worry about how long I fly or worry about making sure I've turned scenery or detail down enough so hopefully I can finish my flight without the sim crashing. I never have these things to worry about. My FPS is locked and my frames never move from the locked value no matter what plane or scenery I am using. Battling FPS, stutters, VAS, this takes away huge enjoyment of flight simming for no real benefit.

 

Of course people may be drawn to a sim because of particular add-ons. That's fine and totally understandable. My point is, if you look at and compare each sim from an overall and general perspective, FS9 is the better sim. I totally stand by this statement because it appears I am the only one who has compared both sims with modern add-ons.

 

Nope: P3Dv4.5 completely renders FS9 meaningless.

As you would expect from obsolescent software from the early 2000's when compared with something advanced by some of the smartest simulator developers on the Planet in the past 7-8 years for the hardware of today not the misguided beliefs of where hardware was going based on crystal balls of the late 90's...

 

Even X-Plane today makes FS9 look ridiculously bad.

 

Technology has evolved. You don't make a 1900 Model T into a 2019 F1 car by bolting on a turbocharged motor...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't grown adults discuss a couple of games without acting like someone is trying to steal their car or something? lol

 

Nevermind...FSX is better...

 

I was just letting you know what you should have suspected over the last 49 posts. It never fails when "discussing" 2 different Sims.

Still thinking about a new flightsim only computer!  ✈️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just letting you know what you should have suspected over the last 49 posts. It never fails when "discussing" 2 different Sims.

 

Oh, I know, it's why I rarely post on forums and likely will go back to my cave again soon.

This thread has shown that people have not run FS9 for years, have no idea what is even available for it let alone tried any of it.

 

It makes things very difficult when you try to get a comparison of the 2 sims and the only threads you can find with any decent discussion are those from FSX release which offer incredibly little value today. Topics that keep coming up do so because there is great interest in these topics. If people don't want participate, don't.

 

I know I have made the right decision for myself with choice of sim. I also know many have made the wrong choice.

After running both sims the last few weeks, here is my modern evaluation and advice.

 

- If you are running FSX, have sliders turned down, are sitting there dealing with FPS or stutters or VAS because you think you are using the visually superior sim, you are dead wrong!

- If you are using FSX because you must have particular add-ons only available for FSX then FSX is for you.

-If you think equivalent add-ons for FSX must be greatly visually superior to FS9, you are again very wrong! I have found little difference visually in identical payware add-ons. The only real difference I found in the 2 sims is around 40-50FPS! lol

 

Both sims have their good points here and there which the other may not have but again, it's a very balanced situation.

 

I asked a question at the beginning of this thread, got some answers, none of which have made me reconsider my choice. My view on the sims from my recent comparisons I have written above. For anyone reading this and looking for some information more recent than a 2006 thread, hope it helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact is, once I changed sims - firstly from FS2004 to FSX, then from FSX to P3D, I have deleted the old sim and used the new one exclusively.

 

Never felt I was missing out in any way, only experiencing the advances from the new version unmatched by ANY addon in the old...

 

The fact is the hardware platform was decrepit, long before its replacement. Nothing to do with addons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got one for you: How about waiting for FS11 (2020) to come out and then they can lock this thread as FS11 will be multi-core, won't load scenery and problems that causes, and be as real as the real world. You can find your street, and your house. It will be a game changer. Not everthing you want will be available right away as they plan to upgrade in stages as the software is developed (using feedback, etc). You won't EVEN think of FSX AND/OR FS9 once they put FS11 out.

Chuck B

Napamule

i7 2600K @ 3.4 Ghz (Turbo-Boost to 3.877 Ghz), Asus P8H67 Pro, Super Talent 8 Gb DDR3/1333 Dual Channel, XFX Radeon R7-360B 2Gb DDR5, Corsair 650 W PSU, Dell 23 in (2048x1152), Windows7 Pro 64 bit, MS Sidewinder Precision 2 Joy, Logitech K-360 wireless KB & Mouse, Targus PAUK10U USB Keypad for Throttle (F1 to F4)/Spoiler/Tailhook/Wing Fold/Pitch Trim/Parking Brake/Snap to 2D Panel/View Change. Installed on 250 Gb (D:). FS9 and FSX Acceleration (locked at 30 FPS).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You won't EVEN think of FSX AND/OR FS9 once they put FS11 out.

 

Not so sure. I'm not at all excited about the new sim. I'm not following development closely by any means but from the little I have read, snippets are now starting to come out about reality.

No seasons just for starters is a total end all. It appears MSFS will travel the typical modern day game route of releasing a partially complete product.

 

I'll be excited when MSFS has all the features I would expect and can be run well on an average machine. I've never witnessed such hysteria for any game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the first things I noticed about FSX is, you naturally have interior sound for both.

 

FSX has exterior engine sounds that change on the intake and exhaust side. Panning around is realistic.

 

FS2004 just has a exterior engine sound that does not change when panning.

Gigabyte GA-X99 Gaming G1, i7-5960X, Noctua NH-D14, Crucial Ballistix Elite 64Gb, Nvidia GTX Titan X, Creative ZxR, Ableconn PEXM2-130, WD Black SN750 250Gb & 2Tb NVMe/Gold 10Tb HDD, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM, PC Power & Cooling 1200w, Cosmos C700M, Noctua iPPC 140mm x6, Logitech M570/K800, WinX64 7 Ultimate/10 Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have both FS9 and FSX. Max50, which are the most important add-ons to make them look and work better. The selection of the add-ons may well depend on the performance of the CPU.

 

Sorry for the late reply, been a very busy week. I'll send you a PM over the weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I'm not a big fan of Froogle, he had a very similar attitude to you about the new sim until he tried it. Worth watching:

 

I don't watch Froogle or any other Youtubers, like to make up my own mind. Couple of times I followed a link from a forum to watch something from Froogle I thought he said some ridiculous things to be honest. I'll take a look at the video you linked and post back if it changes my opinion on anything.

 

There are a number of reasons I'm not jumping up and down with excitement. I don't think my mind will be changed until the game is out and people are running it. Sorry to those cringing I called it a game. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I'm not a big fan of Froogle, he had a very similar attitude to you about the new sim until he tried it. Worth watching:

 

Ok, watched it and speaking for myself personally, I'm even less excited now and that's the truth.

Let's just wait for release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, watched it and speaking for myself personally, I'm even less excited now and that's the truth.

Let's just wait for release.

 

That’s because your mind was already made up. Seriously, if you don’t like Froofle go to the literally hundreds of other videos/post to form your opinion. The MSFS developer have been remarkably candid and the pertinent information is available to allow you to glean the direction of this project.

 

I can’t believe this thread got 64 reply’s; it’s ridiculous as the topic is 15 years too late and been discussed ad nauseam. Seriously, the OP asked a question then proceeded to convince all those who replied why their wrong. To that point, it was he who was trying to convince you, vice you convincing him...

 

If the OP wants to stick with a sim developed 20 years ago, let him. The rest of us will move on to a modem platform employing edge computing, machine learning, and access to 2 PB of data,

 

This is a time to look forward to a fantastic future, not to regurgitate pointless debates 10 years past Relevancy.

Edited by kingm56
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s because your mind was already made up.

 

No, that's because I listened to things like comment after comment about how the weather will now include this and that from mountains and winds will replicate this and that and it will affect the wing tip of the aircraft.

To summarize what he said, what he spent many minutes talking about, is we would see the plane rock a couple of extra times during flight than we do now! lol

 

Are we going to be able to fly in a jet and have a solid blanket of unbroken clouds under us like real life?

Are we still going to just whizz through the most severe thunderstorm like it wasn't even there?

 

If talking about new weather features, I want to hear about things that will make a difference.

 

Imo, MSFS from what we know to this point is new terrain, which will itself come with compromise, and everything else is missing or just one big FSX patch.

 

I'm looking beyond the pretty pictures. There are masses of reasons why MSFS is not yet something to be excited about and we all have a right to an opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we still going to just whizz through the most severe thunderstorm like it wasn't even there?

 

Hi Folks,

 

I don’t know what sim you’re flying - I just had an in flight break up from over stressing my Skylane while flying too close to a cell in IMC landing at Reading PA a few weeks ago...

 

Regards,

Scott

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bJQZKiw.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me personally, I‘m really not ready to shell out big bucks again on the new sim, plus the possibility my old PC won’t be able to handle the new sim, (I do not own an XBOX), will all my FSX addons be compatible worries, and if not, I’ll have to wait for devs to start making some, and that’ll take time and cost more money, etc.

 

Took me 3 years to get onboard with FSX after its initial release. Starting with buying a new (now old) PC.

 

As I get older, I’m just not into the hobby as much as I was back then, so to me, FSX is just enough to get my flying fix.

 

Just my personal opinion.

 

Hell, PlayStation 5 is launching next year, and here I am still with an old PS3. Lol

Edited by kingnorris
CLX - SET Gaming Desktop - Intel Core i9 10850K - 32GB DDR4 3000GHz Memory - GeForce RTX 3060 Ti - 960GB SSD + 4TB HDD - Windows 11 Home
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Took me 3 years to get onboard with FSX after its initial release. Starting with buying a new (now old) PC.

 

3 years? I've just moved to FSX-SE last week when I bought my current laptop. This makes either 5 years (for FSX-SE) or 13 years (for FSX boxed) after its release hahaha. I have some addons to re-purchase (FS9 addons that I have and want to have in FSX), but I guess it will be around $110 (including the iFly 747), and I will only miss 1 single add-on that I care for (the Dreamfleet 727).

 

Going to either P3D4 or MSFS2020 (when released) will be at least 10x more expensive for me.

 

There is something I have to admit: right now you may be able to get a good laptop for FS9 for less than $400. Desktops, even cheaper.

Edited by lmhariano

Best regards,

Luis Hernández 20px-Flag_of_Colombia.svg.png20px-Flag_of_Argentina.svg.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's been the view -- I'm unable to see what you are talking about. Perhaps your statement would be more meaningful if you gave us more concrete information (perhaps comparison pix or something).

 

I got FSX when it first came out (and I still have it), and it was a decided improvement over FS9. Were you perhaps comparing FS9 as you had it with all your add-ons to FSX bare bones? Then, and only then, can I concede there was some degree of improvement, but then it would depend on the add-ons.

 

Basically people saying FSX was worse than FS9 are beating a dead horse if they cannot show us a default to default comparison to prove it.

 

If all you're saying is that you had performance problems initially when switching, then I can certainly understand that, since FSX prefers a more powerful system, but compare mid-level sliders and settings to mid-level sliders and settings (as an example) for the default features, textures, etc. of each in order to get a proper comparison. Don't give us an "apples-to-oranges" comparison.

 

 

Been done years ago.

 

Fsx sux. P3d - which is fsx with a new name sux. Same horrible bland scenery.

 

I spend most of my time trying to bring fsx up to Fs9 standards but give up. Just not going to happen.

The best B200 king air, 737NG, 741/742, 744, 748, DC-10 and who knows what else are on Fs9.

 

My fsx grows cobwebs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been done years ago.

 

Fsx sux. P3d - which is fsx with a new name sux. Same horrible bland scenery.

 

I spend most of my time trying to bring fsx up to Fs9 standards but give up. Just not going to happen.

The best B200 king air, 737NG, 741/742, 744, 748, DC-10 and who knows what else are on Fs9.

 

My fsx grows cobwebs.

 

All I can say is, this is just nonsense. I have been an FSX user since it first appeared 12 years ago, at which time I abandoned FS9 and never looked back. With add-ons such as UT, GEX, and others, FSX is so far superior to FS9 there really is no comparison. Horrible bland scenery? You must be joking (or trolling). Ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was interesting to read the P3D and X-Plane bash fest over at the other site. Of course the other site doesn't like anything that does not demonstrate the site and membership as being "A happy bunch of coconuts!" so the threads were soon deleted.

 

Of particular interest, were the complaints that applied to those sims but did not apply to FS9. There were quite a few. What came out there was the plain old truth from P3D and X-Plane users as they are all convinced they will never need these sims again. The new MSFS will be their future.

 

FS9 holds it's own. As has been mentioned in this thread, you need to compare a FS9 run today against FSX, not one that you might have left 12 years ago, never touched since and use that for comparison.

 

I won't add any more to the discussion but in 10 years from now, I still think there may be a good possibility I'll be using FS9. As for the new MSFS, I'll be fascinated to see how many, and how quickly, people run back to their old sims.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FS9 holds it's own. As has been mentioned in this thread, you need to compare a FS9 run today against FSX, not one that you might have left 12 years ago, never touched since and use that for comparison.

 

Excuse me. What has changed in "today's" FS9, OTHER THAN the various ADD-ONS that are available? No one but NO ONE has explained that so that I can understand it. Those contending that FS9 is better merely make the statement, but have given NO evidence I have come across. And saying that FSX is dull, lifeless, whatever derogatory remark doesn't make it so. I, along with a number of others here, haven't seen it that way at all. SHOW ME!

 

And if you are comparing FS9 with today's available add-ons, then you MUST use FSX with today's available add-ons as a point of comparison, or else you ARE COMPARING APPLES AND ORANGES. Let's have a fair comparison, people.

 

======================

 

I don't have a problem with folks telling me they like the FS9 WITH IT'S ADD-ONS better than FSX, but be honest.

 

Larry N.

As Skylab would say:

Remember: Aviation is NOT an exact Science!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if you are comparing FS9 with today's available add-ons, then you MUST use FSX with today's available add-ons as a point of comparison, or else you ARE COMPARING APPLES AND ORANGES. Let's have a fair comparison, people.

 

This is exactly what was given, a fair comparison. Re-read the thread, it's been clearly stated. If you want to summarize the thread in a couple of lines:

 

FSX is the visually better sim at the expense of low FPS, crashes (OOM's) and stutters.

FS9 is "slightly" behind in visuals but does not suffer low FPS, crashes or stutters.

 

Both sims are old, same generation. You can take the one with headaches and frustration but slightly better visuals or you can take the hassle free one and sacrifice a little on the visuals. Simply depends what you want.

 

I happily sacrifice the little advantage FSX gives in visuals for the ability to just flight sim without restriction or hassle.

Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excuse me. What has changed in "today's" FS9, OTHER THAN the various ADD-ONS that are available?

 

Apart from add-ons, what else makes FSX better than FS9??? There is virtually no difference.

It's the add-ons that make both sims.

 

You compare them with all their add-ons and then evaluate how they look and perform and pick the one that works best for you.

 

Edit: To compare both, you need both with their settings maxed out. You can easily do this with FS9, most people can't with FSX.

You don't have to turn FSX settings down a great deal before your visual advantage over FS9 is gone. There are many running FSX like this. They are putting up with all the FSX problems and don't realize their sim looks worse than a hassle free FS9 would on their system.

Edited by Skywatcher12
Mark Daniels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...