FSX Vs FS9

Ok, I just posted some pics of a round trip flight...well sort of. I departed Heber Valley Utah in Premier Designes new bird using FSX - to Grand Junction. Came back to Provo in FS9. System:

Dell XPS400
2.8 Ghz Dual Core
2 gig ram
Nvidia 7950 PCIe 512
120 gig hd

FS9 - all settings Maxed - use Real Sky V2, and a ground, water, sky texture program.
FSX - Using the settings that most have gone to in the fsx.cfg, and most settings mid to mid high. Water to 2x low, no bloom.

Comments?

lookin at those pics id say FSX looks better...the mountain look more detailed and the forests and things are so much more defined...thats what i think anyway!!!

I just upgraded my laptop memory to 2 Gig. It made a big difference. I'd say, as a general rule, that you might need a new PC with at least two times the minimum recommended requirements for FSX and you should be OK.

Also, you might use the "MSCONFIG" command to shut down any startup applications that are not Microsoft's. This will also free up a lot of memory

.

Ken:

Thanks for the comparison pics. I think FSX looks great on your system....better than FS9 to me. Are your FPS good enough to fly with?
Makes me wish I had a new computer so FSX would look that good...renew my interest etc.

Anybody tried the ATC or flying the same airplane on-line with a friend yet?

That new vid card has done you well for FS9 and X...

I think the best picture lately was Naresh taking off in the DC-3 and saying it was his landing...
uh huh...

LOL, that is a good one eh steve? Jerry, I've yet to try multiplayer with FSX....I'd like to try as the tower and have a few guys fly around....that would be an interesting test!