Hi all,
This may be a ridiculous question from your point of view, but I have to admit I lost track of what is the state-of-the-art flightsim software for a windows 10 PC?
I've heard that Prepar3D is somewhat the best candidate?
I have occasionally played FSX a couple of years ago and would like to get back into it. So what would you recommend? Are the add-ons still usable?
And can Prepar3D make use of all the PC hardware? With FSX, I had the feeling that it never really got everything out of my PC.
Thanks for any insights.
Regards,
Loran
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Successor of FSX?
I would say that FSX is still the best simulator to use. Prepar3d is very good, but often new add-ons are prioritised for FSX and take several months or longer to appear there. I personally have gotten myself FSX:Steam Edition which is a significant improvement on FSX with Service Pack 2, as it incorporates much more stability and some better multiplayer features.
Hope that helps!
Hope that helps!
-
- PatrickZ80
- Posts: 5801
- Joined:
Re: Successor of FSX?
When it comes to making use of the PC hardware, P3D is the way to go. P3D handles this much better than FSX. However, not all add-ons are compatible and certainly olders mostly got some issues. FS2004 add-ons (even those that work in FSX) certainly don't work in P3D. Add-ons that are released nowadays are almost always P3D compatible, so you might have to replace some of your old add-ons with newer versions.
Re: Successor of FSX?
I replaced FSX with p3d a few years ago and haven't had a reason to look back.
-
- Thunderboltdrgn
- Posts: 2622
- Joined:
Re: Successor of FSX?
P3D is not a true successor of FSX. Most of the code is the same so it's almost as outdated as FSX with both sharing the strict 32-bit limit regarding
VAS and etc. You can still suffer "out of memory" with P3D since 32-bit is 32-bit and thus neither FSX or P3D can make full use of a modern computer.
Even if you 32GB of RAM, P3d/FSX will only use max 3-4 GB of it.
P3D is more of a FSX sibling then a successor/child.. P3D is still slightly better then FSX though. However some developers that have
products available for both FSX and P3D will charge you extra for you to be able to install those add-ons in P3D.
PMDG will charge you full price (P3D price, not FSX price) again for all of their P3D compatible you own if you want them for P3D too.
Aerosoft provides a multi installer though with one installer for FSX/FSX:SE/P3D.
If I were you, I'd sit tight for a while to see if/what becomes of Dovetail games new flightsim and to see if/when LM releases a 64-bit version.
Since most of the older 32-bit add-ons might become incompatible with 64-bit sims, you likely have to buy al of them again. £$$$$££$$$$ .
Then there is also X-plane 11 which is already 64-bit.
VAS and etc. You can still suffer "out of memory" with P3D since 32-bit is 32-bit and thus neither FSX or P3D can make full use of a modern computer.
Even if you 32GB of RAM, P3d/FSX will only use max 3-4 GB of it.
P3D is more of a FSX sibling then a successor/child.. P3D is still slightly better then FSX though. However some developers that have
products available for both FSX and P3D will charge you extra for you to be able to install those add-ons in P3D.
PMDG will charge you full price (P3D price, not FSX price) again for all of their P3D compatible you own if you want them for P3D too.
Aerosoft provides a multi installer though with one installer for FSX/FSX:SE/P3D.
If I were you, I'd sit tight for a while to see if/what becomes of Dovetail games new flightsim and to see if/when LM releases a 64-bit version.
Since most of the older 32-bit add-ons might become incompatible with 64-bit sims, you likely have to buy al of them again. £$$$$££$$$$ .
Then there is also X-plane 11 which is already 64-bit.
-
- PatrickZ80
- Posts: 5801
- Joined:
Re: Successor of FSX?
With 64-bits every existing add-on will become incompatible, so not only will you have to buy every add-on again but they have to be developed again. Certainly in the beginning when the 64-bits simulator will first be released there'll hardly be any add-ons available.
Currently, except for X-Plane, there is no 64-bit simulator available and X-Plane is so completely different from the FSX platform that not everybody likes it. If you're used to FSX, I'd stick with P3D. P3D is able to handle it's memory resources quite well within the limits of the 32-bit platform. Where FSX mostly leans on the CPU P3D makes better use of the GPU and therefor also the graphics memory instead of the regular memory.
Currently, except for X-Plane, there is no 64-bit simulator available and X-Plane is so completely different from the FSX platform that not everybody likes it. If you're used to FSX, I'd stick with P3D. P3D is able to handle it's memory resources quite well within the limits of the 32-bit platform. Where FSX mostly leans on the CPU P3D makes better use of the GPU and therefor also the graphics memory instead of the regular memory.
Re: Successor of FSX?
Thanks very much for your replies, interesting to hear about these developments. Sounds like I should give P3D a try.
When I used FSX, I didn't have that many add-ons. IIRC, it was the CLS DC-10, MyTraffic 2013, more realistic weather, a few sceneries such as Kai Tak and Quito, and small stuff like altitude call-outs, Shockwave lights, etc. Does anyone of you by chance have experience if these add-ons and P3D work together?
Thanks again.
Regards,
Loran
When I used FSX, I didn't have that many add-ons. IIRC, it was the CLS DC-10, MyTraffic 2013, more realistic weather, a few sceneries such as Kai Tak and Quito, and small stuff like altitude call-outs, Shockwave lights, etc. Does anyone of you by chance have experience if these add-ons and P3D work together?
Thanks again.
Regards,
Loran
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests