|
Post by cgold on Sept 27, 2014 14:57:28 GMT -5
I got to thinking last night and I have a question for all to pitch in to:
Could FSX use FS2004's default/add-on terrain and scenery files rather than its own default files? If so, transferring over to FSX might be an easier possibility... What implications are associated with this idea? I suspect I'm not the first that has thought of this...
|
|
|
Post by FSMuseum on Sept 27, 2014 23:00:56 GMT -5
I don't think that would be possible, at least, not without a hell of a lot of work put into it. FS2004 uses the idea of a 'cylindrical' Earth - The whole Earth is a giant cylinder with the ends of the poles rendered at the ends. FSX was the first to use the idea of a 'spherical' world, as in, the world is actually a sphere. This is evident if you go into top-down view in both sims - FS2004 reverts to a low res texture of a sphere if you zoom out enough, while FSX actually renders the entire world in that view. I think that would be the main reason while it won't work. Maybe I'm wrong and it would still work, but I don't think it would.
|
|
|
Post by cgold on Sept 27, 2014 23:40:49 GMT -5
That is a fair point... I guess it wouldn't hurt to give it a try and see what happens...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2014 8:33:24 GMT -5
Why would you want to use the default FS9 terrain in FSX? For the textures? Or are you referring to sceneries?
|
|
|
Post by FSMuseum on Sept 28, 2014 10:18:52 GMT -5
I'm assuming he means to take advantage of all the new addons and software capabilities and graphics options available in FSX, while using FS9 designed sceneries (ie calclassic, my sceneries, etc)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2014 8:07:50 GMT -5
FS9 sceneries can be used in FSX. There'll be some visual glitches here and there, but overall, they'll work.
|
|
|
Post by sunking on Sept 29, 2014 16:20:11 GMT -5
FS9 sceneries can be used in FSX. There'll be some visual glitches here and there, but overall, they'll work. Not to be outdone the - partly - massive framerate and overall stability of FSX, while using FS9 sceneries. Native FSX sceneries are more stable and use the entire portfolio of advantages from the engine. Kind regards. Stefan
|
|
|
Post by cgold on Sept 29, 2014 19:15:24 GMT -5
I've heard that even FSX uses only 4GB of memory while in use and was only designed for one-core computers - that was until SP1 and such came along. Unless I get info to the contrary, I see FS9 as a viable place to stay. I was hoping that FSX used more hardware components to their full advantage. I have 2x graphics cards (2x ATI Radeon 5800's) and 24GB of RAM (why? because...) If FSX would use more of this, I may give it a shot. If not, then it's a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by FSMuseum on Sept 29, 2014 22:11:05 GMT -5
There was once a tool that gave FSX some more alloted RAM or something, but its long lost to memory.
|
|
swag
Ramp Rat
Posts: 37
|
Post by swag on Sept 30, 2014 1:22:18 GMT -5
FSX is a 32-bit application and as such has a hard limit of address spae of 4 GB. The binary needs to be tweaked though to signal Windows 7/8 that it can use more than 2 GB (google for 4 GB patch).
All FPS critical functions in FSX run sequentially in one thread which means that additional CPU cores only help with texture loading and other secondary stuff and will not significantly improve the FPS (which is what really matters).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2014 8:00:17 GMT -5
The 2GB patch is part of SP2/Acceleration. If FSX would use more of this, I may give it a shot. If not, then it's a moot point. Prepar3D is still 32bit, but uses two video cards more efficiently. You should have invested the money into a SSD. FSX profits immensely from one of those, as loading times are almost cut in half. You're missing out on a ton of good stuff for FSX. Not to be outdone the - partly - massive framerate and overall stability of FSX, while using FS9 sceneries. Native FSX sceneries are more stable and use the entire portfolio of advantages from the engine. Loss of framerates yes, but differences in stability no. Even a FSX native scenery can crash the simulator. And the usage of FSX-specific features depends on how the scenery was made.
|
|