FSX SP1 on short finals...

Post by **TSR2** » 11 May 2007, 18:48

If SP1 does what it says on the tin, there shouldn't be any need to ver clock if you've got multi cores..... Yippeeee! :dance:

Post by **Trev Clark** » 11 May 2007, 22:38

Nah, Trev doesn't need to move back, he just needs to make sure Telefonica have fed the donkeys that day.

Telefonica can only give me dial up!! :shock: , I have a microwave connection to a sat uplink on a nearby mountain

, this patch should take about 2 hours, with a following wind. Still Summeris here at last (30C today), so I can always pop off to the beach while it comes down the line. Now I will have to by a dual core though :-({|= I have been quoted 139 Euros for a mid to high AMD version. MS said not to bother last November :huf:

tonymadge · Post by **tonymadge** » 12 May 2007, 10:04

Wow a 200 plus Mb patch for the perfect sim...does this mean it will go back to a sim and not be a "game" anymore?? I recall CFS3 they patched that and it still was arse!!
I am sorry I sold my FSX (the S stood for shyte) ....Not :bigrin:

ravilamir · Post by **ravilamir** » 12 May 2007, 11:00

Hi Tony

That made my day mate!!!
Yes, lets hope that M$ has seen the Light and made fsx a simmer instead of a gammer.
Still will not use it until someone dumps a P4 3.0Ghz in the skip.

That's how I got my AMD Athlon :-$

ATB

Post by **Garry Russell** » 12 May 2007, 11:08

Ricardo

I don't know about finding a P4 3.0Ghz in the skip..but I think you should fond enough copies of FS.X for all of us here :roll:

Garry

ravilamir · Post by **ravilamir** » 12 May 2007, 11:36

Hi Garry

Yes, I'll give an alert to my local recycling team to look for fsx! :dance:

ATB

DanKH · Post by **DanKH** » 16 May 2007, 09:04

SP1 has landed at FSinsider...

Be sure to read Phil's blog as well:

http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/

tonymadge · Post by **tonymadge** » 16 May 2007, 09:20

FROM THE BLOG....

It is not recommended to change these settings unless you have a performance reduction and/or maxed out CPU loads in the PerfMonitor.

Ummm so they are issuing tweaks before anyone has even loaded the patch..sounds reassuring... also love the line...re performance reduction thought the patch was to boost performance :think:

FS9 = one minor update
FSX = one huge update (so far)
FS9 runs everything nice and smooth
FSX runs like the three legged camel with fatty harbuckle strapped to its back eating pies!
I know which sim I will be using

(from an ex-fsx user)

Post by **Garry Russell** » 16 May 2007, 09:47

I guess when they developed FS.10 they realised it was not much good and folks would use it then move back...perhaps that's why they decided to give it the more suitable moniker of FS.ex :roll:

Garry

Quixoticish · Post by **Quixoticish** » 16 May 2007, 09:59

tonymadge wrote:FROM THE BLOG....
It is not recommended to change these settings unless you have a performance reduction and/or maxed out CPU loads in the PerfMonitor.
Ummm so they are issuing tweaks before anyone has even loaded the patch..sounds reassuring... also love the line...re performance reduction thought the patch was to boost performance :think:

FS9 = one minor update
FSX = one huge update (so far)
FS9 runs everything nice and smooth
FSX runs like the three legged camel with fatty harbuckle strapped to its back eating pies!
I know which sim I will be using
(from an ex-fsx user)

I don't really think thats a fair comment to make; they are explaining what the new things in the FSX.cfg do as they know everyone will look in there to tinker with things as soon as the patch is installed; I always tweak my FS9.cfg even on a top end PC so this is really no different. I'd far sooner have the developers be communicative like this rather than leave it to us to figure out what all of the new tweaks are.