I bought Flight Sim X for a Christmas present for my dad.  Should I go out and get another version ?  All I read about is that the program doesn't work well at all.  He is going to buy a new pc in January with Vista and I will make sure he gets 2 gig RAM  and a good video card etc.  What is the difference between FS9 and FS2004 ?  Can you still buy FS9 ?  Where ?  Please let me know if I should buy another package before Christmas.

I bought FSX the day it came out: October 6th where I live; after flying it for over six-weeks I've gone back to FS2004 (FS9).
I recommend giving FS2004 to friends and family.
I read a fella's signature online which stated:"FSX is virus. Friends don't let friends fly FSX"
Here's another FSX assessment : "The only thing awesome in FSX are the hardware requirements." -- Anonymous

P.S. Today's advert has FS2004 on sale for $19.95. Buy.

If your dad is going to upgrade his PC with serious hardware specs, then FSX is definitely a good choice.

You can read here a lot of negative comments simply because people here focus only on graphics, and don't care about improvements.
And because FSX requires too much hardware power, people cannot get good graphics.
So people don't like FSX, and prefer staying with the eye candy of FS9.

My personnal experience: I could FINALLY try the demo of FSX.
After having tested:
- the new flight dynamics (improved copters, ground effects etc...)
- the new cristal clear virtual cockpits
- the moving head in the VC
- the new autogen
- the animated vehicules on airports
- the new meteo

And, after having read about:
- the new glider experience (towing, automatically generated thermals)
- the new default aircrafts
- the incredible details of the default scenery (see the world tour topic on FS2004.com screenshots forum)
- the new multiplayer engine
- and more

I cannot play FS9 anymore, too boring. Beautifull and fluid on my medium-end PC, of course, but boring. I'll buy FSX as soon as I can upgrade my PC. FS9 has nothing for me anymore.

See ? It all depends on the point of view. If you prefer having good graphics than cool features, go for FS9. Else make your effort for FSX.

My tip, to be on the safe side, would be to get Dad BOTH games, FS9 AND FSX... ...!

He won't be disappointed then... ...!

I have both Sims, but I am still enjoying FS 9 because my present system is capable of running it smoothly with everything wound up to the maximum... ...!

FS X, on the other hand, for me, is extremely sluggish, and with the scenery, Autogen and effects, etc,  turned down, results in a much poorer visual game... ...!

Paul...(Owner of all most of the MS Flight Simulators... ...!

Has your dad been flying another version of flightsim before? If not, getting him started on FS2004 might be a good idea to get him used to all the features. etc. Once he starts tiring of it (and I am not yet tired of FS2004!) he could could look into moving to FSX, and if needed, upgrade whatever components of his rig that may be in order. Presuming he gets even a good 6-month run out of FS2004, then any required upgrades for FSX will not only be cheaper and more available, but also better tested and documented.  I found FSX very "busy" with regard to getting all the settings where you want them, and am still having issues trying to figure out things like setting views (I cannot get the hat switch to smoothly pan around like FS2004). It also depends on his expectations with the flightsim, e.g., does he plan to fly around mostly detailed areas/cities, or with highly detailed planes, all of which will require a super rig with FSX - flying mostly default aircraft over sparse areas obviously won't draw as much of a demand on his system. The flightsim experience should be rewarding, not frustrating, hence my bringing this points up for consideration.

..And everyone has their own definition of "rewarding"

Some prefer eye candy and could care less about flight dynamics, others prefer realism and are willing to sacrifice eye candy (for now) to learn a new sim.

There is something to be said for learning FS9 and migrating to FSX and have to learn new controls, which can also be frustrating, especially when other factors are mixed in, such as seeing what hardware can do with FS9 and trying to compare to FSX on the same hardware.

The bottom line on the hardware issue is that it will not be until March-May before hardware catches up to FSX for basic ‘decent’ eye candy and 24 frames and even then, its is not going to catch up to FS9 levels for less expensive hardware for at least a year. You must remember that. It was the same in 2003-2004 for FS9.

And as for current hardware not running FSX, the shots I have posted were from a 2 year old motherboard running a 6 month old dual core processor on a 7900 series GPU. It suffers the same lags and stutters everyone else sees although I am sure not as bad because I had the FSX.cfg file tweaked along with knowing how to set up a computer for such loads.

If this was 2003 the arguments and would be the same... they were the same. It’s like a repeat performance.

If you do not have the money to spend on the better hardware and you MUST have the eye-candy, stick with FS9 but you MUST also know how to set up a system and tweak FS9 to get the visuals, even with a 7900GTX or higher video card. Allot of people post things that suggest FS9 is a 'load-and-go' application and to get everything it has to offer you only need to have the right hardware... which is very inaccurate. You must tweak FS9 and install the right add-ons to make it shine, just like FSX.

I am not going to get into the multithread and CPU technical talk unless the thread has experts who know what they are talking about. DX10 and Vista will take greater advantage of the resources a dual core processor and multicore GPU have to offer regardless of the sim programming.

eno wrote on Dec 13^th, 2006 at 12:15pm:



more like technology will catch up with FSX

I am going to add something…

The next time anyone is at a car dealership, please go in with a list of everything you want.

Speed (In MSFS = processor, motherboard, memory, HDD, video card(s))
Performance Handling with maximum road stability and ride comfort (In MSFS = right hardware, no stutters)
Comforts that include construction material and electronic additions (In MSFS = eye candy)
Maximum safety features possible (In MSFS = Best quality system components for reliable operation like a top quality PSU)
Maximum interior sound damping for engine, transmission and wind (In MSFS = quiet computer while playing)

Just to name a few and lets not forget onboard computer navigation and communications interfaced orbital technology.


I would not drive any other way however when I was younger and could not afford all those additions, I had to settle for the best I gould get with the money I had. I had to figure out what was important to me and what was not.

Typically that type of new automobile does not come 'bug free' either and will be back a few times for things. I see crying about 69.95 with bugs... why dont you guys try $69,995 plus tax with bugs?  LOL

When they hand you the bill for the upgraded model… don’t go stomping out the door because the difference in price from the base model to the one you want is $25,000 or probably more and if you do buy it, be ready for the maintenance (same as upgrades and tweaks in MSFS) because you can expect to spend amounts on the order of $1200+ per service on a machine like that especially after the initial 12 month period.

I completely agree that there is nothing wrong with FS9 and those who wish to drive early model systems should stick with what will provide personal satisfaction. Time will allow for fixes, updates and the production of add-ons and development tweaks with FSX including hardware prices within reach just like it did with FS9, FS8…

Microsoft sees it the same way.


The silly thing is most people can't even afford the BASE model of the car. Just like allot can not afford the BASE hardware needed to fly FS9 much less FSX. The difference between the car and MSFS is you get to have the MSFS base package DIRT CHEAP and most CAN afford it.

It's up to YOU and not the car manufacture if you want to HAVE the LUXURY of driving the UPGRADED model.

Quit crying, SUCK IT UP and save. 

I did. My first high performance sports car cost me a small fortune and the maintenance on it was worse than having a wife with 5 open credit card accounts.. and I had one of those too until I wised up.

You have to think about what is important to you and what isn't.




FS9 will run on the right hardware and settings. Check in the hardware section of the forums for recommendations as to what to get.

FSX is no different... but you should wait on that if you expect to run it with what it has to offer in the way of visuals. It will be around March-May before the hardware is out, proven and ready for prime-time.