O'hare or JFK? Which performs best on FSX?

[cmpbllsjc]

I have told myself over and over again that I would not buy either of these two sceneries because I never fly in the NE. However, I am enjoying Geneva, Zurich, Las Vegas, and now Ft. Lauderdale so much that I think I am going to go ahead and get either O'hare or JFK but I would like to base it off which one you guys report better performance on in FSX. If they are about the same I think I am leaning more towards getting JKF. It seems that all the other sceneries FSDT have produced that I buy perform so well, that perhaps a major hub like JFK or ORD might actually perform well, especially coupled with UT2 which seems to improve FPS even with high trafic settings.

I know Umberto would suggest that I download and try the them for free, but to be honest the trail period is so short that I can barely use it long enough to get a good feel for the performance. Plus the fact that my FSX install is working so well that I hate to install something unless I am pretty sure it's going to stay. I don't like to chance installing then uninstalling something and having problems crop up. I have done that once before, not with and FSDT product, but none the less, it was a headache to track down the problem an fix.

So guys, which one: ORD or JFK? Got my debit card ready to go  

BTW, Umberto and the rest of the FSDT, thanks for KFLL and the rest of the geat airports. I have wanted KFLL so long you wouldn't belive it. Look forward to your next airport.

[rrwhaley]

Ord is GREAT, but needs a update (new rwy & taxi way added)
But either way they are both GRAET

[cmpbllsjc]

Ord is GREAT, but needs a update (new rwy & taxi way added)
But either way they are both GRAET

Thanks I didn't know about the runway. Similar performance?

[CX 747-400]

I current am running both of them FS9, and have no issues. I did try them both in FSX, and took a huge hit in FPS with JFK ( from 33 fps to 9 fps). I did take a little drop with ORD (only about 5 fps), but nothing compared to JFK. I hope this helps. I can also tell you that I enjoyed JFK so much that it was one of a few factors that made me go back to FS9.

[cmpbllsjc]

Thanks Jonathan thats good to know. I don't think I will ever go back to FS9 since FSX works really well on my system. However as a test I did a flight from the new KFLL to the default KJFK in the LDS 767 with real world weather (storms) via ASA and UT2 displaying 100% airline traffic and I got around 15 to 20 FPS on approach and it was smooth with no blurries. However if my frames were cut in 1/2 with the FSDT JFK I am not so sure. I will take it under consideration. Thanks.

[virtuali]

I know Umberto would suggest that I download and try the them for free, but to be honest the trail period is so short that I can barely use it long enough to get a good feel for the performance.

Short ? You probably haven't understood how the Trial works: you don't have just 6 minutes of Trial, you have an UNLIMITED number of 6 minutes periods because, if you restart Flight sim when the Trial has ended, you have another 6 minutes of Trial. There isn't any limitation on the number of times you re-start the trial, and there's no expiration date also.

I can't think of a more extended Trial like this one, which is designed JUST for the purpose of flight simmers, because they like to try, tweak the system, restart, try again, tweak again so, it fits perfectly whithin this testing pattern.

Also, keep in mind that the Trial does not start until you enter in the scenery area, which is usually about 10 nm around the airport. This mean you can even make a complete flight arriving from somewere else, the Trial for our scenery will start only when you are 10 nm inbound, which should be easy to cover at normal approach speeds in less than 6 minutes, so you can even practice all approaches, if you want.

[Aeroman]

I have told myself over and over again that I would not buy either of these two sceneries because I never fly in the NE.

Well that's your problem...  ORD isn't in the Northeast, so you'd better get that one, then...

[cmpbllsjc]

Umberto, thanks for the info about the 10 mile radius, I didn't know that. That was why 6 minutes seemed to short. I could barely get a complex plane like an LDS or PMDG onto the runway, take off, and fly an approach to test in 6 minutes. Now I can take off near by and try an approach without having to spend valuable time. However, for me, restarting FSX a bunch of times to test is real pain. With as much stuff as I have installed a full restart takes a good 3-5 minutes, not that long if I exit a flight and go back into the main FSX menu, but a complete FSX reboot takes time. All the FSDT products I own I have only run one test flight, KFLL the exception. I wanted KFLL so much I didn't bother testing, just bought it straight away.

Aeroman, yeah I guess ORD isn't really considered Northeast, but I consider anything that is North and East of where I live Northeast