Unlock your frame rate it is known to significantly reduce the frame rate if your PC isn't powerful enough to maintain the rate you have selected.

Well im running frames unlimited, as recommended bij bojote etc. Limiting with FSX option results in even lower FPS.But I don't see how this effects the mouse-over issue??

Well im running frames unlimited, as recommended bij bojote etc. Limiting with FSX option results in even lower FPS.But I don't see how this effects the mouse-over issue??

Previously you said

With the ifly I go 20fps locked>12fps.

So I said what I said about unlocking the frame rate, I can't tell whether you post something in error or not.

Previously you said So I said what I said about unlocking the frame rate, I can't tell whether you post something in error or not.

I'm using an external limiter to cap 20fps. My FSX is set to unlimited. edit: I'm using the d3d9.dll versoin to cap my FPS. Are you saying that removing the limit will resolve the mouse-over-FPS issue?

As I said already how am I supposed to know what you really mean when you make a post, first you say your frame rate is locked and then you tell me in not locked but actually it is externally. It doesn't matter where you lock the frame rate, if your PC cannot hold 20 FPS with the lock in place the frame rate is going to drop regardless of whether its mouse over related or not. My advice was in relation to the lock only, not the mouse over issue. Try removing the lock, its not hard to do, you simply disable the lock by renaming the dll to something like d3d9.dll.off. Either way the situation should improve because I'm fairly certain your frame rate will improve enough to compensate for some of the drop from the mouse over issue, hopefully you will get a more acceptable frame rate.

I don't see why locking FPS with the external limiter would harm FPS, but i'll give it a try, thanks

If your looking for support for the PMDG 737 your better off with the support ticket system. The forum is not the primary support for PMDG products so it really is unfair to judge their support based on the forum. I had one issue that I noticed the day after release (loading flights saved on approach would crash at 4 percent) and my ticket was answered fast and a hotfix was issued where this was fixed for all users ( part of hotfix 1) I also own the IFLY 737 ( now retired, landed it in victorville with my other retired airliners on NGX release day) Support for both products is very good.

Seriously? Yep, all one big conspiracy theory (shaking head and smacking self on forehead)

Conspiracy theory? Im not following you there. I simply pointed out that there are inaccuracies in the 3d model, for whatever reason, even tho Boeing blueprints was supposedly used in the design process.

If your looking for support for the PMDG 737 your better off with the support ticket system. The forum is not the primary support for PMDG products so it really is unfair to judge their support based on the forum. I had one issue that I noticed the day after release (loading flights saved on approach would crash at 4 percent) and my ticket was answered fast and a hotfix was issued where this was fixed for all users ( part of hotfix 1) I also own the IFLY 737 ( now retired, landed it in victorville with my other retired airliners on NGX release day) Support for both products is very good.

+1

(now retired, landed it in victorville with my other retired airliners on NGX release day)

Haha, first time I have ever seen Victorville cited in a post here. An area I know too well, graduated from VVHS, did the majority of my flight training at Midfield Aviation at KAPV, and my Civil Air Patrol squadron was based at George AFB prior to the base closing back in the day.Come to think of it, maybe I should fly all my CaptSim a/c their for their retirement, along with the other few a/c I own that I rarely use.

Conspiracy theory? Im not following you there. I simply pointed out that there are inaccuracies in the 3d model, for whatever reason, even tho Boeing blueprints was supposedly used in the design process.

Really? Go back and read your post, you do not point out there are innacuracies you question whether blueprints were even used and essentially call PMDG liars and question their legitimate use of Boeing docs to simulate this plane... yes, conspiracy theory... Here you go, your original post where you CLEARLY question the use of blueprints at all...did they really use Boeing blueprints? Really?

Personally I dont really care either, but it does put into question the whole "we used Boeing blueprints" line. Did they really use Boeing blueprints? Really? There are other inaccuracies as well, the eyebrow windows were a bit misplaced, at least in some of the beta screenshots they posted before release. Perhaps they fixed them for the gold release (I havent looked at it, as I said earlier I dont really care)

As a beta tester who KNOWS not ASSUMES what went into the development of the NGX and the hours dedicated to making it the most accurate desktop sim ever TO BOEING SPECS it down right Pi**es me off to see someone question whether the PMDG team actually used blueprints because they found an inaccuracy on their monitor... You found an inaccuracy so you question everything?? Funny Flightblogger doesn't question it...http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2011/07/movie-monday---july-25---insid.html To quote

The project, known as the NGX, has been developed as a product officially licensed by Boeing and has spared no detail, both visually and technically. One of the company's beta testers, Angle of Attack, has created a fly-through of the 737's virtual cockpit, highlighting the nearly uncountable number of features built in to the simulation. The AoA video is available in HD to really show off the level of depth and detail designed into the simulation. I would challenge 737 pilots, Boeing engineers and maintenance personnel to find things that might be missing, but I have a feeling you might be hard-pressed to do so.

Really? Go back and read your post, you do not point out there are innacuracies you question whether blueprints were even used and essentially call PMDG liars and question their legitimate use of Boeing docs to simulate this plane... yes, conspiracy theory... Here you go, your original post where you CLEARLY question the use of blueprints at all...did they really use Boeing blueprints? Really? As a beta tester who KNOWS not ASSUMES what went into the development of the NGX and the hours dedicated to making it the most accurate desktop sim ever TO BOEING SPECS it down right Pi**es me off to see someone question whether the PMDG team actually used blueprints because they found an inaccuracy on their monitor... You found an inaccuracy so you question everything?? Funny Flightblogger doesn't question it...http://www.flightglo...25---insid.html To quote

HelloThe PMDG 737 is in most respects very well done but the fact remains that there are some modelling inaccuracies in the VC which once you notice them are hard to ignore.It is good but not the perfect product that some would have you believe, no addon is perfect or will suit everyone's taste, the NGX comes pretty close though.That said I still use the i-Fly more probably because it is the more mature product as far as hardware support is concerned and seems to play better with my other addons and FSX in general. We are very lucky to have both products available.

you question whether blueprints were even used and essentially call PMDG liars

The guy does nothing of the sort, he uses a common expression 'really?' as a way to express surprise at the fact that apparently there is an inaccuracy in spite having used blueprints. At no point does he call PMDG liars, you are completely twisting what Sekstifire's very obvious intent was in what he wrote. I really don't mind the fact that there is a minor inaccuracy of this nature, frankly I'm hugely impressed with PMDG's NG and not really inclined to get a tape measure out to pick on such trivialities when the PMDG 737 is the tour-de-force that it quite obviously is, but I can't help thinking about the irony that PMDG posted a picture of their cockpit a while back under the title of 'this is what an NG cockpit really looks like' as an obvious dig at iFly, only for us to find that it actually isn't what an NG cockpit looks like in at least that one minor detail LOL. In truth they had a point when you look at various comparisons (see the whiskey compass for a good example of that, where such details are markedly better in the PMDG NG), but that was a big ironic stone they cobbed in a glass house, which evidently has bounced off the iFly's panel and come right back at them courtesy of those who are inclined to get that tape measure out. Just to be clear here, I'm entirely bipartisan on the iFly and the PMDG NG's, I think they are both great and I'll continue to fly em both for their relative merits, that being, less of a resource overhead on the iFly and more systems fidelity on the PMDG. It'll depend entirely on the mood I'm in which one will get the virtual pitot covers removed, although I'll be happy to see which developer gets a 900ER out the door soonest, as currently only Ariane have one of those available. That one incidentally, beats them both on frame rates, if not on systems fidelity or pricing. All of them have a cockpit that is more accurate than the Captain Sim 737 Al

All in the interpretation Al, to me when someone questions whether or not something was really done they are calling out the credibility of PMDG and asking if they honestly did what they said they did...

but it does put into question the whole "we used Boeing blueprints" line. Did they really use Boeing blueprints? Really?

To me that is indeed questioning whether or not PMDG designed to blueprint specs as they said they did which would make them liars...Again, all in the interpretation of his original statement but it rubbed me the wrong way.just my .02, not trying to twist words just explaining how i interpreted them... The reason it bothers me so much is because so many developers throw out sh*t about what they do and don't do and professionally tested by RW pilots and it is all bull and PMDG is one of a few organizations I know that actually have the credibility to back up what they say, about their partnership with Boeing and how close they work to Boeing spec AND the folks they have testing for them. 99.9% of the beta conversations went right over my head ;) if you want to question whether they made a mistake fine, questioning if they did what they say they did is indeed questioning integrity in my book.

Funny you should say that the iFly is less resource hungry, in my experience the NGX is better frame rate wise. In the cruise I get about 50% higher frame rate in the NGX. I like both of them very much but lately I've been flying the iFly more as it's much more stable simulation, I've only had 1 OOM episode and zero CTDs, I wish I could say that about the NGX.

Funny you should say that the iFly is less resource hungry, in my experience the NGX is better frame rate wise. In the cruise I get about 50% higher frame rate in the NGX. I like both of them very much but lately I've been flying the iFly more as it's much more stable simulation, I've only had 1 OOM episode and zero CTDs, I wish I could say that about the NGX.

HelloI had patched the i-Fly with each SP as they were released and my frames were not that good with some fluctuations.I have recently uninstalled it and redownloaded the wrapper and gone straight to the latest SP and the frames now are very good.Something was obviously amiss with the first install maybe a result of all the patches but I am very pleased with the performance now.