I think it sits around how much RAM you have. FSX would like RAM if it could.
Pete

I get great frame rates with the 737. Better than I do with the 707, 757, 767 and 777. Weird!

Pete your right FSX is a pain in the proverbial. I have heaps of RAM and dual core 64 bit system but FSX is realy an MS XP program not a true 64 bit multi-core program. I tried getting windows to pretend it was and make it compatible with WIN 7 but that just produced more problems than it was worth, so I reset it. I recently installed a series of updates from MS which produced some pretty stuffed windows behaviour (the draw part not the programs) it has taken all night to resolve the problems including a system restore. Boy am I tired of this sort of crap from MS.

I am getting ready to migrate across to PREPAR3D and hopefully kiss good bye to FSX I know I will not be able to run a few of the aircraft in my hangar but really at this point I don't care I just want a reliable and stable system and program that is updated properly.

As for the FPS, go figure, I can't work it out, I have fiddled with just about everything I can think of including the FPS limiter internal and external, all I know is that my system technically is capable of unlimited but gets the jitterbugs real bad so I keep it limited to 22 fps internally and 30 externally. For some reason that seems to work for me.

[HP Dual Core 4.0GB RAM, 3.7GZ, 1TER HD and INTEL 2GB Video Card)

The advantage to migrating to P3D (IMO) is that it will get better as time goes by. And because it's core is FSX, it should not be too hard for the developers of addons for FSX to move them across to P3D (like other devs are already starting to do). It would be great if Captain Sim did too, not tthat it matters too much, I am able to use most, if not all, of their addons in P3D (with a little tweaking).