AFTER BLOCK 1: IMPROVEMENT DID NOT END THE ARGUMENT
AVSIM's August main-thread discussion reveals disagreement over the baseline itself. NicXGG called the Fenix economical compared with other complex add-ons, but later reported a lower result than the default Airbus. MrFuzzy challenged the description of that as performance-friendly. Neither account requires dishonesty: the comparator and surrounding simulation workload change what the comparison means. [25, 14 August 2023; NicXGG and MrFuzzy exchange]
By October, skypilotYTS said Block 1 had improved matters but still required reducing graphics settings specifically for Fenix. The original poster asked how others adjusted settings between aircraft. That is quieter criticism than a failed launch, but it describes a real cost: owners were budgeting scenery and visual quality around their airliner. Improvement could coexist with continuing compromises. [26, 24 October 2023; posts 1–2]
The argument persisted in January 2024. TFEV1909 saw a gap from the PMDG 737; NHaviator6127 reported comparable performance; skypilotYTS acknowledged gains but still saw a difference. Replies proposed explanations involving architecture and experience. These are part of the debate, not established engineering findings. The evidence supports disagreement over experienced performance, not one universal ranking. [27, 6–10 January 2024; contrasting experiences and proposed explanations]
Fenix’s own 5 August 2023 beta benchmark at iniBuilds EGLL. Developer-supplied comparison under the pictured conditions, not an independent test or a prediction of current V3 performance. [22, Official V2 performance article, /images/v2/perf1.png]