If you have a laptop or graphics card with only 2GB of VRAM (or even less, because officially you only need 1GB), you'll automatically get some serious problem and have to reduce texture quality just because of extended dsfs. How stupid is this?
Example: I've a laptop with 2GB GDDR5 VRAM and I'm using a ZL16 Photoscenery with "high" texture quality.
In XP10.51 no problem, but in XP11. Loaded textures: 2,3GB, (Main-)RAM usage: 4GB.
Without ext. dsfs in XP11: Loaded textures: 1,7GB, (Main-)RAM usage: 2,7GB.
Disabled the ext. dsfs in this way:
I've less stuttering and performance is maybe a bit better.
The same problem is also in the non existent graphical options. There really aren't any. World details MUST be at least "high", otherwise XP11 looks extremly poor, like FSX. And the rest? Standard options where you can't really reduce something without an extreme loss of visual quality which would look poorer than XP10. Only reflections and shadows are worth to reduce.
Currently XP11 is made exclusive for high end PCs and not for midrange PCs because of missing graphic options.
The minimum system requirements are a fraud. A Geforce 420 1GB is ok if you only want to fly above the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean. Below a Geforce GTS 450 2GB you'll get some serious problems.
The recommended specs are fine and very realistic.