Hi.
What is different? Better, worse? Is it worth the upgrade?
Nothing better, I would stay away from XP12 unless you want a lot of pain and frustration.
No, the Flight model / dynamics in all of the GAs, is not better, if anything it's worse.
In the 172 X1000 you cannot see the left side knobs to use the unit, the Auto exposure is poorly implemented and it uses a lot of resources.
If you do not have at least a CPU running at 5 GHz, at least a Video in the 3080 performance range and 32GB of RAM don't try using it. If you want VR you need at least a 4090.
They've had the problem with the 172 since they implemented the auto exposure, over 4 mts?, and they are still not fixing it, as if they don"t even care about the GA.
Implementing the Ortho imagery, which is must, because the default scenery is useless if you want to use it for ground referencing, and because the 3D water makes the shores look terrible, 3D trees, horrible WX / turbulence implementation, puddles all over the runways that look like hundred of dogies relived themselves, as soon as you select a layer of clouds and some wind, with a 172 going over small bump shakes the heck out of it....
In addition if you get the Digital / download version and you do not have the Inet available it's rendered useless due to having to verify registration.
If you need a sim and want XP get XP11, at this point, as much as I dislike, the Assobo MSFS I would suggest to everyone to go that route.
There are so many smaller wrong things about it that it's embarrassing to post them al. It's like some 10 years old decided to write a sim and know nothing
about flying or writing code.
Embarrassing coming from them really, they've been at it for a while. I am not sure if they are interested in the small users, they seem to look more for commercial use, is what some users say, or they lost their main code writer / manager.