Hello!I get very confused opinions about Radeon 9700 and 9800;some say it is very good, others not.I am still vacillating between GF 5900 and the Radeons.Can someone honestly say that the Radeon gives blurred images,or is that just something exaggerated?The test reports in Tom's Hardware, for example, states that itis superior to the GeForces.If so, how are they superior, if they produce blurred images?That would be quite unacceptable for me.I am after power, framerates and image quality.Looking forward to your just judgements..........Thanks again!Hans HermanssonSweden

i still dont understand what these "blurred textures" are about? i have never had any blurred textrues neither ground or plane. i have a radeon 9800 pro 128mb and its great...the quality is superb.my friend has a nvidia fx5600xt and it is no where close image wise even when at max specifications (yes..i know the 5600 is no where near the 9800 or 9700 anyways) but it had blurred textures sometimes.ive included a pic to help you decide :(http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66103.jpgi thought it looked pretty gooddario

Hi Dario!I think you convince me.Thanks!Hans HermanssonSweden

Hello Hans!Just to stand ground for the Radeon, here are two another screens. I never saw any blurred textures, not on the aircraft, and not on the ground (except outside the FS cross - software limit).http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66108.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66109.jpg

I've got a Sapphire Radeon 9800 Pro 256mb card and have had no problems with it. Display looks nice and clean, frame rates great, looks fluid. Run with pretty much all sliders maxed.Jon----------------------Intel P4 3.0 HT 800 FSBASUS P4C800-E Deluxe Kingston HX PC3200 1gb (2x512)Sapphire Radeon 9800 Pro 256SB Audigy 2 ZSMaxtor DiamondPlus 120gb/7200 rpm HDAntec TrueBlue 480 watt PSWin XP Pro SR-1

Hi!And thanks for taking the trouble, with the screens and everything.Looks wonderful............My doubts fade away; I'll buy a Radeon soon.........Thanks again!Hans HermanssonSweden

Of that shot of the A330 I believe flying, you can see blurred textures in the background that you labeled 'outside of the FS Cross". However, on my 5900Ultra, I don't get that at all. (keep in mind I also own a 9800 pro). Here are examples of what the 5900Ultra can do with the new forceware drivers which the Radeon 9800pro simply cannot touch (without huge fps loss).Hawaiihttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66251.jpgHawaii againhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66252.jpgFL380 and no blurries no matter how far back you lookhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66253.jpgAgain from inside the cockpithttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66254.jpgOn final to Nellishttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66255.jpgAnd for bigger full resolution images of my 5900Ultra in action, click on my webshots link (some are pre new forceware and have some blurried ground textures). Please note that all my settings are maxed with UT 100% traffic and FPS locked at 20. My fps never drops below 10 and only goes that low in the highest congested airports/weather conditions. Other than that, it pegs at it's lock.MikeP4 2.4C @3.44 285FSBAsus P4C800 Deluxe1gb Corsair XMS PC3500 Asus V9950 FX5900 Ultra 256mb 500/950SB Audigy2 Platinum ExWatercooled baby!!!Pics: http://community.webshots.com/user/chksix2002

The 9800pro is a great card, no question about it. I just found that my 5900Ultra with the new drivers (pre forcewares werent as good at all) I am able to reach a new level of realism in FS. I can see as far as my eye can into the sim without any blurries. I never heard of an "FS Lock limit" and I personally don't think there is one. I think it is the drivers or hardware or any combination of the two that creates those distorted views 30 or so miles from the plane.Some more shots:Queens NYChttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66261.jpgSeattlehttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66262.jpgLong Islandhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66263.jpgThis shot is extremely compressed because of the scene/quality..hence the background is a bit blurry ONLY in this shot below. anyone who wants the full shot, pm mehttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66264.jpgMike :-waveP4 2.4C @3.44 285FSBAsus P4C800 Deluxe1gb Corsair XMS PC3500 Asus V9950 FX5900 Ultra 256mb 500/950SB Audigy2 Platinum ExWatercooled baby!!!Pics: http://community.webshots.com/user/chksix2002

hey guys....i dunno...but it just seems that your anti aliasing is not great...i noticed it on some shots of yours...i mean...AA makes a lot of difference FPS wise..i could put all my sliders on max (on the graphics card settings itself) and leave AA at 2x and u would get really good frames..but i personally cant stand having jagged edges....so i prefer a loss of frames for an increased image quality...i dunnoin the end...its really hard to see the difference..its depends on what setup u have..not just ur graphics card (because i have seen so many people complaining that they upgraded their graphihcs card and they say that they didnt get a massive upgrade...) also on how the person sets it up....its not such a basic comparison....dario

You're absolutely right dario.CheersMikeP4 2.4C @3.44 285FSBAsus P4C800 Deluxe1gb Corsair XMS PC3500 Asus V9950 FX5900 Ultra 256mb 500/950SB Audigy2 Platinum ExWatercooled baby!!!Pics: http://community.webshots.com/user/chksix2002

Personally, I won't accept any framerate below 30 and I also have crisp clean images at 4xAA & 16xAF. With FS9, AF is very important. I got most things maxed out and she runs with frames over 30fps 95 percent of the time. That other 5 percent of the time, I'm pee'd. Usually only happens at large airports. Usually runs between mid forties to around fifty.http://www.x-plane.org/users/mgdbottled/FS9B752NW.jpg

I wouldn't either. But lets be for real Bigshot. Your clouds are not the stock clouds that come with FS9. That is easily visible from the shot you posted. Those are the FSW clouds that I use to use on my 9800pro as well, but have since changed them back to the originals after some serious tweaking. I can get the same frame rates as you if I changed my clouds as well, but personally I think the quality of them cannot match those of the originals.Now how about reinstalling the default clouds, set everything to max, go up to around 20,000 and retake the shot for me?BTW, higher FPS does nothing but degrade the scenery and everything else around you, especially at elevation. I know they said that doesn't happen with FS9 (as it did with FS2002) but I beg to differ. Keeping your FPS unlocked is a surefire way to lose IQ. Whether the sim runs at 20 locked or 49 unlocked, the fluidity does not change to where a difference can be noticed...however the degredation surely does. Mike P4 2.4C @3.44 285FSBAsus P4C800 Deluxe1gb Corsair XMS PC3500 Asus V9950 FX5900 Ultra 256mb 500/950SB Audigy2 Platinum ExWatercooled baby!!!Pics: http://community.webshots.com/user/chksix2002

Another example (with FPS counter shown and default FS9 Clouds, Broken 5/8, cloud volume for each is 5000ft..user defined since real weather did not permit it at the time)http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66318.jpgMikeP4 2.4C @3.44 285FSBAsus P4C800 Deluxe1gb Corsair XMS PC3500 Asus V9950 FX5900 Ultra 256mb 500/950SB Audigy2 Platinum ExWatercooled baby!!!Pics: http://community.webshots.com/user/chksix2002

Last one (promise). This one was taken over Honolulu with real weather on at almost 30,000 feet. Notice the the airport's runways (not PHNL) a little north of the DC9's nose are clearly visible. As you can tell, tweaking and knowing your system's potential is everything.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/66338.jpgMikeP4 2.4C @3.44 285FSBAsus P4C800 Deluxe1gb Corsair XMS PC3500 Asus V9950 FX5900 Ultra 256mb 500/950SB Audigy2 Platinum ExWatercooled baby!!!Pics: http://community.webshots.com/user/chksix2002

Actually, FS2k2 and FS9 are very different when it comes to framerates. I was perfectly happy with 20-22 frames with FS2k2. It was smooth. FS9 requires at least 30 frames to be completely smooth. The framerate limiter also works just the opposite. With FS2k2, graphics would degrade without the lock. With FS9, the graphics do NOT degrade with unlimited frames. Matter of fact, the graphics look better at 50fps and don't begin to degrade unless I'm over a major airport where the frames degrade down to around 20fps. Of course I run Chris' clouds. IMHO, they look just as good and the ram consumption and CPU consumption is much smaller. They still look great. I switched back to the defaults just last week. After about an hour, I went right back to Chris' clouds. I'm sure either top of the line cards will do just fine in FS9. It all depends on what the user prefers.