I have just upgraded from a Nvidia 4200 (128mb) to an ATI 9800 Pro (128mb). I just wanted to crosscheck with a few of you guys to make sure that we are all on the same page here as far as the numbers are concerned. What I have found is very little increase in overall framerates. However, I can turn up most settings to the max, where as I could not with the 4200ti. Here is my scenario: Weather Clouds: scatteredVisibility: 30 milesPrecipitation: noneWind Speed: noneDefault Seattle International Airport with C-172 on 34R

Man, that hurts, I don't ever think I have gotten a non-response post before. Is the question too complicated? I'll try and break it down if you don't understand what I am asking.Robb

Hi, Robb.I think that the reason why you got no answer it

Yep, seems that your system is running fine. I think the real problem is that you're expecting too much from it. Here are some changes I recommend:AA x 4 and AF x 16 --- set to "Performance"Terrain mesh complexity: --- try this at 85-90Terrain detail - Land and Water: High (maxed out)Water effects: Low (middle setting) --- this config now saves you resources, but you sacrifice bump mapping in the water. Keep in mind that if you decide to enable bump mapping (moving the "Water Effects" slider full right) the performance hit will be noticeable.Scenery complexity: Extremely Dense (maxed out)Autogen density: Extremely Dense (maxed out) --- you should consider bringing these two down one notch.Ground scenery casts shadows checked --- this is a big time perf killer... turn it off.Sight distance: 150 mi (maxed out)Cloud draw distance: 80 mi (maxed out) --- lower both of these. In RL you wouldn't be able to see the detail at these distances that a computer will try to draw. Try setting both to 40 or 50.Sound Quality (maxed out) --- In RL, flying is rarely a great audio experience. Pull this slider back a couple of notches in the sim, and in DirectX set sound acceleration to "Basic".Greg

"What I have found is very little increase in overall framerates. However, I can turn up most settings to the max, where as I could not with the 4200ti.""but increasing the settings to max leaves me with about the same amount of frames per second that I had with my Nvidia 4200 card with about mid settings."I don't understand why you do not consider that an improvement?Kurt M

Thanks for the response. I guess I did answer my own question in a way. However, I was expecting to get an increase in framerates simply by replacing the 4200 with the 9800 and using the 4200 settings. That increase did not occur. I was then thinking that perhaps something was wrong with my computer because of the improved framerate performance I had been reading about from people who upgraded to the 9800. So, I can basically max everything out with the 9800 and get better eye candy but no increase in frame rates. I was just wondering if that was normal. Your insight helped. I need to the the 3dmark01 and run it.Thanks,Robb

Thanks Greg for your insight. I have not tried setting my AA and AF to Performance rather than quality. I will try that this evening. When I experimented with it, I saw no increase in performance when I reduced the scenery complexity and autogen density when using the 9800. That goes with most other settings as well. I have not tried the sound quality tab but will do that when I get home.Thanks,Robb

Hi Kurt -- I do consider what I have written above to be an improvement. I was just hoping I would get more framerates. I guess we can't have it all. But, from what I gather from your post (and the others) is that I am getting performance on parr with my computer and settings. I wanted to make sure nothing was obviously wrong with my computer and components.Thanks,Robb

>Hi Kurt -- I do consider what I have written above to be an>improvement. I was just hoping I would get more framerates. >I guess we can't have it all. But, from what I gather from>your post (and the others) is that I am getting performance on>parr with my computer and settings. I wanted to make sure>nothing was obviously wrong with my computer and components.>>Thanks,>>RobbHi Robb,But you did get FPS increase! Wha???well your "raw"(No or low AA/AF) FPS are a reflection of your System- Raw CPU+ memory subsystem and then about 10-15% based on your video cards power to move unfiltered (AA/AF) data to the display (this is the highest FPS you will see)...yer TI runing at say 300+ mhz compared to the pros 400+ mhz will not change much of that total "raw" equation, the change occures as you have noted while turning up settings of AA and AF...Ahhh trying to stay >closer:)

Thanks Paul, that was the kind of information I was looking for initially. I now can be quite sure that nothing is wrong with my system setup.Thanks,Robb