An update using 8.2 drivers. Everything else the same as the 8.4 test above. The 8.4 readings are in bold.4X Box...23 - 15 - 27 (25 - 16 - 27) 2X Box...30 - 25 - 45 (29 - 25 - 45) So it would seem the 8.4 drivers do not improve fps. It's the AA 2X setting that is the key.I'll fly with 8.2 for a while and get a feel for how they perform. Of course most of the time we're not flying through cumulonimbus so performance should be as good as above or even better providing there aren't too many cloud layers which also has a big impact.

Thanks for doing the tests a bit more systematically.It seems that AA is the big hit. I am not sure why I did not figure this out earlier

Thanks. I found it quite useful too. If you're correct that AA is more software orientated than hardware then we need to test each new set of drivers. If you haven't got a test strategy feel free to nick mine above. :-)I'm watching for the release of the next set of Omega drivers here http://www.omegadrivers.net/ They are usually better than the default ones. For some reason no new ones have been released for a while but hopefully when they are performance will improve.I've just completed a flight from EDDS down to Milan and even with a lot of cloud at Stuttgart the frame rate stayed in the 20s and soon jumped up to the locked 30 where it stayed for most of the flight albeit with clearing wx.I do find in my test situation that when I slew upwards at EGLC it is very stuttery at low altitudes. I have installed different textures using ASG so I'm wondering if any have a higher fr hit that the default ones. Are you using a different set and if so which ones?

See PM

Hi guys,I am eagerly monitoring this thread as I reecently bought a 3870 and am experiencing the same issue... sigh.I have not had the time to conduct experiments the way you have so please continue to keep this thread public or at least post valuable conclusions and thoughts here.Thank you for your effort./ Regards, Poul

Hi Paul,I started the PM - sorry about that.Here is my theory:In general, I think ATI does more AA in software than hardware. So, if clouds are numerous, close (i.e. they take up a big portion of a high res screen), AND they require significant AA (just a guess), then ATI cards may not perform well when AA is set high. Ray did some tests that are consistent with this. That is, low AA (2X box) gives much better FPS when clouds are significant.For me, I turned down AA to 2X box so that I don

I've had a reply from ATI Support regarding the drop in fps in cloud. Here's what he said...I just tested FSX with the acceleration pack installed at 1920 x 1200 and only got a framerate drop of 2 fps when going through clouds. (under DX9) under DX10 there was a little more frame rate drop but only 5 fps which isn't surprising since there are more graphical effects.The game seems pretty CPU limited as the framerate doesn't really change at low resolutions.Framerate near ground 10 - 11fps or soFramerate in sky 15 - 20ishFramerate going through clouds 12 - 15fpsThose were also pretty much the same framerates at 1024 x 768 too (ingame AA enabled for both)Tested on my 3870X2 card under Vista X64 SP1 with my 6000+ AM2 chip with 4GB of ram.I would want some Fraps videos from Nvidia users showing no framerate loss in clouds before I would want test it further since their cards are supposedly more awesome (doesnt seem likely to me)He wasn't specific about his cloud settings but is it significant he's only seeing a small reduction in fps when he has the Acceleration Pack installed? I thought this was the same as SP2 as far as DX9 users were concerned? Can anyone confirm this?Also, if anyone who has a 8800 card and FRAPS and could record a video flying through heavy cloud to show no fps reduction could they post here please. I'd really like to get to the bottom of this.Thanks.

>Those were also pretty much the same framerates at 1024 x 768>too (ingame AA enabled for both)>Does anybody know what in game AA is? If its equivalent to 2x AA then I am not suppressed with his result.

Hi tyrodes,I posted this in my test report yesterday... The AA setting in FSX equates to 4X.

>I just tested FSX with the acceleration pack installed at>1920 x 1200 and only got a framerate drop of 2 fps when going>through clouds. (under DX9) under DX10 there was a little more>frame rate drop but only 5 fps which isn't surprising since>there are more graphical effects.>>The game seems pretty CPU limited as the framerate doesn't>really change at low resolutions.>>Framerate near ground 10 - 11fps or so>Framerate in sky 15 - 20ish>Framerate going through clouds 12 - 15fps>>Those were also pretty much the same framerates at 1024 x 768>too (ingame AA enabled for both)>>Tested on my 3870X2 card under Vista X64 SP1 with my 6000+ AM2>chip with 4GB of ram.>>I would want some Fraps videos from Nvidia users showing no>framerate loss in clouds before I would want test it further>since their cards are supposedly more awesome (doesnt seem>likely to me)Ray,Well, I don't really know what to say but those are some pretty arrogant comments from ATI (at leat in my opinion...."more awesome"). Sorry, I'm kinda chuckling to myself as I read this. The above statements from ATI tech support are to say the least very vague. I can 100% guarantee you that the support technician did not fly in a heavy cloud cover environment. It's one thing to fly through a cloud, its an entirely differnert scenario flying in and through a heavy cloud cover enviromnent.I'm also curious as to where the ATI technician got the idea that Nvidia users experience no loss in FPS. Nvidia users do experience a loss in FPS in a heavily cloud covered environment albeit to a tune of a few FPS not to the 50% or more loss in frame experienced with the 3870X2.I'm very busy at work ATM and it looks as if I will be working this weekend. However, when time permits I will set something up and run an identical scenario on the 8800GTX and then the 3870X2 running fraps in both instances to capture video.Also, somewhere earlier in this post you were stating that you are still using the 8.2 driver. It is my understanding that if you are using the 8.2 or earlier driver, you are only running on one card of the 3870x2 as crossfire was not enabled properly until 8.3 onwards.I can also confirm the performance decrease has nothing to due with the cloud textures themselves. I use ASX but I do not use their textures. I use FEX textures with the same results. For the heck of it (when I had the 3870x2 installed) I also tried using the ASG textures with he same dismal results.I can also assure you that the visual image quality of the ATI card running at 2x box in FSX cannot even begin to compete with the Nvidia card running at 8xs. The difference is like night and day.I bought the ATI card with the intent of replacing the 8800GTX. The reality of it is the ATI card no where near performs to the level of the 8800GTX. I do not know if it is because of a hardware issue or a driver issue. Beleive me, I'm not happy to have a brand new $450 ATI video card sitting in its box.

Hi sargeski,Thanks for your reply....those are some pretty arrogant comments from ATI (at leat in my opinion...."more awesome").As a ATI employee he probably thinks their cards are 'awesome'.The above statements from ATI tech support are to say the least very vague.Yes. I would have preferred him to be specific about the cloud settings he used. I've asked him to report on the test I tried further up this thread. I suspect that will reveal a rather different picture.I'm also curious as to where the ATI technician got the idea that Nvidia users experience no loss in FPS. Nvidia users do experience a loss in FPS in a heavily cloud covered environment albeit to a tune of a few FPS not to the 50% or more loss in frame experienced with the 3870X2.That might be down to my interpretation of your comment on the difference between your 3870X2 and the 8800GTX... For example in an identical scenario, with identical weather with heavy clouds the 3870x2 will drop to a crippling 8-10 FPS (even when reducing cloud textures to 256x256) and the 8800GTX will maintain 24-30FPS (with textures set 1024x1024). I took that to mean your fps didn't change. i.e. it maintained the same values as in a clear sky. Perhaps you can advise by how much the fps dropped in 7/8 cumulus base 3000ft, top 13000ft please.However, when time permits I will set something up and run an identical scenario on the 8800GTX and then the 3870X2 running fraps in both instances to capture video.That would be brilliant, thanks.It is my understanding that if you are using the 8.2 or earlier driver, you are only running on one card of the 3870x2 as crossfire was not enabled properly until 8.3 onwards.I've toggled back and forth between 8.2 and 8.4 and didn't notice any difference in fps. However, I've discovered a feature in ATI Tray Tools that shows the actual RAM available so I'll see if that changes with 8.4. The CrossFire option in ATI Tray Tools is automatically checked which suggests it's recognising the Crossfire config.I can also confirm the performance decrease has nothing to due with the cloud textures themselves. I use ASX but I do not use their textures. I use FEX textures with the same results. For the heck of it (when I had the 3870x2 installed) I also tried using the ASG textures with he same dismal results.Okay, thanks. I think we can safely assume ASX cloud textures have no appreciable impact on performance.I can also assure you that the visual image quality of the ATI card running at 2x box in FSX cannot even begin to compete with the Nvidia card running at 8xs. The difference is like night and day.I'm going to need convincing on that claim. ;-) At 1920*1200 I fail to see the need for extensive AA. A couple of screen shots would help. Might need to crop it to keep within forum rules.Beleive me, I'm not happy to have a brand new $450 ATI video card sitting in its box.That makes two of us. I had great hopes for this card but even the educated IT press can hoodwink us it seems. :-(Cheers,

>I'm going to need convincing on that claim. At 1920*1200 I fail to see the need for extensive AA. A couple of screen shots would help. Might need to crop it to keep within forum rules.Ray,The problem lies within the fact that a screen shot cannot tell the true story. I am at an advantage because I own both cards and can experience first hand the difference in quality with FSX running (and it is VERY noticable). However, screenshots always look really nice and do not necessarily covey graphically what is experienced witin FSX itself.When I do the video captures, I will also do some screen captures. I'm sure you will see a difference in the video. I'm not sure how much of a difference you will see in the screen shots.

Allow me to chime in...We all know that FSX is very CPU bound and I think that may explain why the ATi guy does not see a reduction in FPS when flying near clouds; his FSX is configured so that he gets very low FPS (around 10-15) no matter what weather he is flying in. So from his test:"Framerate near ground 10 - 11fps or so"Low framerate because the CPU is the bottleneck (probably too much AI, autogen etc.)."Framerate in sky 15 - 20ish"Higher framerate because he is now clear of the airport with all its jetways, vehicles and stuff."Framerate going through clouds 12 - 15fps"Slightly lower framerate as the CPU is also being loaded a little more in clouds.Thus, this test is bottlenecked more or less by the CPU and does not reveal any shortcomings of the GPU.Just a theory.../ Cheers, Poul

Hi sargeski,<>I wouldn't disagree with that statement. Just like a slideshow isn't the same as a movie.How will you make the videos available? An upload to AvSim, private email to requestees or YouTube?Thanks,

Hi Poul,FSX is CPU-bound for mosst current processors (depending on settings) but his problem is two-fold.1) His processor and the 3870X2 are a complete mismatch in terms of FSX. You would never spend that much on that card if you had that CPU.2) His weather settings are not known so we can't draw any satisfactory conclusions from his brief test.Once I can get him to run a proper test he might see the problem. But the most important evidence will be sargeski's two videos showing inconrovertably that the 8800GTX does not suffer the same problems in cloud as the 3870X2.