In FS9, is there any real diference or gain to be had between 128 megs on video vs. 256 megs onboard. I have read so many different articles that say yes, no, etc. it is hard for me to say.The cards I have tested are the 9800 pro ATI 128 meg and the 9800XT 256 meg.I have both of these cards for a few years and I never saw a diference.I tried both on a DELL 8300 3.2 Hyper-threading computer. Maybe it is my settings.How much does FS9 use video on board memory?.I see no difference between them.I cant afford a new rigout and I am using the 3.2 DELL 8300 currently.Thanks for any thoughts and I know the cards are outdated.I was doing some benchmarking.R. Martin

My last computer had 1gig memory and a 128meg video card. It could run FS9 at with all sliders at 100% with no difficulty. My newer computer has 2gig memory and a 256meg video card and I see no difference in FS9 performance. FSX is another story.

Dude, your computer lays waste to my computer. I couldnt touch FSX with my DELL 8300. FS9 runs great, although, honestly, I cant turn all the sliders up at my add-on airports like, ie: Aerosim (Aerosoft) KDEN. I do have my sliders maxed except a couple, like my scenery density is turned back a notch. I think I run my cloud settings turned down to 72% also.Thanks for the reply, I see no difference either as far as on board video ram is concerned.Roger M.

It depends on what you're using. If you fly high polygon count models with 32-bit textures, like the PMDG 747, it will make a difference, especially if you fly from the VC. If you fly with very high screen resolution (i.e. 1600x1200) and/or use multiple monitors from the one video card, it'll matter, at least if you have you config optimized for the higher texture bandwidth requirement.Also, if your CPU isn't keeping up with things it won't matter how much VRAM you have...and likewise, if your system is really strong and you have the frames locked at a rate much lower than it can sustain, the potential frame rate loss due to the additional texture swapping may not be apparent.So...the answer really is "it depends." Don't want people reading this thread to draw the conclusion that video RAM simply doesn't make a difference in FS9...because it certainly can.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

And adding to w6kd, also depends on the settings for AA and AFas higher values use more memory. Second, the MIPS setting also effects the amount of video memory as more textures are loadedup to the GPU if you have higher MIPS cos you have higher AF.I guess same conclusion, depends, though a GPU of that level Ithink you should for the larger memory.Tom

Thanks for the input guys. I agree, it all depends on what you have in your simulator that is running along with all the AI traffic. I went to Cloud 9 KDEN and Cloud 9 KDTW and it gave me an extra 5 FPS at both airports, and it is very detailed scenery.FS Tampa has good airports, KSAN is real cool. I get good FPS with it.I keep my sim locked at 20 FPS.I run allot of detailed scenery and allot of AI traffic and I only get 13 FPS at KDEN and it is very detailed.I wish a KJFK would have been done other than the one that was done by ...I cant remember the company, but I have it.It looks okay, similar to all the others.DELL 8300 is suppose to be a great rig but I dont think it is that great of a gaming rig. I run 3.2 P4 with 250 gig SATA, 2 gigs of PC3200, ATI 9800XT 256 meg on the INTEL board. Just gets by, maybe I expect too much.I thought performance would be better than it is.I feel the kind of disappointment that some FSX users feel to be honest.

>In FS9, is there any real diference or gain to be had between>128 megs on video vs. 256 megs onboard. Try to find out yourself. It is very easy to do. Get the ATI-Traytools (they ship e.g. together with the free and fantastic Omega drivers for ATI cards).There is an option which you can find under --> With this onscreen display you can show in one of the four corners of your monitor e.g.:- FPS- memory usage- free video memory- free texture memoryand many more.I have the ATI 9800XT with 128MB and with Fs9 the video memory is always something between 45-112Mb free. Same with texture memory, always enough available, even with more complex sceneries. So I suppose this graphic card is more than sufficient.On the other side with Trainz 2006 after some minutes all video and textur memory is full and I think because of the way they programed the handling of the graphic resources the card might be slowing down the game...Mick!