The 295 is a dual GPU card. FSX does not support dual GPU cards. That is your problem. Try it with a single GPU card, and see if all is well.

First off my basic configuration:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Intel Dual Core E8600 3.3 Ghz8GB DDR3 Firestix Inferno running at 1333 MhzMainboard: MSI P45-8D Memroy LoverMonitor: 26" Samsung Syncmaster T260, with 1920 x 1200 pixels.Vista 64 Ultimate SP1FSX + Acceleration + Austria_X_Pro + REX , with screen resolution set to 1920 x 1200.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I also switched from a HD4870 (1GB Palit Sonic Dual) to Nvidia about 2 weeks ago. My new model is a single GPU BFG GTX 285 OCX.FSX works fine now (though not from the very beginning) but the progress in image quality and FPS compared to my old HD4870 is not as great as I great as I expected.I simply followed the recommendations (or better say the urban legend :( ) spread here on the board, that Nvidia is in any case far superior to ATI,when it comes to FSX.When I ran FSX for the first time with my new Nvidia with the same settings, that I had used before for the HD4870, the image quality was rather poor.Lots of aliasing and scenerey spikes, even much more than with the old HD4870. Only checking Anti-aliasing and unchecking Preview Direct X10 in the custom settings of FSX did improve matters somehow .Bottom line is, that the BFG GTX 285 OCX performs a little bit better than the 1GB HD4870 at FSX, if all settings are correct, but everyone should judge for himself, if such a small advantage in performance and quality justifies a price difference of about 180 €.

First off my basic configuration:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Intel Dual Core E8600 3.3 Ghz8GB DDR3 Firestix Inferno running at 1333 MhzMainboard: MSI P45-8D Memroy LoverMonitor: 26" Samsung Syncmaster T260, with 1920 x 1200 pixels.Vista 64 Ultimate SP1FSX + Acceleration + Austria_X_Pro + REX , with screen resolution set to 1920 x 1200.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I also switched from a HD4870 (1GB Palit Sonic Dual) to Nvidia about 2 weeks ago. My new model is a single GPU BFG GTX 285 OCX.FSX works fine now (though not from the very beginning) but the progress in image quality and FPS compared to my old HD4870 is not as great as I great as I expected.I simply followed the recommendations (or better say the urban legend :( ) spread here on the board, that Nvidia is in any case far superior to ATI,when it comes to FSX.When I ran FSX for the first time with my new Nvidia with the same settings, that I had used before for the HD4870, the image quality was rather poor.Lots of aliasing and scenerey spikes, even much more than with the old HD4870. Only checking Anti-aliasing and unchecking Preview Direct X10 in the custom settings of FSX did improve matters somehow .Bottom line is, that the BFG GTX 285 OCX performs a little bit better than the 1GB HD4870 at FSX, if all settings are correct, but everyone should judge for himself, if such a small advantage in performance and quality justifies a price difference of about 180

So everyone knows ... with the 185.68 driver my 295 is running FSX in dual gpu mode. I can even use alternate processing although I can't see any difference.

You did delete the FSX.CFG file before running FSX for the first time with your new card, didn't you?Tim

Not, yet bcs I didn't know, that this is a necessity when changing from an ATI to a NV card. :( I'll do it later and reportabout the result here. Anyhow thanks for the hint. :(And I must partly correct my previous post. Exactly speaking, those disturbances were no scenery spikes but flickering runways, :( fortunately they are gone now, after unchecking the Preview Direct X10 option.

I deleted the old FSX.CFG file and amazingly there were less stutters and the frame rate (measured with FRAPS)improved significantly :( Before: HD4870, 20/21 fps.After: GTX 285 OCX, 24/30 fpsSo in the end, it did pay off to spend more €€€ for an OC'ed GTX 285.

interesting reading this threadwhy do I keep seeing on reviews though that the 8800GTX/Ultra are faster than all the new cards - including the GTX285 for FSX ?is it sheer grunt ? I can' tunderstand what makes them fasterI have a 8800GTX @ Ultra speeds and its puts me off that if I upgrade my gfx, then most games will run faster - but FSX (which I play most) will be slower ?!!

interesting reading this threadwhy do I keep seeing on reviews though that the 8800GTX/Ultra are faster than all the new cards - including the GTX285 for FSX ?is it sheer grunt ? I can' tunderstand what makes them fasterI have a 8800GTX @ Ultra speeds and its puts me off that if I upgrade my gfx, then most games will run faster - but FSX (which I play most) will be slower ?!!

To which "reviews" do you refer? Tom's Hardware's charts I presume, since no one else out there really uses FSX for testing, and even Tom's has stopped using it with their latest 2009 charts. The only other recent use of FSX for benchmarking purposes that I've run across on the net has been in this CPU performance scaling article @ HardOCP. Using only one graphics card though (and a 4870 X2 at that) so no useful comparison of GPU performance can be made. It's simple. FSX raw framerate is dependant on sheer clockspeed, both of the CPU and the GPU. This is why older 8800 Ultra cards outperform newer GTX 260/280 cards - the 8800 Ultra has a higher core clock @ 612MHz vs 575/602MHz for the 260/280 respectively. Now if you were to switch over to a 285 which has an even higher core clock @ 648 you'd see the 285 out-performing the older 8800 Ultra. If you buy one of those fancy pre-overclocked cards at near 700MHz (or DIY as I have done) you'll see an even larger difference.

It's simple. FSX raw framerate is dependant on sheer clockspeed, both of the CPU and the GPU. This is why older 8800 Ultra cards outperform newer GTX 260/280 cards - the 8800 Ultra has a higher core clock

Also compare the Video Memory Bandwidth specs (in GB/sec).. the 8800 Ultra held the title over newer cards until very recently.

Also compare the Video Memory Bandwidth specs (in GB/sec).. the 8800 Ultra held the title over newer cards until very recently.

Not entirely accurate. Even the GTX 260 with its 448-bit memory bus has more available bandwidth than any 8800 Ultra ever did with its 384-bit bus. Let's not forget the GTX 280/285 models with their full 512-bit buses. It is core clockspeed alone and the corresponding triangle setup rate which clockspeed governs that allows the GTX 280/285s to surpass their 8800 Ultra predecessors in FSX.

Hi to all from to the Greece...I have pny-gtx 295x2 an i running fsx good in in 1920x1200 and AA is off, but the others all is configuration maximum performance. I have inside included all sceneries (Greece, London,Germany, etc), many lots of aircraft, add-on's, REX2, etc. If someone test nvidia 480 on fsx the same configuration pls tell me....ThanksMy system is : Windows:7 Ultimate 64-bit memory:4 dimm 2gb (dual channel) corsair dominator 1066 ddr2 (8gb) mobo:asus p5q processor:intel Core 2 Duo E8500 graphic:pny-gtx 295x2 power supply:Thermaltake Tough Power 850 XT PSU view:iiyama ProLite B2403WS 24' connection:HDMI to HDMI internet:Conn-x 24mbs