Back to the problem. I believe my current processor (Intel E8400 overclocked to 4 Ghz) is throwing more data than my 320Mb 8800 GTS can handle. That is why, I believe, my framerate increase has been so small between the E8400 clocked at 3.0 to the overclocked 4.0 Ghz - hardly noticeable. The 250GTS 55 nm has the 512Mb option. I think I will go with that one because I am using XP. The 250 uses less power than my 90mm 8800 GTS 320Mb and the 250 also has GDDR3 memory. Those factors should all get my framerates up to where they should be based on my E8400 4Ghz overclock.Do you guys see any better bang for the buck option other than the 250GTS for my situation?Thanks,RH

Back to the problem. I believe my current processor (Intel E8400 overclocked to 4 Ghz) is throwing more data than my 320Mb 8800 GTS can handle. That is why, I believe, my framerate increase has been so small between the E8400 clocked at 3.0 to the overclocked 4.0 Ghz - hardly noticeable. The 250GTS 55 nm has the 512Mb option. I think I will go with that one because I am using XP. The 250 uses less power than my 90mm 8800 GTS 320Mb and the 250 also has GDDR3 memory. Those factors should all get my framerates up to where they should be based on my E8400 4Ghz overclock.Do you guys see any better bang for the buck option other than the 250GTS for my situation?Thanks,RH

I don't know about your particular combination of kit but you might like to see what happened when I went from an 8800 Ultra to a GTX 285 on an [email protected] with DDR3 RAM:http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=248987&hl=However, there are so many variables involved that it is extremely difficult to predict what your experience would be with your proposed upgrade. You may well be right in suspecting that your GPU has become a bottleneck. But as has already been pointed out, it is also possible that the DDR2 RAM and/or the timings on your RAM, are holding you back. Last year I went from an E8500@~4GHz with DDR2 to an E8600@~4.3GHz with DDR3. I am pretty sure that what made the single biggest improvement in fluidity (IMHO measurable, if at all, by how much the minimum and average fps go up, rather than by looking at changes in the maximum fps) was the speed and timings of the DDR3 RAM. New kit can produce quite subtle changes. For example, this year I went from the E8600 to an i7 [email protected]: the framerates are a bit higher but the biggest improvements are better smoothness in demanding situations as well as more snappiness in texture loading and consequent "sharpness" of image, rather than a massive leap in maximum fps. More generally, without an idea of what sort of performance you're already getting and what settings you use, it is difficult to judge what sort of improvement it might be realistic for you to expect given any particular new component.All of that is a long-winded way of saying "don't expect miracles, whatever GPU you buy".Tim

I don't know about your particular combination of kit but you might like to see what happened when I went from an 8800 Ultra to a GTX 285 on an [email protected] with DDR3 RAM:http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=248987&hl=However, there are so many variables involved that it is extremely difficult to predict what your experience would be with your proposed upgrade. You may well be right in suspecting that your GPU has become a bottleneck. But as has already been pointed out, it is also possible that the DDR2 RAM and/or the timings on your RAM, are holding you back. Last year I went from an E8500@~4GHz with DDR2 to an E8600@~4.3GHz with DDR3. I am pretty sure that what made the single biggest improvement in fluidity (IMHO measurable, if at all, by how much the minimum and average fps go up, rather than by looking at changes in the maximum fps) was the speed and timings of the DDR3 RAM. New kit can produce quite subtle changes. For example, this year I went from the E8600 to an i7 [email protected]: the framerates are a bit higher but the biggest improvements are better smoothness in demanding situations as well as more snappiness in texture loading and consequent "sharpness" of image, rather than a massive leap in maximum fps. More generally, without an idea of what sort of performance you're already getting and what settings you use, it is difficult to judge what sort of improvement it might be realistic for you to expect given any particular new component.All of that is a long-winded way of saying "don't expect miracles, whatever GPU you buy".Tim

I checked out your earlier post. Those were super framerate increases. I am using XP though, so I think a 1Gb card would make me run out of main system memory. The only 512 option is the 250. And, I can pop one in for just over $100.00. My other plan was to buy a i7 940 D0 and overclock it to 4.0, go with about 6Gb of DDR3 RAM, and get a videocard like yours on Windows 7 64. That way I get a good FS boost and can upgrade CPUs again with the 32nm Intels come out next year (to get the i7 CPU up to 5Ghz).

Hallo everybody(this may be an old topic I just cannot find it)My setup 1stWin xp 32 profsx dedicated velociraptor 300 gb(HD)q9650 [email protected] gig ddr2 1066nvidia 285(1gig)(Main) attach to a 22" monitornvidia gts 8800(640)(2nd)attach to a 2nd 22"monitorwhen I enable the second minitor the frame drops 50% Why?And Please how can i get smooth frame with a second monitorThank you! Tank you! Thank you!Stefan

Do you ever have problems running out of RAM in XP because you use such a large memoried (IGhz) videocard?RH

Do you ever have problems running out of RAM in XP because you use such a large memoried (IGhz) videocard?RH

I RobbieHenot at all,actually nvidia shares the workload between the two

You should listen to the FSBreak interview of Mathijs Kok HERE. If you don't feel like listening to an 1+ hour interview, Mathijs said that FS has better performance with low-end video cards. It means your FS would not perform better if you upgrade your video card for a more recent one. It sounds strange, but Mathijs is the main project manager at Aerosoft, I think he knows what he is talking about...I think he's right, but I would be more than glad to have your opinion about this.Eric

My experience with triple monitors suggests Mathijs may be correct. In my FS9 setup, I'm using 2, very old, GeForce FX5200 GPUs powered by an equally ancient AMD XP2200 1.8 GHz CPU. As far as I can tell from experiments, my limiting factor appears to be CPU. In tests I've run, the GPUs are apparently capable of delivering twice my typical/actual FPS- if only the CPU & RAM (2GB) could keep up.Clearly, there needs to be balance between CPU & GPU(s).Alex Reid