Hi,I heard that FS2004 has problems to work with 9700pro. Maybe MS like to work with Nvidia ??? Is that true ???Thanks,Ulisses

Not true Ulisses, I'm using a 128MB ATI 9700 Pro and FS2004 runs great, no issues at all.Sounds like somebody that's trying to sell Nivida cards came up with that one!Bear!

I will stand next to Bear and state the same thing. I run an ATI 9700 Pro and it is just..... awesome!

Im am running an ATI Radeon 9600 TX and there is nothing wrong with it in FS2004. Allthough this is not an exact answer to your question (as you mention a 9700 Pro), it indicates probably that there is also nothing wrong with other Radeons and FS2004.Jozef http://www.dse.nl/~joker32/pictures/signature.jpg

I've been running all my sims since September of last year with a 9700 Pro. Zero problems.

Thanks guys for all the feedback.Ulisses

Kyle / Bear,Any chance you've tried multimonitor with FS2004 and your Radeon 9700 Pro? If so, does FS2004 choke if you have run two 3D displays like FS2002 did, or does it keep cranking out the frames good?Gary

For those of you who have FS2k4 - what's your subjective view on framerates v 2k2?

>Kyle / Bear,>>Any chance you've tried multimonitor with FS2004 and your>Radeon 9700 Pro? If so, does FS2004 choke if you have run two>3D displays like FS2002 did, or does it keep cranking out the>frames good?>>GaryThe problem is not with FS, ATI cards do not have hardware acceleration for non-full screen windows on the second monitor.George

Frame rates are certainly a big part of everyone's concern, but my experience has been that even with the improvements (environment, scenery, autogen, and weather) FS2004 still performs slightly better than FS2002 in almost all conditions. My feeling is that if you're getting acceptable performance now with FS2002, then FS2004 will almost certainly run better on the same equipment.Bear!

It's interesting these kind of posts. Every now and then people will post things like "I've heard that Athlons don't work with Windows XP, is this true?" or "The guy at the store said I should not buy a 9700 Pro because ATI cards have lots of problems". I wonder who tells people things like that?Even if the 9700 Pro did have a problem with FS2004, it would be a driver problem and probably fixed in a driver update even before FS2004 is released.

Besides; the 9700 Pro rolls over the 5900 Ultra in real games for half the price: (too bad the 9500 Pro wasn't included in this review) http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.as...=3x5900u&page=8

Hi,Maybe it isn't only a "driver problem", the FS2004 readme has a list of issues with some ATI cards (but not the 9600/9700/9800pro).I don't know that ATI hardware version you guys are using...For those of you that don't know how to find this version number it is located on the corner of the circuit board near the connectors.XXX-XXXXX-30 and later looks like the good guy.Maybe some versions with some chipsets can have problems.I'd like to ask what MB chipset are you using with your Radeon that is working fine in FS2004.I'm buying a Radeon 9700pro or 9800pro and I want to make sure it will work just fine in FS2004.Thanks again,Ulisses

Nuts, I was hoping ATI would offer a dual 3D display solution. Thx for the info.

My original comments about ATI cards are based on costly experience. I paid 350 British Pounds for a Radeon 9800 Pro. When I finally confirmed the problem of no hardware acceleration via an indirect approach to ATI, I got no recompense from my supplier.I am still using a Ti 4600, the 9800 has been relegated to my daughter's machine.George