Anything less than Anisotropic Filtering is a whole decade step back to bad image quality. Use Tri if you must but, its god awful and suggest you find another way to regain performance.Back in 2001:http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/dis...-filtering.html

I have great performance, so can use either one. I have no need to "regain" anything.And I respectfully disagree with your "...whole decade step back to bad image quality" statement. FSX is only about 4 years old. An RTM install of it DEFAULTS to Trilinear (or it might actually be Bilinear...but I'm sure it ISN'T Anisotrpic). Just like it defaults to a locked 20 FPS setting. I'm sure the ACES guys would have made it default to Anisotropic 4 years ago if "anything less" was a "decade step back" at that time...or if 60 FPS was "required" for FSX to perform properly they sure as hell wouldn't have defaulted the install to 20 FPS locked (but that's another topic that has been beat to death already in other posts).I'm sure there are still users of FSX reading this thread that don't have the latest and greatest over-clocked i7 with latest GPUs, or even a Quad Core. Anisotropic Filtering to them COULD be a killer on their system, and they would get better overall FSX performance with Trilinear and different BufferPools settings than all the "magic" numbers being posted here. All of the settings being posted here are still going to be SYSTEM SPECIFIC depending on the hardware the end-user has and the FSX settings they have enabled (and at what levels, like a 3-wide monitor resolution of 5040 x 1050 vs a single monitor at 1920 x 1080).That's the only point I was making. To say "Trilinear is obsolete by a decade" is a poor recommendation, as it certainly will not apply to everyone reading this thread.

I have great performance, so can use either one. I have no need to "regain" anything.And I respectfully disagree with your "...whole decade step back to bad image quality" statement. FSX is only about 4 years old. To say "Trilinear is obsolete by a decade" is a poor recommendation, as it certainly will not apply to everyone reading this thread.

We have been using Anisotropic filtering since before the days of FS98 using single core CPUs, not just since FSX - good greif! However it is done on the GPU.As far as the "who", It will apply to anyone who has at least a Gforce4TI or ATI9800 or even older GPU in fact.You may not want to use Aniso if if you use say a netbook or laptop or desktop, with integrated graphics - yes, by all means use tri then. But as stated if you feel you need to regain performance by turning off anisotropic filtering there are other areas I would recommend to head first as Tri/Bilinear filtering gives the user terrible image quality in comparison to Aniso, especially for a sim in which you view the terrain textures at various angles all the time can result in very blurred textures - which is why we have Aniso in the first place. Might as well go back to VGA display too right? - Hey 1000 FPS! :(

Well this thread has certantly run the gammut, thats for darn sure and I think the mods should close it. I dont care what tweek you use or have heard of the bottom line is that no one tweek will ever work for everybody. That is why we all say YMMV. With that being said though I run Anisotropic and the image quality is far better and I actually get nicer performance with it than I do with tri, kinda like the lower my Autogen the worse my performance anything below dense. If you have never tried it you should and see the difference. I wish someone would make a FSX specific GPU that would cater to what FSX wants and needs such as the mem, speed, shaders, bandwidth. It is a good thing Nick N is on vacation right now as I am sure he would have something to say about this thread for sure. Good night all and happy flying!

Well this thread has certantly run the gammut, thats for darn sure and I think the mods should close it.

I think it's absolutely not up to you to decide that. And no thread should be closed if there is something one can say.

Hi Word Not Allowed,I run BufferPools at 500000, if I run them higher I get a black sky, if I increase BP even higher I get a full black screen. So for my system, 500000 seems to work the best.

Thanks for the suggestion, I tried that. Same result as with BP=0, the whole flight usually goes OK, but in the end, or after a longer time, if I attempt switch back, I get graphical errors...

I run at 1920X1200 at 8x and 16x so I am going to upgrade from a 260 192 to a GTX 285(trade up when the GTX 480 comes out) and see if that gives me a little more headroom to play with. I have noticed that unless I have autogen turned completely off, my framerates suffer greatly. May have to OC the I7 a little more to help with that issue. I currently have HT turned on using the affinity mask setting of 85. The BP tweak hasn't really done anything for my system.

I think it's absolutely not up to you to decide that. And no thread should be closed if there is something one can say.

Calm yourself Word Not Allowed, :( I think what he was trying to say was that with 24 pages and almost 600 post later, including the misleading title, there isn't anything new being posted that already hasn't been posted, so its exactly what he said = YMMV. :( Frankly I 3rd it to be shut down, Or if anything the MODs could have provided some help in the beginning by renaming the misleading subject title. :( however we do need someplace to hide the garbage, lord knows we dont need a any more BP=0 threads to open up. :(Anyways, for most of you higher end I7 users the real clue to eliminating stutters that has nothing to do with the software has already been alluded to by Peter Dawson and Flyingbits but unfortunately for some got ignored (memory & QPI:Uncore).

Calm yourself Word Not Allowed, :( I think what he was trying to say was that with 24 pages and almost 600 post later, including the misleading title, there isn't anything new being posted that already hasn't been posted, so its exactly what he said = YMMV. :( Frankly I 3rd it to be shut down, Or if anything the MODs could have provided some help in the beginning by renaming the misleading subject title. :( however we do need someplace to hide the garbage, lord knows we dont need a any more BP=0 threads to open up. :(Anyways, for most of you higher end I7 users the real clue to eliminating stutters that has nothing to do with the software has already been alluded to by Peter Dawson and Flyingbits but unfortunately for some got ignored (memory & QPI:Uncore).

Oh joy, let's open a new one, with a title "To BP=0 or not to BP=0, the question is now". B) Maybe a little misleading title, but it serves its purpose I think: if anyone want to give it a go, he can ask in the end of the thread. I believe that there will be enough people to give him a straight answer! And noone is required to read through 600 posts...

Hi,I agree, keep the forum topic open, for those that don't want to read any posts in this 600 post topic, don't mouse click on this topic anymore. Easy enough, and for those of us intrested in continuing forward will have an opportunity to do so.

Hi, all!Here is a thread at ORBX forums for all passionate tweakers. Title: The super, duper, ultimate tweak; get the best smoothness and performance in FSXPosted by John Venema!http://orbxsystems.com/forums/index.php?topic=11307.0Enjoy :(

Hi, all!Here is a thread at ORBX forums for all passionate tweakers. Title: The super, duper, ultimate tweak; get the best smoothness and performance in FSXPosted by John Venema!http://orbxsystems.com/forums/index.php?topic=11307.0Enjoy :(

LOL, and I expected another BP=0 thread!!! :(

Oh joy, let's open a new one, with a title "To BP=0 or not to BP=0, the question is now". :( Maybe a little misleading title, but it serves its purpose I think: if anyone want to give it a go, he can ask in the end of the thread. I believe that there will be enough people to give him a straight answer! And noone is required to read through 600 posts...

Another BP thread is Exactly what we dont need!!! "enough people to give him a straight answer! And noone is required to read through 600 posts" Now that's funny! :(

LOL, and I expected another BP=0 thread!!! :(

He didn't know about BP=0 yet, otherwise he wouldn't have said what he said. :( If you can make BP=0 work, it's like getting a new computer for free. I agree with the of what he said there, the less tweaks, the better, but the BP tweak (zero or anything higher) is too good to pass. Even when you do have the fastest machine, BP can make it better.

He didn't know about BP=0 yet, otherwise he wouldn't have said what he said. :( If you can make BP=0 work, it's like getting a new computer for free. I agree with the of what he said there, the less tweaks, the better, but the BP tweak (zero or anything higher) is too good to pass. Even when you do have the fastest machine, BP can make it better.

Its also true that BP=0 can induce artifacts and bring you to Black screen really quick.BP=0 YMMV=True :(

I run at 1920X1200 at 8x and 16x so I am going to upgrade from a 260 192 to a GTX 285(trade up when the GTX 480 comes out) and see if that gives me a little more headroom to play with. I have noticed that unless I have autogen turned completely off, my framerates suffer greatly. May have to OC the I7 a little more to help with that issue.

You'll hardly notice the difference, AI: My old GTX9800 gives as good as any screenshot I've seen - especially since going to aniso. Your bottleneck right now is sitting there at 3.2gig. That proc is hardly warmed up! 3.8 is minimum with the i7, and FSX looks pretty good at that. At 4 - you have headroom. With the mods talked about here you can run heavy sky and good traffic, low down at 250 kts.I did try DX10 with the current setup and got the blurries that were mentioned earlier.

Really! When I set to that, I get pretty much stuttering... but will try again with the technique of deleting shader folders. Maybe it's different. I was running this whole flight with BP=0 and it went well, just until the last switch!

BP=0 totally messes me up with memory starvation. nVidia 285, 1 gig.jja