ATI 9700 and 9800 Pro fix at Flightsim.com

[Guest SoarPics]

For those interested in trying:http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/howto/ati2004.htm

[Guest Milamber]

Been there...Done all that....Doesn't do one thing for the menu blinking nor the text smearing issues unlike what the author claims.

[russdirks 0]

Did absolutely nothing for my system. Just made the autogen textures shimmer like crazy.

[Jimmy Angel 19]

Before you apply his suggestions, it might also be good to make sure you have a watercooled P5 running at about 6.0ghz.With all due respect to the author, setting all sliders to max might somewhow cure the text smearing problem (though I am suspicious that it won't, unless you go to windowed mode), but there's not a system on earth that's going to run that at a consistent fps unless you are flying over sticksville kansas.8xAA and 16xAF? 100 mesh? Extremely dense scenery and auto-gen? My system would walk out in protest if I tried to do that ;) ... and does anyone want to look at this sim with mip-mapping on 8? Holy shimmers, Batman.

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Greg,With all due respect this just has to be a leg pull...LOL!Mike

[Guest SoarPics]

"With all due respect this just has to be a leg pull...LOL!"Yep, Mike, I got a chuckle out of it. As Jimmy said, it would be worth trying if you had a watercooled P5 at 6.0 Ghz.The only part that isn't funny is that Flightsim.com put it on their front page.

[kerosene31 349]

I am just going to wait for the newest ati drivers. ATI is aware of the problem, and is working on a solution. http://www.ati.com/support/infobase/4256.html

[Cruachan 705]

I guess the membership here are not quite so gullible ;)Mike

[W2DR 1,859]

Been there, done all that days ago, and none of it works. (I hope he's enjoying all the pixilation from the maxxed mipmap setting though :-) ). Doesn't anybody over at FS.com ever check these "tech tips" they keep coming up with? Sigh.....Doug

[Guest Bigshot]

My settings are higher and lower in some areas with my PIV 2.53, 9700 Pro 512mb PC1066 ram. I run 4xAA and turn off truform. FS doesn't use truform anyway. Otherwise my control panel card settings are identical to the authors. Running at 1600x1200x32. I run with Terrain and Land maxed and water slider in the middle. I run with other sliders on that page maxed except terrain mesh at 90 percent and AI at ZERO and autogen turned down one notch from max. Mesh maxed out is unnecessary and both mesh and AI kill the processor. Don't need any company in the sky anyway to enjoy the sim. Each to their own in that respect, I say. Special effects is maxed. Airplane page is identical to the authors. In the weather page, I run with visibility at 90 miles, cloud draw maxed (80mi) and cloud density set on high. Otherwise, all other settings are maxed. In the hardware page everything is maxed except mipmap slider is set on 4. I lock my frames at 22 and that's where it stays. The only frame problems I have is when flying in heavy weather near the ground. Nothing on my computer except WinXP and my flight sims. No garbage running in the background. IT's a finely tuned gaming machine. Yes, I used windowed mode because of the flashing menus and haven't bothered to look at the text in the learning center yet. I assume it's like every other ATI. FS2k4 is smooth as silk as long as I don't use any airplanes that require a gig of ram.

[Guest SoarPics]

LOL Doug... just saw your post over at the FSN forums.Just callin' it the ways ya sees it. :-beerchug

[MikeAdamo 51]

Hi All,No offence to the author but, I thought it was a joke at first until I re-read it a few times. I guess if you got systems as "beefed" up as his you can afford to run with those settings but from the posts I've seen here and over there, the people that need the help have the mid to lower range systems (please don't take offence to the labeling :-) ) Yeah, if I had a Dell Dimension XPS and the Dimension 8300 using an ultra-fast 3 GHz Intel Pentium 4 processor with Hyper-Threading Technology, 800 MHz front side bus and the Intel

[W2DR 1,859]

And I haven't calmed down yet Greg. IMNSHO, it's just irresponsible for a site like FS.com to publish something like that. Many folks will, through no fault of their own, get sucked into believing that there is a bit-of-the-magic in those words. And they'll spend a lot of time, wasted time, hosing up everything they've done to-date with their system settings. Shame on FS.com...Got to go get some more medicine now....Doug

[Guest SoarPics]

Hi Doug,I believe Flightsim.com has always been very liberal about allowing folks to offer their opinions in the Op-Eds. But you're right about this one... can't see that it will do much (if any) service to the community. Hopefully, most folks will see it for what it is (that's the eternal optimist in me talking :-) ).About that medicine... I used the good old shot of Johnny Walker Black Label after my evening here last night.To MikeAdamo... "so call me stupid!"No can do, Mike. You're recent submission to this forum on the subject of tweaking the new sim is far more useful than much of what we're seeing on the Net recently. So, you'll just have to remain a bright and articulate fellow. :-beerchug

[gosta 0]

Hi Mike,the author is the same guy who has written an advert for Dell on the FS.com frontpage a few months ago - the gist of it was 'Dell is good, everything else is crap' :). Nevertheless, I dare say my system is not that fr behind(AMD Athlon XP3000+, Asus A7N8X, 1GB PC2700 RAM, Radeon 9700 Pro), and the recommended settings look absolutely horrible. Apart from the obvious, such as MipMap detail, the performance option on the Radeon does appear to have an impact on the display quality. I get much better results with 4xAA and 8xAniso with the 'Quality' option checked. Also, leaving 'Wait for Vertical Sync' at 'application preference' could be a mistake - I believe FS prefers not to use it, and the result can be a weird effect, sometimes seen when quickly panning around a plane in outside view, where parts of the tail, for example, will be left 'behind' and 'rejoin' once you stop turning. This option should be set to 'always on'I won't go into his recommended FS settings - suffice to say that he has specifically maxed out the most CPU-intensive parameters available. This explains why he is getting consistent performance with the fps slider set to unlimited. I enjoyed smooth performnce with the unlimited setting in FS2002 on my old 1GHz machine as well - the reason was that all available system resources were used up, thus there was nothing left for FS to prioritise, so the fps slider had no real purpose... In short, if 'Cap Mason' shipped his system over to my place, I doubt I would enjoy running FS on it with his settings.Cheers,Gosta.http://hifi.avsim.net/activesky/images/wxrebeta.jpg