I rarely pay any attention to what FPS I am getting while flying. I just want the best performance I can see.All I know is with these drivers FS9 is performing smoother and more fluid than ever. As far as I am concerned these drivers are a keeper on my system.AMD 2700+1gig PC3200 DDRMSI GF4 4800SE Video

I tried the 52.16s, but for my older Ti4200 system, I still get slightly better fps and clarity with the 30.82s. Steve J.XP1800+/512/Ti4200(64)/WinXPHomeSP1

I have 4600ti 128, P4 2.4 g, 1.5 gig mem, and I get 30 fps+ on every view EXCEPT the 2d panel. Why is this? What is intersting, is that it does not matter which res I run at, or if I have sliders maxed or not. The best fps I can get on 2d, is 15. Any ideas?Thanks.Conrad

The guy fixed the banner, and apologized. Get over it.

Try lowering the Anistropic Filtering (AF) setting.

Would those driver work with video card. See me specs.Thanks,Bill

That was my same problem that started that huge thread on the display.cfg file. Changing the sliders seemed to do nothing on my 4200ti.....http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/Geofdog2.jpg

>Try lowering the Anistropic Filtering (AF) setting.From the looks of it Nvidia already beat him to ithttp://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTM3LDI=Whether that applies just to the FX line or not I don't know, but it could explain sudden performance boosts for some ppl.

I was running the 45.23 and just switched to the 52.16 driver.Having everything set as close to the same as possible, with the 45.23 I was getting 18.6 in 2D view and 14.8 in 3D view.After installing the 52.16 driver I am now getting 20.4 in 2D view and 18.6 in 3D view.This is with most sliders maxed 3D clouds at 100% but with the frame saving FSW download and AI traffic at 33%. I am running a P4 2.4 533mhz and a Ti 4200. View and flickering seem about the same. I was hoping for some clearing of the flickering but dosen't appear to be any. Maybe next driver version.Chuck

I know this is a minor gripe, and especially when coming from a "dialup" user,But would it be SO hard for NVIDIA to release a html, .txt or .doc version of their release notes? PDF is a GREAT tool for converting "printed" material in electronic form. But to use PDF on already "electronic" media is a huge waste.It took nearly 5 minutes just to download the release notes.How hard would it have been for them to convert that document into HTML, and allow us to bring it up through a browser?Like I said, PDF is great to convert printed media into electronic format, but since these release notes are never "published" in paper form, the use of PDF just seems backwards (unless they, for some reason, feel the need to tight document control).Like I said, a minor gripe, but it did steal quite a bit of bandwidth away from my driver download.

>How hard would it have been for them to convert that document into >HTML, and allow us to bring it up through a browser?You do not have the slidest idea what is involved to make good HTML pages for large companies such as Nvidia. You have to take into account securityrules, service layers, stylesheets etc etc etc. So PDF is much easier as mostly MS Word is used to collect the release notes as a starting point. Converting to a PDF format is a small and cost efficient step.(I know so, because I am a projectmanager of a webbased project for a company with 160,000 employees)And back to the topic again:I have installed the 52.16 and must admit that I did see improvements. No flickering of the textures (yet)! And a increase of appr 20-30% of the previous performance!So, nVidia has done it again!

Hi allI downloaded these drivers last night I have an old GF MX 440 card and whilst I didn't see any real significant fps change I was able to increase my resolution substantially and strangely enough that created a vast improvement in the flying experience. This of course is in FS2002.FS2004 will be going back on my machine on Boxing day after I have installed the extra ram the new chip and the new spanking card that my daugters are buying me. And I promise I wont bash FS2004 at all. It's gonna be set at it's default settings and I aint gonna mess with the sucker at all.Wycliffe

Wycliffe -re Xmastell us all how you got them so well trained- I usually finish up with socks (woolly- make your feet sweat),sweaters(large and baggy) or handkerchiefs(Dads only got about 5000 left- he must need some more)CheersDave

Something that is worth trying is nview 3.0, released with Forceware, which now has the capability of different resolutions on different desktops. It is accessible for activation in the Windows Control Panel.What this does is gives you the ability to easily switch between a readable (1024) resolution for your regular apps and a higer resolution for games running in windowed mode.I set up a desktop with nview called FS2004 with a resolution of 1600x1200 and left my default desktop at 1024x768. It takes just a right mouse click and select to switch between them. There appears to very little overhead processing with nview.At 1600x1200, or higher (if you have it) AA does a much better job at the jaggies and you may not even need AA at all.Give it a try.

DaveI spent thousands of pounds on their educations, put them through university paid for one wedding, the deposit on a house for the other and then told them it was my turn now and it's time you paid back the investement.They both got jobs at BT and earn exorbitanat amounts of money and love both me and my wife like mad.Does that help at all.Oh and I'll probably get a 25 yr old single malt to help whilst I'm flying off one of them. CoolWycliffe