From my limited (and unscientific), use of my new AMD XFX 6970 I am seeing no frame rate hit in clouds. By that I mean nothing like I have read about where simmers drop down to single digits. In FS2004 I may drop from 130FPS down to 110 or 120. I sure it shaves off some in FSX as well. Normally in 30-50sFPS and drops a few as I mingle around in them. But no stutters and big drops. This is all still default setup.My issue is the shimmering or moire effect with buildings and autogen, trees. So I am reading up to see what others are doing. Seems like this is apparent whether it is an AMD or an Nvidia card? Still investigating...

Not sure what ATI offers FSAA wise, but utilizing super-sampling seems to pretty much eliminate any shimmering/moire effects.

Not sure what ATI offers FSAA wise, but utilizing super-sampling seems to pretty much eliminate any shimmering/moire effects.

Hi,could you post how did you use super sampling (I assume using catalyst tools?)?ThanksVu

Hi,could you post how did you use super sampling (I assume using catalyst tools?)?ThanksVu

Not sure what ATI uses. On Nvidia cards I use Super-Sampling. Maybe ATI uses that new Morphological (sp?) AA?

Not sure what ATI uses. On Nvidia cards I use Super-Sampling. Maybe ATI uses that new Morphological (sp?) AA?

AAA = Super Sampling.

AAA = Super Sampling.

Its close but not the same, because only some parts of the scene get SuperSampled, while other parts use transparency Anti-Aliasing.

Its close but not the same, because only some parts of the scene get SuperSampled, while other parts use transparency Anti-Aliasing.

Well there's also Temporal AA

What the??? I just checked my CCC program and I don't even have those selections available (Like AAA or even MipMaps!). What version of CCC are you guys running? Mine says Version 2010.1215.2136.38682.

Odd. I've got version 2009.0729.2238.38827I download the Motherboard/Integrated Video Drivers as that's what I've got. Too bad I can't even run Catalyst maxed out. I'm stuck with running no AA on about everything

For what it's worth I was able to make a "benchmark" comparison between my ZOTAC GTX 570 amp! edition (OC'ed @ 780/1560MHz) and my SAPPHIRE HD 6970 (stock). (see my sig for the rest of my computer specs and addons used)As benchmark I used a recorded landing (fsrecorder) at EBBR rwy 25R starting at an alt of 1000ft using the PMDG 747-400F.Total duration of the sequence = 130sFraps was used for the fps benchmark (fps is from within VC)******* Altuve's cfg tweak applied.Weather conditions : I simply made a custom weather situation with cumulus clouds (BKN at 7/8) starting at 6000ft --> 10500ft (that's a lot of clouds ;p) and visibility of 20misliders of interest :water : low 2.xscenery : very denseautogen : densetraffic : no traffic at allairport vehicle density : mediumno aircraft labelscloud draw distance : 90miresults were :2011-06-25 20:58:40 - fsxFrames: 2608 - Time: 130214ms - Avg: 20.029 - Min: 13 - Max: 26This is with the GTX 570 using the settings described here2011-06-25 21:42:04 - fsxFrames: 2340 - Time: 130199ms - Avg: 17.972 - Min: 13 - Max: 23This is with the HD 6970 at stock clock speed (880MHz) : supersampling : High Quality - AA : x162011-06-25 21:47:32 - fsxFrames: 2423 - Time: 130042ms - Avg: 18.632 - Min: 14 - Max: 24 --> 6970 OC 940This is with the HD 6970 overclocked @ 920MHz (ATI Overdrive) using the same settings as aboveIt is important to note that the AA settings used on the HD 6970 are actually a bit higher than those of the GTX 570 and it showed clearly on the screen,the image quality was really better (but we loose 1.4 fps on avg compared to the GTX570)2011-06-25 23:02:32 - fsxFrames: 2642 - Time: 130199ms - Avg: 20.292 - Min: 14 - Max: 26 --> 6970 OC 4X AA edge detectAgain with the HD 6790 but this time overclocked @ 940MHz (ATI Overdrive) with AA set to x8 (same as for the GTX 570) and I could immediately tell that this time graphically it looked almost exactly the same as with the GTX 570 (which means a small loss of image quality)Here we now have the same 20fps on avg as with the GTX 570.Is this little test enough to make conclusions? probably not... but at least it gives you a rough idea of how the HD 6970 performs in FSX, which imho is way better than what I thought it would be compared to a high range (not the highest I know) nvidia card.What I can say is that there were no stutters at all using both cards. I also reckon that if you are planning to use multiple screens, the HD 6970 should probably perform better thanks to its 2Gb of video RAM.This is all I am able to tell at the moment. Hope I was of any help to anyone...

Quote: "What I can say is that there were no stutters at all using both cards. I also reckon that if you are planning to use multiple screens, the HD 6970 should probably perform better thanks to its 2Gb of video RAM."Unquote No it won´t, ATI cannot do clouds, and a s..tload of other things! http://www.simforums...6626851852.html

No it won´t, ATI cannot do clouds, and a s..tload of other things! http://www.simforums...6626851852.html

First, let me put something straight:I am in no way an ATI or Nvidia a really excited user. I couldn't care less which card I have in my rig as long as the fps is as high as it can be... be it within a reasonable budget. (a GTX 580 is way above what I am willing to spend to a gfx card)I consider myself "lucky" to be able to test both cards myself (although the fact that I bought both cards is actually the result of an unlucky event... but that's another uninteresting story ;p) therefor I am only telling what I see... nothing more nothing less.I read the thread you posted and I must say that I am, at least, surprised about the story...Today I made some changes to my fsx.cfg file :1. removed the lines UsePools, PoolSize and FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION (<-- the last one is because Bogote's tweak says that optionally that entry can be removed in case of microstutters, so i figured removing it too was not that much of a risk anyway...)2. Went from RejectThreshold=131072 to 98304 as I read that the higher number of shaders with ATI cards made it possible to lower the buffersize without risking to crash the card.I made an (online) flight from Aerosoft's LEBL to EBBR and my impression was that since I am playing FSX (about 3 years now) it had never EVER been that smooth (but yeah, what's an impression...)So next thing, I had to do my benchmark again using my recorded landing into Aerosoft's EBBR (all same graphical settings used as described in my previous post). Also note that I am using REX HD clouds at 4096pixels.result was :2011-06-26 23:04:35 - fsxFrames: 3720 - Time: 130000ms - Avg: 28.615 - Min: 19 - Max: 31which confirmed the feeling I had during my flight...Firstly, I am wondering why Bogote's tweak does add following lines :UsePools=1PoolSize=5000000Removing them gave me the impression that it actually gave the ability to the CPU to "freely" sent data to the GPU (I am no specialist in this matter but that is how I'm understanding this...)I dare to conclude the following :- the HD 6970 is not a bad card for FSX. I do not believe that my HD 6970 is a "special" one... ;p- Nevertheless I am convinced that there is some further cfg tweaking I need to do with the GTX 570 as I still do believe that the card is supposed to perform better than the HD 6790Tomorrow I am planning to put back in my GTX 570 and try to find the optimal settings in order to get those fps up...Any suggestions are welcome ofcourse.

Appreciate your comments, and if you are satisfied with the HD 6970, congrats!Try flying with heavy clouds, and all other settings at 3/4 sliders, included roadtraffic and boats...