Running the latest (Jan 4/11) Beta 266.35's on a GTX 285. Very crisp and clear graphics. Nothing bad to report. Good performance, all around. This driver suite supports all the top end cards, including the 200 series of course.Get them in the Beta section off of nVidia's website, if interested.

Same IQ and performance on my system compared to 260.99.

Running the latest (Jan 4/11) Beta 266.35's on a GTX 285. Very crisp and clear graphics. Nothing bad to report. Good performance, all around. This driver suite supports all the top end cards, including the 200 series of course.Get them in the Beta section off of nVidia's website, if interested.

Work nicely on my (new) GTX460 alsoand seem to fix some texture flashing problems I had with the 260.99 drivers

Same IQ and performance on my system compared to 260.99.

BTW, now that I've had a chance to really run my new GTX460 through various scenery,I agree that the external limiter is likely a thing of the past and that the internal 30 fps lock,coupled with LOD=5.5 gives me fabulous visuals and very smooth flight.I'm beginning to think that this upgrade was "worth the money" [email protected] 4GB RAM WinXP32 GTX460-1GB

BTW, now that I've had a chance to really run my new GTX460 through various scenery,I agree that the external limiter is likely a thing of the past and that the internal 30 fps lock,coupled with LOD=5.5 gives me fabulous visuals and very smooth flight.I'm beginning to think that this upgrade was "worth the money" [email protected] 4GB RAM WinXP32 GTX460-1GB

+1 - Internal limiter at 30 and a LOD of 6.5..jja

+1 - Internal limiter at 30 and a LOD of 6.5..jja

Based on that, I tried 6.5 and to my amazement, my system handled it..4.5 to 5.5 to me is a big visual difference, 5.5 to 6.5 is more subtle, but the detail stretches almost too far out to be believable. Nice to have the texture sharpening and autogen popping happening further away, though!Will have to try some more, but 5.5 looks to me awfully close to the real thing..

Based on that, I tried 6.5 and to my amazement, my system handled it..4.5 to 5.5 to me is a big visual difference, 5.5 to 6.5 is more subtle, but the detail stretches almost too far out to be believable. Nice to have the texture sharpening and autogen popping happening further away, though!Will have to try some more, but 5.5 looks to me awfully close to the real thing..

--------------------------------------------------------------------Bert, I have been running with 7.5 on a GTX285 all along. VERY NICE visuals!Give it a try....

+1 - Internal limiter at 30 and a LOD of 6.5..jja

And 2nd or 3rd that.8.5 hereNever have found going back to LOD=4.5(Stock Max) satisfactory since our LOD discoveries from back in FS2K days.Also agree on the external limiter as it is unstable at times and as we know its easier for the blurries to creep in with FPS set to unlimited, though I admit that unlimited is also very nice.

LOD 7.5 here, would like 8.5, but performance drops too much with it. 7.5 is a nice sweetspot imho.

Are you guys using FFTF=0 with these LOD settings and internal limiter?Simon

Are you guys using FFTF=0 with these LOD settings and internal limiter?Simon

No

Are you guys using FFTF=0 with these LOD settings and internal limiter?Simon

I use FFTF=0 dependant on my situation (if I expect very heavy landing, then I turn it off), and all with internal limiter.

With 266.35 I use 8.5 LOD with internal limiter at 40fps and textures are always crisp and sharp. I found that using external limiter set at any fps, or setting to unlimited FPS gives me blurries at any LOD radius from 4.5 to 8.5.An accidental discovery happened yesterday. I roll back my OC to 2.8GHz for work on the computer, but that time forgot to change profiles back to my OC before starting an FSX flight with the Carenado Mooney at Darrington (ORBX). I flew to Concrete and then to Israel's Farm, which can be extremely hard on FPS. At 2.8GHz the frame count was lower by about 10 FPS and every once in a while, if I snapped a look to the side, I had blurries for a few seconds, but no stutters or hesitations. However there was the sense that there was a missing smoothness that was hard to pinpoint (FPS) and had me perplexed. Nothing really wrong, but something not right either.I restarted with LOD radius to 4.5 (which I no longer can stand) to see if that would improve things, but it made no difference whatsoever. Performance was still the same, perfectly adequate but not perfectly perfect. It seemed that the 580 GTX was working less hard though.I was really starting to think that perhaps I need Sandy Bridge more than I thought when I realized that I was running in default clock. A profile change and restart to 4.3+ OC and restoration to 8.5 LOD brought back the full experience. The point of this little yarn is that LOD radius changes did not seem to make much of a performance difference, even at default clock. I would have though it would. Perhaps that is due to the 580 GTX, don't know.Kind regards,

With 266.35 I use 8.5 LOD with internal limiter at 40fps and textures are always crisp and sharp. I found that using external limiter set at any fps, or setting to unlimited FPS gives me blurries at any LOD radius from 4.5 to 8.5.An accidental discovery happened yesterday. I roll back my OC to 2.8GHz for work on the computer, but that time forgot to change profiles back to my OC before starting an FSX flight with the Carenado Mooney at Darrington (ORBX). I flew to Concrete and then to Israel's Farm, which can be extremely hard on FPS. At 2.8GHz the frame count was lower by about 10 FPS and every once in a while, if I snapped a look to the side, I had blurries for a few seconds, but no stutters or hesitations. However there was the sense that there was a missing smoothness that was hard to pinpoint (FPS) and had me perplexed. Nothing really wrong, but something not right either.I restarted with LOD radius to 4.5 (which I no longer can stand) to see if that would improve things, but it made no difference whatsoever. Performance was still the same, perfectly adequate but not perfectly perfect. It seemed that the 580 GTX was working less hard though.I was really starting to think that perhaps I need Sandy Bridge more than I thought when I realized that I was running in default clock. A profile change and restart to 4.3+ OC and restoration to 8.5 LOD brought back the full experience. The point of this little yarn is that LOD radius changes did not seem to make much of a performance difference, even at default clock. I would have though it would. Perhaps that is due to the 580 GTX, don't know.Kind regards,

I'm thinking about updating to this driver. What mods do you guys have on your FSX.cfg file besides the LOD? Are you using any of *******' mods?

One issue I see is with a higher LOD radius more memory is used. I had occassional OOMs even with FSX in Win7 64, 6G RAM. Looking at the LOD radius and going from 6.5 to 4.5 saved 15% in Memory (Private Working Set) as reported by task manager. May only matter when using a very detailed AC at a very complex airport, but, I have tried to stay at 4.5, occassionally using 6.5 with FSX Go when I start my flights.Joe