At this point, I am not sure whether to bite the bullet and get rid of my Nvidia 4200ti and replace it with a ATI 9800XT or not. Now, I don't use AA or AF with my 4200 because of the very obvious performance hit. Before I go on, here are my relevant specs.AthlonXP 2800+ (2250Mhz T'Bird overclocked to 2400Mhz)Windows XP HomeASUS KT400400Watt PS1Ghz 3200 SDRAMNvidia 128Mb 4200ti (latest drivers 53.xx?)80Gb WD HD (8mb cache)At which points will I see frame rate improvments over the 4200? At which point with AA and AF enabled (x?), will the performance of the 9800XT drop below the 4200ti that does not have AA or AF enabled. What I am trying to get at here is that I don't want any drop in framerates that I am currently getting with my 4200. I am sure if you crank up the AA and AF in the 9800XT, at some point, the performance will drop below that of the default 4200ti.I know that the 9800XT eats through (or spits out rather) the FS2004 clouds like there is no tomorrow, hence increasing framerates over most other cards. However, how does the 9800XT perform at busy airports where there is a lot of geometry (buildings and other CPU limited scenery)? At the point, will the 9800XT drop to levels of my 4200 because of the CPU limits?I think you guys know kind of what I am getting here. I am sure I am not the only person who is thinking about upgrading to an 9800XT. So, thanks in advance if you are able to answer any of the above questions. Oh yeah, I use real world weather (static) and, other than AA, I have all hardware options (other than mip mapping which I have on 4 and lighting midway) maxed. All of the scenery options I have maxed too.Thanks guys!Robb

I would be interested as well considering that I have a very similar setup. I have lived with the GeForce4 for 1 1/2 years and it never stops to amaze me with its level of performance (I can play any current 3d game at 1024/768 or higher and most with 2xAA and 4xAF enabled). When I read posts of 9800 owners who get single digit frames in congested airports in foul weather I often wonder why bother changing it since that is what I also get...Regards,

Just from personal experience I would say go for it.I went from a GF4 Ti4200 to a Radeon 9800 and the difference is large. I can now do hi-res AA AND anisotropic filtering with decent frame rates. I run a P4 @3.0ghz with 512mb ram and a Radeon 9800 non pro overclocked to close to pro speeds. I am getting frame rates of consistently low to mid 30's and even with traffic and nice scenery and add-on airports it stays in the 20's.I lock at 37fps and can get a good bit higher if I unlock with no problem except at the high detail airports with >50% traffic. I have UT here. Also I use all the frame rate fixes for autogen(textures and Def.xml) plus smaller size cloud textures and slightly reduced weather settings.The image quality for me improved slightly and the AA is definitely a good bit better with the ATI cards then the Nvidia.I say go for it!Hornit

I had a GF4 Mx 420 for awhile and was generally happy with it.I just bought a 9600 Pro 128 meg on ebay for a little over a hundred bucks (about what I was looking at a new 5200 for) - I tell ya, it's a BIG difference. I was hoping for a little improvement, but it's been an "eye opener", especially with the 737NG flying in real weather. I can put off buying a new machine for little bit now...

Hey Hornit,I also have a 9800 NP. What are your over clock settings?John Franklin

FWIW, I have 2 rigs at home and recently replaced a TI4400 in P4 2.53 with a Radeon9800 Pro128. I have a 9800XT in my P4 3.2 - All I can say is it's worth the upgrade as I recently did it myself. You may want to consider going with the 9800 Pro128 and save yourself over $200.00 compared to the XT version. I run AA and AF with the Radeons and FS2004 just looks great. I can pretty much run everything at or near max except for the clouds and frame rates never drop below 30 on either setup. I run AUTOGEN on MAX. Your CPU should be fine. I don't use any tweak textures or anything on the XT but I do use the cloud tweak textures on the 128 version. But honestly I can barely tell the difference. If you have the $500 though and want to spend it all, I would say go for the Radeon Pro 128 and pick yourself up a TrackIR2, it will make your flightsim experience just awesome!! The 9800XT is a great card and I own one myself but it's not worth the $500 price tag IMHO as compared to the $279.00 128 version. Definitley get one or the other. I had a TI4400 which is even faster than your 4200 and I saw a huge difference in MSFS when I got a Radeon. I hope my 2 cents help you out. let us know what you got and how you like it.

Do your frames per second ever drop below 20? What kind of performance, in terms of frame rates, were you getting when you used your 4200 with your current setup?Thanks,Robb

What kind of framerates do you get when you run you secenery settings and clouds at the maximum level? Right now, with my scenery and clouds maxed out, my framerates occasionally drop to 7 or 8 per second, and that is very choppy. I probably should scale back on my settings, but I just don't want to. I am hoping that the cards like you mention will do away with the 7 to 8 frames per second. Also, I think about the future like when the new 767-PIC updates are finished. With the 767-PIC, the framerates were much less than they were when I used the default planes in FS2002. I am wondering whether to wait until that update is available and whether or not I will need to invest in a new CPU before I invest in a new card. Your comments have been valuable.Thanks,Robb

Well with having a Ti4200, I wouldnt use those new drivers, I would go back to the 30.82's, way faster and better image quality and I can run FS a 4AA and still be perfectly smooth on my system. Give the 30.82's a try.

Robb,Just for you I maxed out everything in FS2004 and I got 24fps @ Seattle Tacoma International-FAIR weather-playable but I like better fps. Thats on a P4 3.2 w/ Radeon 9800XT. However I don't normally fly with everything maxed out cause I can't stand any stutters. Typically I fly with everything at max except I tone down the clouds to 50 percent 3d clouds and 40 miles vis and I set the scenery complexity to NORMAL. Everything else is maxed out sliders AUTOGEN, AI traffic, etc to the right and I get 35 fps in the same location. SeattleTacoma is pretty hard on fps and normally I get much better then 35fps just flying around. Oh and this is with 2X AA and 4X AF. Frame rates are actually better on my 2nd computer with the Radeon Pro 128, but that is because I use the tweaked clouds from Chris Willis or whoever it was that made them. I actually regret getting the RadeonXT because I think it will only be a few more months and ATI and Nvidia will both be coming out with new GPU cards. But for $279 or less you can get a Radeon128 Pro. If you want more info, tommorrow I will fire up FS2004 on my P4 2.53 with the Radeon128 Pro and give you some more data on performance with that setup, which is probably closer to your current rig-heck your's is probably faster. I don't have my Ti4400 to compare with, but trust me the Radeon made a big difference when I upgraded. ttyl