Optimal settings for ATI users with FSX - Great Results!

[dazz 69]

8xSSAA is not an option for me. FPS in the mid/low teens, even after lowering cloud coverage density from 12 to 7. I'm trying every possible setting and theme in REXE + ovd, so far to no avail. Next is the shader 3.0 mod

Can you please run GPUMark2 at 8xS + 2xSGSS & 8xS + 4xSGSS?

 

EDIT: The shader mod completely breaks the sim. Textures all messed up. I read somewhere it's not compatible with REXE or something.

Also tried DX10, and it's a bit better in clouds, but not too much (20 - 24 FPS)

[cvearl 60]

8xSSAA is not an option for me. FPS in the mid/low teens, even after lowering cloud coverage density from 12 to 7. I'm trying every possible setting and theme in REXE + ovd, so far to no avail. Next is the shader 3.0 mod

Can you please run GPUMark2 at 8xS + 2xSGSS & 8xS + 4xSGSS?

 

EDIT: The shader mod completely breaks the sim. Textures all messed up. I read somewhere it's not compatible with REXE or something.

Also tried DX10, and it's a bit better in clouds, but not too much (20 - 24 FPS)

You bet I'll run it and get back. Is there a way to get rid of the shimmer in the water?

 

C.

[Shepred 1]

Hello. Long time nVidia user here but I have been using ATI for a few years now and currently own a factory overclocked 2GB 6950 from HIS with great results. The last few nights I have been using FSX on another computer with a new 3GB 7950 from HIS. It worked fantastic as well. In both cases I am getting glass smooth framerates locked at 30 in ORBX scenery. On that note, occasionally I see posts from people not having the same luck and thought I would chime in on the best settings I have found for ATI in FSX after a few years experience.

 

These are MUST HAVE settings I would like to point out. Screenshots follow of these settings. With my 6950 I get fantastically smooth experience locked at 30 with Scenery Complexity set to Very high and Autogen to Dense. With the settings listed, I get no tearing, blurring, stutter or otherwise. I can go higher on autogen with the 7950 as well.

 

IN GAME SETTINGS

 

Lock Framerates at 30 (best practice)

Do NOT check Anti-aliasing. (enabling AA in game produces stutters when SSAA is enabled in driver)

Anisotropic must be enabled in game

 

IN ATI CCC DRIVER

 

Set AA to Override and AA to 4X

Filter = Standard Filter

Method = Super Sampling or you will get hard to read gauges

Anisotrophic to 16X

Quality set to High Quality

Surface Format Optimization Off Or you will get shimmering bad (critical setting)

Wait for Vertical Refresh OFF, unless application specifies

 

FSX CONFIG - The holy trinity.

 

Add these. This seems the best and cleanest from testing. I've tried allot of others to get same or degraded experience overall.

 

[Display]

WideViewAspect=True

 

[GRAPHICS]

HIGHMEMFIX=1

ForceFullScreenVSync=1

 

 

 

 

Can I just say many, many thanks! I've been saving up a Nvidia card for a long time, to replace my AMD 6870. 

 

Now, I do not have to, your settings worked out perfect for me. Now i'm running with wonderful graphics, and a rock solid 30 FPS. 

 

Here's a screenshot of my new graphics: 

 

 

Once again, many thanks!  :good:

[dazz 69]

You bet I'll run it and get back. Is there a way to get rid of the shimmer in the water?

 

C.

 

I also see some water shimmering in the distance @ 4xSSAA. Don't remember it being worse with the 580 to be honest. I don't think there's a particular setting other than regular AA and transparency AA that can help there

[cvearl 60]

8xSSAA is not an option for me. FPS in the mid/low teens, even after lowering cloud coverage density from 12 to 7. I'm trying every possible setting and theme in REXE + ovd, so far to no avail. Next is the shader 3.0 mod

 

Can you please run GPUMark2 at 8xS + 2xSGSS & 8xS + 4xSGSS?

 

EDIT: The shader mod completely breaks the sim. Textures all messed up. I read somewhere it's not compatible with REXE or something.

Also tried DX10, and it's a bit better in clouds, but not too much (20 - 24 FPS)

 

Ok here's the GPUMark scoop!

 

2xSGSS = average 24

4xSGSS = average 15

 

Charles.

 

Can I just say many, many thanks! I've been saving up a Nvidia card for a long time, to replace my AMD 6870. 

 

Now, I do not have to, your settings worked out perfect for me. Now i'm running with wonderful graphics, and a rock solid 30 FPS. 

 

Here's a screenshot of my new graphics: 

 

 

Once again, many thanks!  :good:

 

No Prob. Nice screenshot BTW.

[dazz 69]

2xSGSS = average 24

 

4xSGSS = average 15

 

Thanks Charles. Was that with cloud coverage density maxed out? also what's your 660Ti clocked at currently?

[cvearl 60]

 

Thanks Charles. Was that with cloud coverage density maxed out? also what's your 660Ti clocked at currently?

 

Clocks are default for the EVGA GTX660Ti 3GB. Have not played with them. I know that I tried 800, 850, 925 and 1000 with my 7950 and they had little to no affect on the GPU mark score. 2 or 3 average fps at most. I noticed going from MAX cloud density to High, I went from about 21 fps to 25+ in that test and it smoothened out. But that was 4xSSAA.

 

3 quick 8xSSAA tests for me if you can.

 

1. If you go down to HIGH density and 70nm and run GPUmark at 8xSSAA what are you averaging?

 

2. Do you have ORBX PNW and the Duke Turbine or JS41? If you do I would like you to try something with 8xSSAA enabled.

Flightplan KHIO to KPDX @ 3500 feet. Spring, Daytime, Settings using RadeonPro as per my setup posted earlier but with 8xSSAA instead of 4xSSAA. Using Weather Cold Fronts. How's the fps on the runway, turning East and climbing out and then crossing the ridge into Portland with the skyline and the airport in the distance?

3. Now keeping Cold fronts and repeat but on the runway and with Cold Fronts still the weather theme but then switch weather to USER DEFINE (so it keeps the rest of cold fronts elements) and bump the clouds to Broken. Repeat the flight. How about that? This is a heavy test IMO. Lots of AG. Lots of day to day like clouds and HD plane.

 

I already know going to overcast will not be smooth. Or at least I think it wont.

 

C.

[dazz 69]

Clocks are default for the EVGA GTX660Ti 3GB. Have not played with them. I know that I tried 800, 850, 925 and 1000 with my 7950 and they had little to no affect on the GPU mark score. 2 or 3 average fps at most. I noticed going from MAX cloud density to High, I went from about 21 fps to 25+ in that test and it smoothened out. But that was 4xSSAA.

 

3 quick 8xSSAA tests for me if you can.

 

1. If you go down to HIGH density and 70nm and run GPUmark at 8xSSAA what are you averaging?

 

2. Do you have ORBX PNW and the Duke Turbine or JS41? If you do I would like you to try something with 8xSSAA enabled.

Flightplan KHIO to KPDX @ 3500 feet. Spring, Daytime, Settings using RadeonPro as per my setup posted earlier but with 8xSSAA instead of 4xSSAA. Using Weather Cold Fronts. How's the fps on the runway, turning East and climbing out and then crossing the ridge into Portland with the skyline and the airport in the distance?

3. Now keeping Cold fronts and repeat but on the runway and with Cold Fronts still the weather theme but then switch weather to USER DEFINE (so it keeps the rest of cold fronts elements) and bump the clouds to Broken. Repeat the flight. How about that? This is a heavy test IMO. Lots of AG. Lots of day to day like clouds and HD plane.

 

I already know going to overcast will not be smooth. Or at least I think it wont.

 

C.

 

will do, with the JS41. It's been ages since I last flew the Jetstream hope I don't crash it LOL.

So what was your cloud coverage in those last GPUMark runs please?

[cvearl 60]

will do, with the JS41. It's been ages since I last flew the Jetstream hope I don't crash it LOL.

So what was your cloud coverage in those last GPUMark runs please?

max density and 80 miles.

 

when you do that kpdx test for me can you bump cloud density down to high?

[dazz 69]

1. If you go down to HIGH density and 70nm and run GPUmark at 8xSSAA what are you averaging?

 

With those settings (overclocked to 1150MHz):

 

8xSSAA, 15 FPS

4xSSAA, 30 FPS

 

 

 

when you do that kpdx test for me can you bump cloud density down to high?

 

roger that

[dazz 69]

 

 

2. Do you have ORBX PNW and the Duke Turbine or JS41? If you do I would like you to try something with 8xSSAA enabled.
Flightplan KHIO to KPDX @ 3500 feet. Spring, Daytime, Settings using RadeonPro as per my setup posted earlier but with 8xSSAA instead of 4xSSAA. Using Weather Cold Fronts.

 

 

How's the fps on the runway,

 

38 FPS

 

 

 

turning East and climbing out

 

41 FPS

 

 

 

crossing the ridge into Portland with the skyline and the airport in the distance?

 

34 FPS

 

[cvearl 60]

38 FPS

 

 

41 FPS

 

 

34 FPS

 

so if you lock the frame rates in radeon pro to 30, I imagine they stay there for almost the entire flight. what do you think about that 8xSSAA? scenery wise I mean. granted its not max cloud density with overcast. but how do you like it overall. Smoothish?

 

what planes do you normally fly are you an NGX guy?

[dazz 69]

 

 

3. Now keeping Cold fronts and repeat but on the runway and with Cold Fronts still the weather theme but then switch weather to USER DEFINE (so it keeps the rest of cold fronts elements) and bump the clouds to Broken. Repeat the flight. How about that? This is a heavy test IMO. Lots of AG. Lots of day to day like clouds and HD plane.

 

35 FPS on the tarmac

30 FPS climbing out and base

30 on final approach

 

So yeah, looks great and it's silk smooth.

 

This card has no problem with clouds at 4xSSAA with cloud coverage set to HIGH like you said, and can handle some clouds even at 8xSSAA

But still, I'm convinced now from self experience nVidia performs better in FSX with clouds, and can imagine that mid range & low end AMD cards get totally murdered @ 4xSSAA in overcast conditions. Problem here is that 2xSSAA looks pretty bad and there's no middle ground with no combined modes available.

 

I'll see if I can send it back for a 660Ti tomorrow

 

 

what planes do you normally fly are you an NGX guy?

 

I spend most of my simming time in the NGX & the Maddog

[cvearl 60]

35 FPS on the tarmac

30 FPS climbing out and base

30 on final approach

 

So yeah, looks great and it's silk smooth.

 

This card has no problem with clouds at 4xSSAA with cloud coverage set to HIGH like you said, and can handle some clouds even at 8xSSAA

But still, I'm convinced now from self experience nVidia performs better in FSX with clouds, and can imagine that mid range & low end AMD cards get totally murdered @ 4xSSAA in overcast conditions. Problem here is that 2xSSAA looks pretty bad and there's no middle ground with no combined modes available.

 

I'll see if I can send it back for a 660Ti tomorrow

 

 

 

 

I spend most of my simming time in the NGX & the Maddog

 

Good to know. My experiences equal yours. FSX looks fantastic on ATI. But you do have to knock Cloud Density to High instead of Max. nVidia can take MAX.

 

As for what ATI cards can do 4xSSAA in FSX with weather? 6950 and up basically. We can say now that at least FSX is totally cool on ATI with one exception. Heavy cloud with weather slider MAX which is not too big a deal breaker. I rarely would fly in those conditions anyway.

 

The lineup that can handle 4xSSAA mode in day to day flying in most weather now are these and what they are roughly equiavlent to...

 

7870 Ghz edition = $249 (=GTX570)

6950 (no longer for sale) (=GTX570)

6970 (no longer for sale) (=GTX570)

7950 3GB $319 (=GTX580/660ti)

7970 3GB Ghz Edition $419 (=GTX670)

 

That said. I am too lazy to swap out to my 7950 and the cooler is too loud. They did not have any ICEq in stock. I will just leave the 660Ti in there and try to find a fix for the water shimmer situation.

 

I will wrap up with my final conclusion in another post. It's pretty simple and which card depends on a persons mission profile within FSX. One card sacrafices one thing and the other sacrafices another thing. I'll elaborate in another response. Thanks for the fun! I really like working on this with you. Oh and I am sorry. Those videos were at 8xSSAA I think which explains why I confused you a little. I thought they were at 4xSSAA.

 

Charles.

[cvearl 60]

ATI 7950 3GB for FSX versus GTX660 Ti Conclusion.

 

I would have to give the edge in this race to the GTX660 Ti over the 7950 but just by a nose. But I now know beyond a doubt that ATI can be used in FSX just fine and with really good IQ provided you have a 6000 series card and up and like ANY card regardless of brand, you get what you paid for. Buy a $150 card and get $150 performance. Period.

 

Comparisons - nVidia versus ATI in FSX

 

1. ATI seems to handle the water textures better. My new nVidia card produces a noticable ammount of Shimmer on the water compared to what I used to see with ATI. Win ATI.

 

2. AA modes contest goes to nVidia by a few points. nVidia 8xS w/ 2xSGSS AA provides slightly sharper AA than ATI's 4xSSAA. While ATI can go to 8xSSAA, performance suffers just like nVidias 4xSGSS. So sticking to a performance AA level, nVidia provides a little bit bit more sharpness and eliminates some AG shimmer that is on some rare building models and small boats. But I would not have known had I not side by sided them. Win nVidia

 

3. Smoothness with fps locked at 30. Tie!

 

4. Cloud performance. Both seem to be about the same at the same settings until you enable MAX cloud density. Here a performance hit is felt with ATI and less so with nVidia. Max Density and heavy overcast and the 7950 was in the mid to low 20's but still flyable where as the 660 Ti remained closer to 30 if not at 30 depending on the scenery accompanying the weather. Win nVidia.

 

5. Tourture test. The PMDG JS41 landing at ORBX's own KSFF scenery (from the East) with even moderate clouds. Both cards SUCKED!!!! Why PMDG why have you forsaken me!!!! Or maybe KSFF is not optimized well. In any case, any other GA plane from Carenado or Real Air was silky smooth otherwise on both cards. Verdict? Both losers. Wa waaaaa..

 

6. Visuals and texture. ATI has slightly richer and deeper color tones. The ground textures are less abrupt and softer yet not blurry. Almost like nVidia has the pixes sharpened up a notch higher. This could be a personal preference but I have to say ATI makes FSX look more natural in that respect. But only just a little. Small win to ATI. But I will play with my 660 Ti's color sliders and make it match somehow.

 

Conclusion? Which card is right for you? It really is simple.

 

You like VFR? Staring at scenery and sticking with small GA planes from Carenado and the like? Get either. I prefer ATI in this situation. Set the Cloud Density to High and 70 miles radius or less and CRANK the AA to 8xSSAA. Pure eye candy and class smooth framerates. Bomb around Anacortes in the cub or do aerobatics in the Chritian Eagle II and drool. I did. Wonderful experience. But both cards are soooo close in that regard you could not go wrong with iether.

 

You are a big tin PMDG JS41/NGX pilot and love drilling holes in a thick blanket of black overcast in a tunder storm? Doing the FL300 thang sandwiched between two big layers of thick black overcast wtih low visibility and rain? Hands down you have no choice. You need an nVidia card GTX600 series and up. NGX in bad weather landing at large airports will eat everything you throw at it and ask for more. It's going to be a struggle no matter what card get and testing this, I feel the nVidia product will struggle less so in this scenario because it does not mind flying through overcast as much as ATI seems to.

 

As for an ATI brand recommendation should you want to go with one? Stick with HIS, ASUS and Gigabyte with the nice coolers. They are more quiet and can take the GPU clock higher. I always find ATI reference coolers to be woefully lacking in the overclock headroom department. HIS ICEq (while a little disco looking) has always been my personal favorite but ASUS has the CU II stuff that just looks bassazz in your case.

 

I hope people get something out of this and thanks Dazz for all the feedback and guidance.

 

Charles.