Arjen,

 

I have BP set to -0 in DX9 and 10, and I am confused as to where you have come up with that information.

 And when you say disabled, I assume you mean UsePools=0 and not removed from  fsx cfg altogether.

A lot assume if the Bufferpools is removed from the fsx cfg then it is disabled. Of course it is not, as FSX uses 4MB by default.

 

Buffepools set -0 does not suit everybody.

This is my experience and it was also told to me in the DX10 forum. Yes, with "disabled" I do indeed mean UsePools=0 or PoolSize=0.

 

My personal experience is simply that UsePools=0 in DX9 gives me significantly higher FPS than UsePools=0 in DX10. Let's say, I get 40 FPS in DX9 and in DX10 in that situation I would then get 33. However, if I remove the BufferPools altogether in DX10 (which will still have them enabled) then I get back to 40 FPS or very slightly below. For DX9 is works exactly the other way around, having them disabled causes 40 FPS, having them enabled will drop FPS to something like 33. Thus the conclusion for me here is that BufferPools need to be enabled for DX10 if you want to see similar performance to DX9 with bufferpools disabled.

I gave up on dx10, sure water looked nice, but everything else is compromised. Terrible aa, ftx light black squares,almost every addon scenery isn't supported, pmdg's 777 looks funky at night with panel lights on, stars are way to bright(to the point that you wish you could dim them). If this "fix" truly delivers, I'll reconsider using it again.

DX10 has totally changed FSX for me. Stick with it

 

Same experience. Most important for me is finally no more micro-stutter.  FSXDX10 is similar to MS Flight: "Butter smooth". Better water, VC shadows, improved fps, etc - is pure bonus.

Good AA? Do you know the difference?

 

Yeah, and apparently you must have never realized good AA in DX9? Thanks for making the point.

 

Like was said .... good filtering: you still can't get the minimum of DX9 8xS (1x2 SS + 4 MS) let alone 12xS or 16xS, nor any Transparency AA, let alone 16X Aniso, nor Gama CorrectionAA in DX10 FSX . <

 

Geez, repeating myself.

 

All you are doing is making a fool of yourself. DX10 AA screenshots in 3...2....1....

 

8xSSAA on an ATI HD 7970 (more or less on par with nVidia 8xS+2xSGSS). SuperSample (Read Transparency AA) enabled in CCC.

 

Last two shots are the AA line added to CFG in DX10 mode and an nVidia buddy's GTX680 for DX10 which in his words are... Wow... I have never seen my VC so friggan sharp. The screenshots are from my ATI card at 8xSSAA and not his. Note the 16xHQAF

 

Oh. I like to call this next series of shots... "Pigsinspace is dead wrong". LOL

 

 

Spot on cvearl, most of those that knock DX10 have never used it or configured it incorrectly. The new software DX10 Controller works perfectly as you can see:-

 

 

 

Those screenshots certainly look good enough to me, although the AF quality can only really be determined with a moving image. I certainly hope that this Fixer can solve all of my problems with DX10 mode, because the really important part (for me) is the reduction in OOM errors.

ll you are doing is making a fool of yourself. DX10 AA screenshots in 3...2....1.

 

Thanks for posting these, helps to set the record straight.

 

Look at full size, jaggies everywhere, not even close to 1x2 SuperSampling + 4 X MultiSampling 1x2 of 8xS combined with 16X Anisotropic filtering, let alone 12xS or 16xS.

 

You can show the pics of the cpl all you want but the proof is in the game:

 

Look at the outboard profile of the Cessna, jaggies everywhere, and what happened to that fence? No, that is not good Alpha AA and there is no Gama correction AA.

 

2nd see how smeared and blurrie the terrain textures are? Not

 

Nice shots, but the low filtering IQ is exactly my only gripe, we are all on the same team, only I just stated the obvious and you backed up what I said.

 

Will post some pics when I get home this evening and you can decide.

So by your standards, Pigsinspace - Orbx should also be vilified - maybe hung, drawn and quartered for creating their "People-Flow" animations. Maybe throw in JustFlight too, for some of their offerings.

 

In fact there's no pic in DX9 OR DX10 that I've ever come across which doesn't have some form of graphical anomaly. This is a 2007 program, with issues in both DX9 and DX10, but it's one that has an enormous following in the "wanna-be" and "has-been" circle, and it's our hobby. Most of us are pretty happy with it.

You are treating image of DX10 - rabidly treating the image DX10 - as if we are claiming that has the very best graphical quality of all softwares everywhere! Well, it doesn't - and neither does DX9 OR P3D. All have their own problems, peculiarities - and good points, too.

 

It seems that you have some kind of personal agenda aginst those who prefer to use DX10, instead of conforming with your perception of what is "graphically good" in FSX.

Thanks for posting these, helps to set the record straight.

 

Look at full size, jaggies everywhere, not even close to 1x2 SuperSampling + 4 X MultiSampling 1x2 of 8xS combined with 16X Anisotropic filtering, let alone 12xS or 16xS.

 

You can show the pics of the cpl all you want but the proof is in the game:

 

Look at the outboard profile of the Cessna, jaggies everywhere, and what happened to that fence? No, that is not good Alpha AA and there is no Gama correction AA.

 

2nd see how smeared and blurrie the terrain textures are? Not

 

Nice shots, but the low filtering IQ is exactly my only gripe, we are all on the same team, only I just stated the obvious and you backed up what I said.

 

Will post some pics when I get home this evening and you can decide.

 

I think you are nit picking to be honest, one of the main complaints regarding DX9, which you will "never" overcome is OOM's. Try flying across the pond...And back in one session. DX9 is dust.I mean if you want cutting edge graphics go and play ARMA3 or Crysis.

Where does it say that Steve's Dx10 fixer will be out in a few days?

So by your standards, Pigsinspace - Orbx should also be vilified - maybe hung, drawn and quartered for creating their "People-Flow" animations. Maybe throw in JustFlight too, for some of their offerings.

 

In fact there's no pic in DX9 OR DX10 that I've ever come across which doesn't have some form of graphical anomaly. This is a 2007 program, with issues in both DX9 and DX10, but it's one that has an enormous following in the "wanna-be" and "has-been" circle, and it's our hobby. Most of us are pretty happy with it.

You are treating image of DX10 - rabidly treating the image DX10 - as if we are claiming that has the very best graphical quality of all softwares everywhere! Well, it doesn't - and neither does DX9 OR P3D. All have their own problems, peculiarities - and good points, too.

 

It seems that you have some kind of personal agenda aginst those who prefer to use DX10, instead of conforming with your perception of what is "graphically good" in FSX.

 

Paul, nothing there, go back and read, I'm all for DX10.

 

But was this not a discussion of Apples to Apples? Some one states its the same, I pointed out fact, there was no negative response from me until someone said I was full of it and then I simply questioned if they actually knew what good filtering quality was and reiterated the facts. Is that wrong Paul? I am somehow a bad person or I have an agenda?

 

Some of us are enthusiast when it comes to quality graphics in games, I know of where I speak, and this FSX DX10 limit has always been a disappointment that's all.

 

Someone made the false claim that you can get the same AA settings as DX9, the fact is it is limited to what the best available was way back before FS2k, thats almost 15 years ago Paul, IQ has improved a bit since then bro. Many of us here have $300-$1000 Video cards, yet here we are stuck with the IQ of a GeForce2 or TI4600? Are you kidding me? This makes you happy?

 

Have DX10 FSX graphics been improved upon by the diligence and hard work of others? Yes and I stated such countless time and I will state it again, I am all for DX10, but if we are going to compare DX9 it should be done Apples to Apples. Would you not agree?

Lower the overhead and filter quality of DX9 settings to match the max of DX10 and OOMs decrease and FPS go up, nothing hard to understand about that, but shall we pretend that its the same at DX9 best average filtering setting? Does that make you and I fell better?

 

Look, I apologize to each and everyone in here, if I somewhere stepped over the line, really sorry guys....meant no offense and I really mean that.

 

 

Look at full size, jaggies everywhere, not even close to 1x2 SuperSampling + 4 X MultiSampling 1x2 of 8xS combined with 16X Anisotropic filtering, let alone 12xS or 16xS.

 

How are you looking at these posted images?  I don't see what you see?  They look great to me.  Are you looking at them via a Browser or OS Preview?  OS Preview will NOT show the image correctly (as is).  Pending what Browser you use it may also not be showing you the image "as is" ... suggest you download the image and look at it in Photoshop at 100%

 

Like I said in other posts, AA is a filter, filters reduce image quality (overall) ... AA filter exists to compensate for reduced screen resolution on pixel based systems.

 

 

 

Some of us are enthusiast when it comes to quality graphics in games, I know of where I speak, and this FSX DX10 limit has always been a disappointment that's all.

 

I'm sorry but I don't see this, I would expect an enthusiast to know that a 3840 x 2160 31.5" monitor to be a far better solution than trying to blend/filter an image at ever higher AA settings on a 1920 x 1200 24" monitor.  You should know there just is no substitution for resolution

 

AA/AF settings don't impact VAS.

I don't see anything wrong with those pics. I'm actually impressed and looking forward to the DX10 tool.

 

Thanks for posting those pics, They LOOK great!

If i dont click in the pics in the below reply to bring them up to size i see blurries and jaggies.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/421238-to-dx10-or-not-to-dx10-thats-the-question/page-2#entry2801181

 

Since the pics in the second below reply are at full size already they appear perfectly smooth.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/421238-to-dx10-or-not-to-dx10-thats-the-question/page-2#entry2801202

 

My eyes really cant be decieving me even though i am wearing glasses....

 

(this coming from a relatively hard core DX9 user who plays around with DX10/11 in his gauge work and eagerly awaits the full DX10 fixer to take his sim to the next level).

nor any Transparency AA, let alone 16X Aniso, in DX10 FSX . <

 

 

 

I'm currently running BOTH of those in DX10, you have something set up wrong.  I have in game filtering set to tri-linear and 16x aniso is forced in NI, yes it's working, I can give you a screenshot to prove it.  Same thing with transparency, you have to check the internal AA box for the rest of the scene but then you go to NI and select 4xSGSS and it works fine as evidenced by the fact that all my cockpit VC shimmers and jaggies totally disappear along with jagged textures on planes becoming smooth.  I don't know about gamma AA as I've never used it anyway.