Sorry, another AA question

[JonP01 104]

Yes, I have read through many posts and the fixer website, but I am not quite clear as to whether the AA options I am currently using with FSX / DX9 will work under DX10. Like many here I can't stand any jaggies but with my older GPU I am successfully using 16xQ AA + 4 x rotated grid transparency supersampling AA for FSX under DX9. This gives me pretty good image quality with jaggies only in certain (very minor) situations such as the electricity pylons in my ORBX scenery. I could probably get rid of those using 4 x supersamping for the whole image area but that is way too costly for my current GTX580 and just cripples its performance (though I may try it again when I build a completely new machine late next year).

Anyway, given there is no demo of the Fixer program for me to try, does anyone know if I can still use these settings under FSX / DX10 and get the same result as I am getting now under DX9?

And is DX10 going to be "slower" on the GPU itself compared to DX9 if I preserve all the same settings as before? Perhaps it might not even be worthwhile trying DX10 at the moment with my old GTX580 and I should wait till I get more horsepower under the bonnet? I know DX10 is supposed to "free up" some CPU but in my configuration that probably won't make much difference as even my current AA settings are pushing my video card to its limit under DX9 - so my video card with its current settings are just as limiting as the CPU currently is.

 

Thanks 

[Jim Young 2,356]

The AVSIM FSX Configuration Guide provides some guidance.  In fact, use the settings there and you will see no jaggies (but they are fairly high but not for current systems).  AVSIM also hosts the DX10 Fixer Support Forums.  You might get more guidance there. 

On 3/5/2019 at 8:47 PM, JonP01 said:

Anyway, given there is no demo of the Fixer program for me to try, does anyone know if I can still use these settings under FSX / DX10 and get the same result as I am getting now under DX9?

The AVSIM FSX Configuration Guide used the NI Inspector to get the no jaggies.  I doubt you would be able to get it via Nvidia's display settings.

On 3/5/2019 at 8:47 PM, JonP01 said:

And is DX10 going to be "slower" on the GPU itself compared to DX9 if I preserve all the same settings as before?

DX9 is old stuff and most of it is not compatible with FSX/SP2.  FS9 was GPU dependent.  FSX is CPU dependent meaning it mostly uses the CPU to render and not the GPU.  If you want DX9, best to get a copy of FS9 and install it.  Your video card should be able to handle DX10 without any problems.  DX10 Preview enabled provides about 10% boost in performance according to Microsoft.  FSX is a super old program and was built for those duo Core and quad Core processors.  Think the best video card back then was something like the GTX 8800.  You got maybe 10 fps with any addons and usually could get up to 30 fps in default mode (default scenery, aircraft, and settings).  Now, one can get over 300 fps with the modern CPU's with default settings.  You install any addon, and the fps drop dramatically.  Developer's needed eye-candy to sell their products and that decreased performance.

Personally I have the DX10 Fixer because it optimizes your FSX.cfg and enhances graphics.  I still used the NI Inspector too.  The main thing about the DX10 Fixer is the fact it fixed FSX.  It's like an upgrade to FSX as Microsoft failed to upgrade their product before laying off the team that was developing the product.  When you see flickering on runways, taxiways, and many other locations, the DX10 Fixer will fix that.  SteveP, the developer of the DX10 Fixer, provided the community with an outstanding product where we were able to enjoy the product even more.  Without his fixes, I doubt many would have stayed very long with FSX and it had a lot of anomalies.

So, get the DX10 Fixer and read the AVSIM FSX Configuration Guide (link in the sidebar to the right).  You will never have to ask questions ever again (well, almost never).

Best regards,

Jim

 

[JonP01 104]

Thanks Jim for the great explanations. Will do!