If you don't swing by too often, check out Sebby's blog. He has a short, but informative post regarding SM 2.0 and 3.0, how FS uses them, and a bit of insider advice regarding hardware upgrade paths.Check it out here:http://blogs.msdn.com/sebby1234/archive/20.../01/522120.aspxRegards,Nick

Great find! It will be a 512mb card for me then! However, what is bothering me is that Shader 3.0 is not Shader 4.0 which is a DirectX10 Vista feature. I thought the whole purpose of FSX was to showcase Vista and DirectX 10. I'd rather wait 6 months for a full Vista version. How about you?RH

> I'd rather wait 6 months for a full Vista version. How about you?6 months will be ok so long as there is a Vista version, and optimised with the long shaders too. Then we will be flying in heaven ;)

I have to say I don't understand the logic of waiting. Maybe one of you could explain it some more. Why would you give up 6 months of exploring all the cool new features?And I'm not just talking about Flight Sim--it could be any hobby you're really into. If it were me I couldn't stand it to read the inevitable hundreds (if not thousands) of forum posts saying how cool *this* is or how awesome *that* is and not know first hand what every one was so excited about. But, to each his/her own, I guess...

I will be buying it the first day its out, but a 6 month wait for a Vista/DX10 version will be fine by me. And by that time it could include some additional new features as well.. Also I hope next time it will go back to a 2 year release cycle.John.

<< will be buying it the first day its out, but a 6 month wait for a Vista/DX10 version will be fine by me. >>Okay. Maybe I misunderstood your reply, wingnut. Thanks.<>Wow! You are one of the few, I think. I've read on this forum for years how people want us to wait longer between releases.

Yep, I am one that is fine with a longer development cycle, go figure!Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International

> Wow! You are one of the few, I think. I've read on this forum for years how people want us to wait longer between releases.The only reason I can think is its due to the compatibility problems that arise when the new version is released. So they fear their products will have a shorter lifespan. If FS11 will be running on DX10 it probably won't need the kind of graphics engine upgrade as FSX (and be more compatible?)John.

Given what we already know; what's to say that the new FS isn't already or wont' be DX10 ready? Therefore when DX10 is ready and/or Vista, you don't have to do anything to the sim?Maybe I've read wrong, but I thought this was the case.

Hi tdragger- I humble myself before you. My thoughts are that a Vista version will be less CPU dependent due to Shader 4.0. Back in the days of FS98, a different videocard could make all the difference in terms of smoothness and FPS. Knowing (or believing) that upon initial release, the available hardware will not be able to push FSX to its limits, it is much easier on the mind, knowing that when the right DX10 videocard is released, I will be in FPS bliss. With FS2000, 2002, and 2004, each required switching out motherboards because the CPU that existed at the time, when each was released, was not the one that finally could run Flight Simulator (with add-ons) to a satisfactory (good smoothness and FPS) degree. Changing out videocards had only a minimal effect on these versions.Feel free to exploit my ignorance. These are just my thoughts.RH

> I humble myself before youhaha..> My thoughts are that a Vista version will be less CPU dependent due to Shader 4.0........I hope they are reading this!

Well, I figured if Tdragger is indeed the lead programmer (or whatever similar title) for FSX, I do feel humbled given the fact that my knowledge of software consists of being a Flightsim addict and knowing how to work perhaps 40% of the features on Microsoft Word but not much else. RH

Wait a sec, I have not been following the development of Vista. Are you all saying that Vista/DX10 will not ship until 6 months after FSX is due to be released?

No. It's not about the Vista schedule. I think the discussion started with speculation that FSX would not add DX10 support until some time after it (FSX) was released. Some folks were saying that a difference of 6 months wouldn't be bad.

<>Oh, please. *You* are ones that make the software great through your dedication. You can dispense with the flattery. As Jason will tell you it's not deserved. ;)<>Um, don't get your hopes up *too* much. DX10/SM4.0 will performance in some cases but it's not a silver bullet. If a 2.0 shader is already efficient DX10 isn't going to make a difference.