Sign in to follow this  
Geofa

Vista + ATI RTM Drivers + FSX = HOLY COW!

Recommended Posts

Okay:I had to wait until now to post my results because I tested last night and figured it all to be a dream and had to test again for certainty while I was awake. So, after hours and hours of verification, I, Mike T., the original not happy with FSX person, hereby state...YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! FSX is a GOOD thing.ATI released its RTM drivers for Vista RC2 and that combined with Vista RC2+ (almost RTM) is a GOOD THING! With all the tweaks I had before and with RC2 release it was a stuttering slideshow. POST upgrade, I was able to get rid of ALL FSX.cfg tweaks completely (I still am using the texture reduction tweak).I am running, FSX with NORMAL Autogen (both sliders) 100% AI traffic (imported from FS9), 50% cars, 100% ship traffic, highest ground texture resolution, water at its highest levels, plus imported FE clouds at high density, 38m Mesh. At SEATTLE, I am getting 15FPS (locked). New York (well, its still New York :-( , but the rest of the world FR as high at 50+ FPS, epecially in less dense areas. Mountain flying through mist will bring tears to your eyes.Right now, I can honestly say that light bloom, terrain mesh and 100% vehicle traffic are the only sliders not maxed and the sim is flyable in 80% of the world. I don't think the current tweaks allows to go any higher.I think I've made it infinitely clear that I will NOT dumb down FSX to utilize it. FSX is now solidly in that ballpark for me. With that said, there is still some pausing for texture loading (I don't believe ANYONE who says there is not), and FRs can get ugly in certain areas. But right now, performance is still a bit less than FS9 (to be expected) in exchange for much more visual treats.After last night, FSX has offically met MY expectations and I can finally say that I am happy. With that said, make NO mistake that current hardware would be hard pressed to run a PMDG 747-400 or PSS 777. Complex airports will probably bring FSX to its knees and require dumbing down. However, I can see that Vista DOES bring something to the table. Again, the caviat is that you WILL need a highly tweaked, higher end system to start really bringing the power of FSX to bear. But at the end of the day, there IS promise on the horizen with Vista and ATI at least.Thanks for listening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hi Mike,I happy to hear your happy. :) FSX is pretty good, but it sure does have a way of making me wish I had a newer system. (-: Oh well, one day I will. So how about showing us some screenshots of your FSX goodness now that you have it, in the screenshot section of the forum! And don't forget to change the ATI Driver to 'RC2' in your system specs sig. ;)Cheers,Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to hear things are better for you, Mike. The darn thing better run well--you've got a killer system.Have a look at my lowly specs and you'll see why I'll be waiting to switch to FSX. However, with PC gaming bottoming out in general I just don't know if it's worth an upgrade at all. My priorities are definitely starting to shift.Have fun with it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting these results Mike.We've had the RTM version of FSX for just under 1 month now and it's good to see the tweakers, tuners, and OS/video driver folks like you, Matt, and others add the benefits of their findings. We all learn from these people's efforts.I have a moderate PC (about 2 years old), 3.4GHZ, 3GB RAM, Nvidia 6800,and I find FSX to fly reasonably well in most areas other that the high details cities/airports.I've applied the tweaks on this forum, but not many! I've not scaled back textures or Autogen. I've used the FSX.cfg file tweaks only.I'm getting about 20-25 FPS at a minimum. In some missions, I get from 30-50 FPS!. In more rural areas, I can get about 30 FPS on average. This is with AI down to around 25%. At KSEA, I get around 12FPS or so on take-off from 34R, but then the FPS value increase as I bank to the West.For me, FSX is a good purchase!Looking forward to the future advancements.Thanks!JerryG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Careful now, someone might acuse you of being a sheep! :)>>Vic>>Is that a baa baad thing? :-lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike T ... Is that running at 1920x1200 ?What specific texture reduction tweak are you using?Lastly, do you have a XP install you can compare to?Thanks sounds promising!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike T.AVSIM Staff Reviewer---------------------------------------Simmin' System: AMD Athlon 64 Dualcore 4800+ (OC @ 6000+) - 2GB Corsair XMS Pro PC3200 Low Latency DDR SDRAM - 2x ATI Radeon X1900XTX Crossfire PCIe 32 - 2x SATA 240GB WD Caviar Drives in RAID 0 - 1x SATA WD Caviar 120GB Drive - Phase Change Cooling @ -15F - Asus A8R32 MVP MoBo - Creative X-FI Platinum Sound - Logitec THX certified 6.1 Surround sound speakers - Antec Trueblue 500 Watt PSU - Wavemaster Aluminum Case - Dell 2405FPW LCD @ 1900x1200 - Windows Vista RC2 (MSDN Universal) - ATI Vista RC1 Video Drivers - Creative Labs Vista Beta Drivers - DirectX 10 - OCX 2 MB Flash Memory for Vista ReadyBoost---------------------------------------WOW..... Your system is a PC of Mass Destruction. I mean you have TWO, count them TWO X1900XTX video cards. LOL... I appreciate your effort to test and report, kudos to you. Wow though, shoot if most people can swing one X1900XTX, and you have two, and still the add-ons will bring it to its knees.anyway... looks like my upgrade may still need me to sit on my hands a bit longer and build something beefier in jan/feb 2007.Thanks for the info!!http://www.lemosnet.com/misc/gpilotsig.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about what I said earlier...we'll all need to spend thousands of $ to get a decent running and looking game...I haven't touched FSX in a week...too disappointed :(Some of us can afford it...some of us cannot...So I guess MS caters to the haves and "oh well, tough luck, fix it yourself" to the have nots LOL...You want a better running game...spend massive amounts of cash on Vista and hardware and you'll have it...uhhh. So sad...If MS would have thought farther ahead and implemanted things we have now instead what they thought ( I read that"this way is cheaper") we all would be enjoying it alot more...I'm going to go buy X Plane :)Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, running at 1920x1200 16xAF HQ, 6x AA :-) Unfortunately I don't have XP running on any of my PC's at home. I made the migration over to Vista since pre RC1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Geoff!We're on the same side of the fence now...now we'll most certainly have to go have that beer! :-beerchug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hi>>Would an AMD 3400 64 and an ATI 9800 XT be a "fast PC"? I have>that and run 25 maxed in MOST situations.>>Jim>>http://www.hifisim.com/>Active Sky V6 Development Team >Active Sky V6 Proud Supporter>HiFi Beta Team>Radar Contact Supporter: http://www.jdtllc.com/>AirSource Member: http://www.air-source.us/>FSEconomy Member:http://www.fseconomy.com/Jim I am getting about the same as you on a Dell XPS P4 3.2GHz with a Radeon 9800XT. My machine still feels fast to me, but FSX makes my machine show its age I guess. I still like FSX a lot though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've run the texture tweaks & added the FIBER_FRAME tweak & PoolSize tweak to my FSX.cfg, and I get a sold 28-30 FPS on my system (see specs below).I'm happy, but by no means will I 'settle'. I am a habitual tweaker, and I'm hoping to squeeze a little more out so I can raise the AI & autogen a bit higher than what I've got them at now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who are you and what have you done with Mike.:) "But at the end of the day, there IS promise on the horizen with Vista and ATI at least."Thats all we have been saying Mike that FSX is a Diamond in the rough, not a lump of coal. Just needs some polish which will come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK Stelios, Go back and actually read the post theres your answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - quick query, I'm running XP Home + Vista RC2 - dual boot.FSX installed on XP Home.what happens re activation when I install also on RC2 ? Will it cause me grief ? Will it use up one of my "installations" before I need to phone Microsoft ?thanks for any help,Mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK ... Quick update from me. My experience only.1) If you you are using a current ati card under xp fsx runs badly 2) If you are using a current nvidia card under xp fsx runs ok and with a bit of tweaking, pretty good.3) Thanks to the op for pointing the new drivers out and fsx runs now as well as it should under vista with an ati card and with a bit of tweaking, pretty good.So the conclusion is that something in the ati xp drivers doesnt like fsx, but can i just say that for me anyway this is a ,massive leap forward as i have vista rc2 and intend purchasing a retail copy on 30 Jan as they have now retreated on the licensing restrictionso can i just repeat .. HURRAH!!!!YIPPEE thank goodness etc etc (you get the picture)My next question is .. is it going to be worthwhile upgrading to an 8800gts from an x1900xt and i gues i'm going to be answering that, but given that the 8800gts has 64GB/s of memory bandwidth against my current 46.4GB/s it ought to.and again i would like to say YIPPEE!!!!all the best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're upgarding hardware for other things, then January might be a good time to upgrade - if you like throwing your money away. Buying a DX10 card is absolutely pointless unless/until DX10 games start to appear - and for FSX, th patch is released and PROVES to have better performance. If you are upgrading only for FSX. Wait.Allcott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this