I dont know if anybody answer this question or not.

Why ATI are not advise for FS anymore????

I see lots of posts saying that everybody should go to Nvidia.
I still remember my 9700 Pro being wonderful for FS 2000, 2002 and 2004.But it was only 128 megs.
Is there any reason???

Because FSX uses an old shader/rendering engine that's almost 10 years old. ATi have newer ways of rendering graphics and it doesn't work as well with FSX...

It's not Nick's fault... He knows what he's talking about. don't throw him down for this NDUDE737

it's FSX's fault and its old rendering engine... that's why newer games work better with ATi cards, because they have newer rendering engines.

Because Ati cards are designed for shader driver rendering engines and FS9/FSX is a old school triangle rendering engine that requires a video core which is targeted at CPU bound render code which Nvidia still caters too.

and if anyone here wants to tell me ATi runs FS9/FSX better or equal to Nvidia under equal weather conditions and high load payware aircraft then that tells me they are clueless from the neck, up when it comes to hardware technology


You guys are welcome to use what you want but dont EVER post I am some kind of fanboy freak.. What I post comes from 45 years of being a lead engineer in the aerospace industry and if you think you can argue tech  and CS with someone who designed and specified data systems for the Space Shuttle guidance controls..   

bring it on

The day ATi releases a card that runs head-to-head with Nvidia for equal result, or better, is the day I will begin to suggest their use for MSFS.

That has not been true since 2005 and the ATi 800 series just before Nvidia whoomped them with the G7

And one other thing too..    if your game of choice is a modern shader engine game like Crysis and FS is just a passing fancy, stick with the modern ATi card.

If your primary game is FSX and you want the most horsepower available for the application, stick with Nvidia

And in EITHER case you must match the right card to the processor/memory speed in use including the clock.





I'll ignore the rest of the noise ...

burp

Bah!! once google chrome os is up and running you'll be binning the graphics card anyways ATI and Nvidia will be screwed.
Check out the video
http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/

waspiflab wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2009 at 2:20pm:


That uses videocards for rendering, and honestly it looks like crap compared to a real game.

waspiflab wrote on Oct 4^th, 2009 at 11:08am:


Then it seems that the limiting factor will not be the crap PC....... but the crap internet connection and ISP and overall net traffic and bandwidth at any given time.

Out of the frying pan into the fire, maybe?

At least you can control the "crap PC" by getting a new one.  Forr many, the internet situation is not something that THEY have all that much control over.

best,

.............john

waspiflab wrote on Oct 4^th, 2009 at 11:08am:

No - you're wrong. IF you don't believe me then ask Nick N.

Thanks.

The 5870 is going into an i7 rig.

Also getting a 5850 for my 3.6ghz Q6600. Not ideal, but it will have to do (and not really for msfs anyway)

i7..   975 will clock to 4-4.2Ghz

950 4GHz no problem

920  3.8 to 4Ghz

any of the above will require a proper clocking heatsink

DDR3 1600 6-7-6-18  3x2GB memory

P6T Deluxe v2 motherboard


and a 295 is useless to FSX..   either the 285 or the ATi 5870, one of the two