5870 / BP=0 - Great fps improvement by lowering to 2xAA

[Guest Zorg_DK]

Before I ran FSX with 4xAA or 8xAA box / 16xAF. I just tried 2xAA and the framerate is MUCH better with less stutters (very often 60 fps). I guess that since the BP=0 makes FSX rely more on the GPU it makes sense that AA would have such a big impact on fps (AA don't have much impact without BP=0 for me). I'm running an i7 @ 4.2ghz, ATI 5870, 6gb ram @ 1600 mhz 6-7-6-18, Crucial C300 256gb SSD, Win 7 x64. I'm using BP=0, unlimited frames and ATI tray tools to get vsync, 1920x1200. Give it a try with no AA or AAx2 and check if you see a big fps gain (or less stutter) with BP=0.

[HyperionXL 0]

I'll attempt to confirm this when I get home from a short vacation I took this weekend. We have virtually the same system.

Before I ran FSX with 4xAA or 8xAA box / 16xAF. I just tried 2xAA and the framerate is MUCH better with less stutters (very often 60 fps). I guess that since the BP=0 makes FSX rely more on the GPU it makes sense that AA would have such a big impact on fps (AA don't have much impact without BP=0 for me). I'm running an i7 @ 4.2ghz, ATI 5870, 6gb ram @ 1600 mhz 6-7-6-18, Crucial C300 256gb SSD, Win 7 x64. I'm using BP=0, unlimited frames and ATI tray tools to get vsync, 1920x1200. Give it a try with no AA or AAx2 and check if you see a big fps gain (or less stutter) with BP=0.

[bojote 20]

Before I ran FSX with 4xAA or 8xAA box / 16xAF. I just tried 2xAA and the framerate is MUCH better with less stutters (very often 60 fps). I guess that since the BP=0 makes FSX rely more on the GPU it makes sense that AA would have such a big impact on fps (AA don't have much impact without BP=0 for me). I'm running an i7 @ 4.2ghz, ATI 5870, 6gb ram @ 1600 mhz 6-7-6-18, Crucial C300 256gb SSD, Win 7 x64. I'm using BP=0, unlimited frames and ATI tray tools to get vsync, 1920x1200. Give it a try with no AA or AAx2 and check if you see a big fps gain (or less stutter) with BP=0.

That would be great news for ATI users indeed.... would be nice to have someone confirm it.

[jwenham 1]

I think its funny you all getting these big bad GPU's/CPU's, ect and all I have been reading lately on this forum is 2x AA or no AA, lower LOD or Lower AG or this or that ect ect. No wonder you are all seeing such big FPS boosts (which mean absolutely nothing, zip, nada in FSX). Please dont get me wrong, I do promote tweeking and such in FSX but come on... no AA or VSYNC ect. Not to mention that 1/2 of the current tweeks floating around no nothing at all in FSX and if anything are only masking a issue somewhere else in the system or settings not made properly.

[JHepburn 0]

I think its funny you all getting these big bad GPU's/CPU's, ect and all I have been reading lately on this forum is 2x AA or no AA, lower LOD or Lower AG or this or that ect ect. No wonder you are all seeing such big FPS boosts (which mean absolutely nothing, zip, nada in FSX). Please dont get me wrong, I do promote tweeking and such in FSX but come on... no AA or VSYNC ect. Not to mention that 1/2 of the current tweeks floating around no nothing at all in FSX and if anything are only masking a issue somewhere else in the system or settings not made properly.

I've tested all manner of configurations recently. Interestingly enough, I ended up with the same settings I've started with (nhancer per NickN, ENB Bloom, etc.) except for 2 changes...1. BP=02. Frame rates unlimited in-game (and using the external FPS limited).These two changes have provided a significantly better experience in both smoothness and overall frame rates. Bottom line...use what works for you, but don't discourage others from using a few tweaks recently "discovered" that CAN actually work for them.

[DylanM 1,069]

Zork, are your frames locked?

[bojote 20]

use what works for you, but don't discourage others from using a few tweaks recently "discovered" that CAN actually work for them.

Wise words... 'who' would discourage others from trying 'new' discovered tweaks? doesn't make much sense

[jjjallen 37]

I've never been able to tell the difference between 2x and 4x driver level. And 4x does seem to take a hit even on nVidia cards.jja

[jwenham 1]

Wise words... 'who' would discourage others from trying 'new' discovered tweaks? doesn't make much sense

Dont see where I was trying to talk someone out of a tweek. Go back and read my reply as I said that I DO promote tweeking. My comment was just that ... a comment. There is more than one way to run FSX and people are welcome to their comments or to how they want to set up FSX. Sorry if I offended anybody as that was not my intention at all.

[Guest rdg]

Hi,Yea, I have seen this too concerning the lowering of this and that. I made a huge mistake as I thought the 197.45 drivers were a miracle cure as my frames and smoothness improved. But....I did not realize right away that the level of the AA applied by this new driver using the same AA settings I had set with the 182.50's was not near as effecient. I had jumped the gun in another forum and stated I found the perfect driver. Anyway, I will be more careful next time.I just have a gut feeling that were not going find the miracle cure. Faster CPU's and GPU's I believe is where the biggest improvements will be. I just hope that because of the FSX code that we dont hit the point where nothing seems to improve no matter we do.Bob G

[Twitchstick 0]

Probably my biggest fear is that no matter what comes out in the future, it might never give us the performance we hope to achieve.

[ryanbatc 12,920]

Before I ran FSX with 4xAA or 8xAA box / 16xAF. I just tried 2xAA and the framerate is MUCH better with less stutters

uuuuh yeahhh, what has this got to do with BP=0 though? With 2x AA you are lowering the amount of information for the video card and also the CPU to process. Thus FPS increase. 2xAA looks nasty!! Or did I miss something else?

[HyperionXL 0]

I saw absolutely zero difference between different AA settings in the default 172 at KSEA, except when I turned the AA to the max, which dropped everything down 2 FPS on average. I had max everything except water at med x 2 and clouds at high with 60 miles visibility. AI was at 100% with trafficx. Average FPS was around 11. I turned on catalyst AI and openGL Tripple Buffering on and got 2-3 more FPS. I admit my frames are lower than what I would expect from my machine which makes me wonder if I've done something wrong. Done the ******* buffer pool and general tweaks, so it all runs generally smooth... just lower FPS than I'd imagine I should be getting with all the power in my machine.However, Low and mid AA settings showed absolutely no change in FPS for me.

[BNS 0]

I saw absolutely zero difference between different AA settings in the default 172 at KSEA, except when I turned the AA to the max, which dropped everything down 2 FPS on average. I had max everything except water at med x 2 and clouds at high with 60 miles visibility. AI was at 100% with trafficx. Average FPS was around 11. I turned on catalyst AI and openGL Tripple Buffering on and got 2-3 more FPS. I admit my frames are lower than what I would expect from my machine which makes me wonder if I've done something wrong. Done the ******* buffer pool and general tweaks, so it all runs generally smooth... just lower FPS than I'd imagine I should be getting with all the power in my machine.However, Low and mid AA settings showed absolutely no change in FPS for me.

Are we sure that we allways make fair comparisons? It is my experience that changes in nHancer, like changing AA or AF, only take effect AFTER restarting FSX. Also I have the impression that once you have also made some kind of quality adjustment through the nVidia control pannel, you are no longer sure what setting you end up with. Remedy for controled testing and reporting effects: uninstall and re-install nHancer and quit FSX and restart after every change in nHancer settings.BNS

[Guest Flight708]

uuuuh yeahhh, what has this got to do with BP=0 though? With 2x AA you are lowering the amount of information for the video card and also the CPU to process. Thus FPS increase. 2xAA looks nasty!! Or did I miss something else?

Agree, how can anyone stand the look of 2xAA?We are really at the low end here IMO.Sure you will get high FPS with lower settings, LOL!But I prefer a balanced Sim-experience, smoothness above all, and OK IQ.That's possible even with 20-25 FPS, if your system is set-up the right way.Here's a guide - for both XP and Windows 7:http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_post...D=198077#198077Do it that way, you won't regret it!