Simviation Forums

Hi All,

I am thinking about replacing my Radeon 9800 XT Pro and I would like some suggestions on a decent replacement. It must be a AGP card as I don't want to replace my motherboard.

I think it is still a pretty good card, running pretty smoothly given the shots I can take without pausing the sim and then tweaking settings for better graphics.

Currently I am on a Dell Dimension 8300, running a P4 3.2 Ghz. HT with 2 GB RAM. I have two SATA HDD's (300 + 120) and it's a system I'm still very happy with.

My local computer store has an 'old' 6800GT on sale for

Judging from those shots...I don't think you need to replace...I use an AGP 6800GT and I get (or used to get) very decent settings and an overall crisp FS environment...As for the hardware part, ask Cameron...I am a dumb-a$$ compared to him

I suspect the screen shot quality is because you are either using a CRT monitor or high res LCD and perhaps have the ability to raise the resolution and refresh rate? Those who do not understand resolution and refesh rate on CRT monitors and those who are running low res (1280x1024) LCD units which do not allow raising the refresh rate tend to have screenshots that are not as crisp and clean as others no matter how good the video card is.

Low res LCD owners are stuck however anyone with a CRT that has the ability to run 85Hz or higher refresh and a higher resolutions should set thier systems up to do so, at least for screen shot captures.

Another reason for clean shots is the type of aircraft textures and ground textures/mesh being used along with a tower having a decent and powerful system bus to work with that is not all buggered up with lost resources.

As for AGP cards.... the only choices are an x850xt or the newer Nvida 7XXX AGP release. Both should provide a substantial boost over the 9800xt but they are considered medium-low grade cards for FSX.

Why would a screenshot be any different on a CRT vs. LCD? Same computer, same resolution, I think it would look the same regardless of monitor.

Why would a screenshot be any different on a CRT vs. LCD? Same computer, same resolution, I think it would look the same regardless of monitor.

Assuming the CRT monitor has a native resolution of 1600x and a refresh rate abilty of 85Hz and higher the VIDEO CARD is being set to that and THEREFORE the screenshots reflect the increased quality.

EDIT: Funny this subject should come up... here is some more info about resolution and refresh

http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb/ ... 1156652185

Resolution affects screenshot quality but not refresh rate. I think 60HZ will look same as 85HZ.

Resolution affects screenshot quality but not refresh rate. I think 60HZ will look same as 85HZ.

LOL

Well if you really want to replace the card, your going to be looking at spending about $200+ for something that would offer a large jump in preformance.

I would suggest a 7800GS.

Cheers
Cameron

Funny, I did some research today and was thinking about a 7800 GS 512 too ...

Another funny thing is that I'm on a 19" Dell 1902FP LCD screen runnign 1280x1024 at 60 Hz. I only resize the entire shot to 800x640, so no cropping. So basically I think your get a better resolution because your cramming the same amount of pixels in less space.

Does that make any sense?

Funny, I did some research today and was thinking about a 7800 GS 512 too ...

Another funny thing is that I'm on a 19" Dell 1902FP LCD screen runnign 1280x1024 at 60 Hz. I only resize the entire shot to 800x640, so no cropping. So basically I think your get a better resolution because your cramming the same amount of pixels in less space.

Does that make any sense?

a very simplistic way of putting it and there is a bit more about it than that, but you are correct.

The refresh rate has to do with scan lines and other issues such as creating a better viewing distance with sharper results.

I run a top of the line Sony flat panel @ 1280x1024 and 60Hz however I have a CRT which I use from time to time for graphics work. When I snag a shot using that monitor and it is set up to 1600x the screenshots are much better defined and sharper on the same system.

I suspect the screen shot quality is because you are either using a CRT monitor or high res LCD and perhaps have the ability to raise the resolution and refresh rate? Those who do not understand resolution and refesh rate on CRT monitors and those who are running low res (1280x1024) LCD units which do not allow raising the refresh rate tend to have screenshots that are not as crisp and clean as others no matter how good the video card is.

Nick, I'd like for you to see the following pic...:



I'd say it's a rater crisp FS image...keep in mind I have not done any editing to it besides resizing it...

And I run FS9 on my Philips 19' LCD Monitor...I don't quite get what you mean by not getting crisp images....

Nick, I'd like for you to see the following pic...:



I'd say it's a rater crisp FS image...keep in mind I have not done any editing to it besides resizing it...

And I run FS9 on my Philips 19' LCD Monitor...I don't quite get what you mean by not getting crisp images....

and your point is?



that was snagged from 1280x1024


I said "generally" and also distance shots tend to be much better on high res with higher refresh rate... texture quality affects it as well

The location, camera angle, type of camera being used (tower or spot, etc

Resolution affects screenshot quality but not refresh rate. I think 60HZ will look same as 85HZ.

Well, that's what I thought too, as far as the screenshot is concerned. I can understand why Nick is laughing if this concern was in relation actual viewed quality, but I thought what was being discussed was capture quality, so I can't see why refresh rate would matter in captured images, as the quality isn't dependant on what the user sees, but rather the quality/settings of the capture device (video card).

I might be totally misunderstanding the whole principle of screen capture, but I didn't know it had anything to do with the display device other than the fact that the user has the ability to set the resolution to optimum.

In other words, if someone uses a lowly GeForce FX5200 video card that fully supports dx9 features, and that card is quality built and capable of high resolutions, it will capture images just as good as a much more powerful card on a more powerful system, providing the display settings in the software are identical.

What difference to the captured image if one shot is taken with a high quality monitor and another with one of dubious repute, providing the resolution of the image is identical?

The captured image is not an image of the actual screen is it? I thought it was the capturing of the image being sent to the monitor.

Well, that's what I thought too, as far as the screenshot is concerned. I can understand why Nick is laughing if this concern was in relation actual viewed quality, but I thought what was being discussed was capture quality.

Not really... what was being discussed was a replacement card for a 9800xt and the fact he cant go PCIe

Screenshots can be fudged, cleaned up in post <--easy for me to spot those and there are alot of them on this board... carefully planned with lighting camera angle viewing distance and the list goes on and on... some even force a higher res just to take paused and carefully planned screenshots and claim they are from a moving sim. Then there are the ZOOM tricks. The list goes on and on.

There is a math involved when using higher res then recompressing for others to see. Most dont know how to calculate or work with it. Since the majory of users are running lower res monitors viewing these forums the images have a different appearance and bring out details not normally seen as well.

http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb/ ... 1156706752

The bottom line is if one wants a better looking sim especially in distance shots and moving visuals a higher res higher refesh CRT unit (unless it is pure hi res digital LCD with good response time) will provide a better quality format for just about anything in the sim. Thos who run systems like that can generally snag a shot from any angle and always come up with a clean one... others must wait for the right set of variables to be in place before attempting a snag which is why many run screeshot capture programs to rapid fire and see which one caught the frame buffer just right.

Resolution affects screenshot quality but not refresh rate. I think 60HZ will look same as 85HZ.

I came back to this because when I answered earlier I was a bit short on comment to the specifics of what you were saying. I was not laughing at you and I apologize if it appeared that way.

You are correct that the refresh rate does not physically affect the screenshot in so much as the scan of the monitor. In that context the higher refresh allows for a much sharper and smoother visual image on the monitor being viewed. There is however some influence..

In a screenshot the video card produces an image based on the monitor settings in Windows, the graphics card settings which typically include "wait for vertical refresh". By placing that in sync with the monitor it also adds a level of clarity, not just deal with tearing. The details of the image will be greatly influenced by those settings although not so much physically by the refresh rate, the amount details the sim produces is directly influenced by what it is being directed to do and what type and amount of resources it has to accomplish the task.

Higher res and refresh will produce visuals in the distance and details up close that are typically not seen at lower resolutions.

The raw image produced in high res in combination with Windows display and the video card is what gives you the data to create the final product so when the image is reduced there is still significantly more image data per line and therefore the lower size image becomes impressive.


This is easily seen if you have ever take a true 35mm digital image in .tiff and reduced it to a 200x200 image. The details are so defined even at a significantly smaller size they are noticeable where if you were to take the same shot with fewer lines per inch, the 200x200 image would not look anywhere near as clean. The smaller details disappear because the number of lines per inch is significantly less.