This AGP 64mb grfx card, " NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 4000 (Microsoft Corporation) " on my A socket mobo, gives clearer view of my house in GoogleEarth, than the MSI 6600GT 128mb in my Asus AN8 32 sli mobo. No Ovrclocks. The 6600gt is set at full AAliazing outside & within fs9. Does it need special settings for G.Earth ?. Home build Asus A8N 32 sli deluxe Chipset nF4 SLI x16 AMD 64 3.5+ Venice 2.2ghz Corsair twinx 2x512mb MSI 6600gt 128 PCI-E Maxtor sata 160mb PSU 400w XP sp2 X45
The question I would have is along the same lines as what hitman is getting to: Did you upgrade from the mx4000 to the 6600gt? While your 6600gt is obviously a lot better than the mx4000 when it comes to 3d performance, there really shouldn't be any image quality differences in that application between the two.
High settings perhaps yes, as it was set for good performance in fs9. Not upgrade, two different PCs. Thanx
Yes, but are the settings in the Google Earth application configured for maximum quality? They should look like this:
No, on either PC, just set both G.Earths up like yours, but the Nvidia 64mgs G.Earth asks if I want to go to DirectX, if I say No it goes to black screen, if yes restarts OK. The 6600gt GEarth starts OK but no difference in picture quality. Both have DX9.
Try using the same settings on both, right down to the DirectX stuff. Are both on the same Internet connection etc?
Both GEarths have DX9 and set as per your settings. The clearer example on NvGeF4 MX 4000 64mb gfx card on S.A mobo + 1.2ghz AMD XP:- This with the 6600gt 128mb on S 939 Asus 32 sli
This would be the next step - I had to clear mine when they introduced high-resolution images of my city. Before I did, it would not replace the old cache data with the newer scenery.
At a guess having never used it, I'd say in the "cache" tab just to the right of the "view" tab in "options"
Resolved now by chance. Thought because I downloaded G.E. in the Asus mobo long ago, and in the A socket nly recently, I better try to redownload it again in the Asus one. And that did it. Here it is, same with the 6600gt 128, as the Nvidia 64mb one. One would think that the 6600gt would be far superior though. Thanx, nick
In 3D app's it will smack the 64mb one... But 2D isn't that demanding... I recon you'd get the same results on a S3/VIA integrated grafic solution.
OK, thanks all, I guess GE is 2D, and a friend said this: "...... The difference in the cards doesn't produce better, clearer quality. The performance cards are just that...... built for performance....... they will display any given quality faster than a poorer performance card. As you fly around and rotate the view etc in google earth, the 6600GT should be smoother........" which proved right with the 64mb one in fs9, very poor airport buildings, and the VFR photgraphic Scenery SE-UK not so hot at all. Can not map-read my way at all, unlike the real world quality in MSI 6600gt. And indeed MSI is smoother in GE nick PS my stable 2.55 Oclock on latter, makes a visible but slight difference in FS9 now, and no doupt will do none in GE. nick
