480 GTX vs. 580 GTX

[SpiritFlyer 987]

 

Battle of the Heavyweights

 

Since there is already a considerable body of experience and knowledge base concerning the 480 GTX as it pertains to FSX, it seems to me that it would be worthwhile to attempt to objectively compare it to the new 580 GTX. Even though a wide game based comparison of benchmarks on both cards would be most helpful, what actually happens with these cards when flying in FSX is most important to the flight simulation community.

 

In any such comparison every precaution must be taken to compare apples with apples when possible. So under most circumstances it is important to try and standardize both elements so that the differences will become apparent based solely upon performance capabilities. We want to compare apples for apples. However, It is impossible in this case to conduct a fair appraisal of these two video cards in this manner, because of a number of insurmountable obstacles, as I will try to explain the best way I can.

 

Background

 

The same Nvidia driver is not available and used for both of these video cards. At the time of this test the 580 GTX uses version 263.09, while the 480 GTX uses 260.99. The effects of the difference could be a double edged sword, cutting either way. The 480 GTX drivers have had time to mature while the 580 GTX has only had the very first one, giving a possible advantage to the more mature 480 GTX. On the other hand, perhaps the new driver is simply an improved version on the former ones, giving the 580 GTX an unfair advantage. This is all unknown, and is a wild card that could trump the hand either way, (or not), with the next mutually shared driver release.

 

Heat and Noise

 

The whole subject of the heat caused by the 480 GTX has presented an awkward challenge when trying to establish what should be broadly considered to be a safe and sane overclock to compare to the 580 GTX. The overclocked reference versions of the 480 GTX were limited to only +3.6% on air and only +7% with factory installed water blocks. Even though some of us in the fringe, who had been lucky enough to have particularly good cards went well over these numbers, the vast majority are not willing to do so at the risk of over heating and/or living with all the fan noise.

 

480 GTX Clock Speed?

 

What then are the best clock speeds to do a fair comparison with? One only has to read any number of reviews on the 480 GTX to find that the common 480 GTX has a ceiling close to default because of noise and heat issues. There are always exceptions. My 480 GTX could remain stable in FSX at 800 MHz because of good ventilation, but not many can run at that speed. So what is the best clock speed then to measure the 480 GTX? Which will be the most practical and helpful information to those who may use this data to make a purchase decision?

 

580 GTX Clock Speed?

 

What should the speed the 580 GTX be measured at, the default 772 MHz, or at an overclock? On the surface it should be an easy question to answer, particularly to anyone that does not yet own one of these new cards. It might seem logical that both cards should be measured by the clock speeds they were sold at. However, it is not as simple as that. For most everyone who has actually bought the 580 GTX, that has owned the 480 GTX before it, that perhaps does not seem like a practical approach, at least to me. Why? Because the 580 GTX is perhaps the best overclocker that Nvidia has ever produced to date, whereas the 480 GTX nearly cooks itself at the default 700 MHz. The 580 GTX seems to be able to run much, much faster without getting hot and bothered.

 

580 GTX Overclockability

 

As has been stated by testers and many new owners in various enthusiasts forums, many 580 GTXs will run at levels close to 900 MHz. With voltage tweaks there is often substantially more headroom even than that. I tested my Zotac 580 GTX in FSX at well over 900 MHz for an hour over the PNW at 1.125 volts, without a single artefact, or heat, or excessive fan noise. The temperatures did not exceed 75C and the fan remained at around 65 - 75%, which is barely above my case fans sound levels.

 

So, even though I would not benchmark those speeds for comparison purposes, I have been convinced that the 580 GTX was engineered and designed for these operating zones because of how effortlessly it does so. So, what would be the most meaningful speed to run the 580 GTX at for someone trying to decide whether to buy a 480 GTX at a bargain price, or to pay a premium for a 580 GTX? That is the question I would like to address.

 

 

 

Swap Out

 

3 way Test

 

The answer I came up with is my own, what seems logical and consistent to me after having spent a lot of time with each of these video cards, and experienced what they provide to FSX. Some will disagree I am sure, and I too have waffled back and forth, but here it is. I made a decision I can live with as being the most practical for anyone wanting to use these cards for FSX.

 

The 480 GTX is tested at both default and at 800 MHz while the 580 GTX is only tested at 880 MHz. The 480 GTX is working really hard at 800 Mhz (+14.12% OC) on air, a lot harder than the 580 GTX is when running at 880 MHz (+14% OC). In my opinion there is no reason to test the 580 GTX at default speed because there is absolutely no reason to leave it there. BUT the 480 GTX default vs. 580 GTX overclocked is the most important test results for anyone who wants to know what they can comfortably achieve and enjoy with either video card, because that is the sweet spot for both.

 

Fine Print:

 

However if you do overclock and destroy your computer and/or burn your house down, it is your own responsibility. Even though this information is believed to be true it is not warranted to be so.

 

Specifications and Settings

 

CPU-Z1CPU-Z2GPU-Z 480 GTX GTX

 

GPU-Z 580 GTX

 

Nvidia Inspector 480 GTX

 

Nvidia Inspector 580 GTX

 

Nvidia Inspector Control Panel Profile Settings

 

Afterburner Settings 480 GTX

 

Afterburner Settings 580 GTX

 

FSX Settings 1

 

FSX Settings 2

 

FSX Settings 3

 

FSX Settings 4

 

FSX Settings 5

 

The Test Bench

 

Concrete 1

 

480 GTX at 701 MHz 29.3 FPS low, 50.7 FPS Average, 60.4 FPS High

 

480 GTX at 800 MHz 44.9 FPS Low, 54.5 FPS Average, 60.0 FPS High

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 55.2 FPX Low, 60.1 FPS Average, 60.8 FPS High

 

Test Results - Concrete 1

 

Concrete 2

 

480 GTX at 701 MHz 42.5 FPS Low, 82.0 FPS Average, 60.4 FPS High

 

480 GTX at 800 MHz 60.1 FPS Low, 92.4 FPS Average, 106 FPS High

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 64.7 FPS Low, 101.6 FPS Average, 129.5 FPS High

 

Test Results - Concrete 2

 

Concrete 3

 

480 GTX at 701 MHz 36.7 FPS Low, 70 FPS Average, 87.2 FPS High

 

480 GTX at 800 MHz 58.0 FPS Low, 75.5 FPS Average, 91.2 FPS High

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 67.3 FPS Low, 86.6 FPS Average, 96.1 FPS High

 

Test Results - Concrete 3

 

Darrington

 

480 GTX at 701 MHz 36.8 FPS Low, 46.3 FPS Average, 63.2 FPS High

 

480 GTX at 800 MHz 43.0 FPS Low, 52.2 FPS Average, 68.4 FPS High

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 45.9 FPS Low, 58.3 FPS Average, 71.5 FPS High

 

Test Results - Darrington

 

Israel's Farm

 

480 GTX at 701 Mhz 54.8 FPS Low, 83.4 FPS Average, 97.3 FPS High

 

480 GTX at 800 MHz 70.0 FPS Low, 93.4 FPS Average, 104 FPS High

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 89.8 FPS Low, 105.6 FPS Average, 112.9 FPS High

 

Test Results - Israel's Farm

 

Alaska Forest

 

480 GTX at 701 MHz 41.3 FPS Low, 74.6 FPS Average, 119.5 FPS High

 

480 GTX at 800 MHz 57.8 FPS Low, 83.1 FPS Average, 93.7 FPS High

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 77.1 FPS Low, 92.5 FPS Average, 112.6 FPS High

 

Test Results - Alaska Forest

FSX Comparison Test Averages

 

Brief FSX Test Analysis

 

Both the 480 GTX and the 580 GTX are outstanding video cards. The differences in performance more or less follow the known criteria of relative power as determined by common benchmarks. It would seem that with both of these cards, if the CPU and the rest of the computer is providing the opportunity, without bottlenecks, the video cards make their own numbers as advertised, even in FSX.

 

The outcome of the tests are remarkably consistent with each other and with the other dozen or so unofficial tests I undertook. The numbers stray very little from the percentages relative to each other. The default clocked 480 GTX has a much lower bottom end than when it is overclocked. The 580 GTX jumps even higher in it's minimums, providing an amazing 67.5% lift at the bottom end where stuttering can happen. The 580 GTX at these settings is just too fast that and is stutter free in this computer. It is a nice and gentle smooth experience.

 

There is more FSX testing at the end of this post, adding some other video cards that I have recently owned and tested. Meanwhile let's take a look at some of the factors of why the 580 GTX and the overclocked 480 GTX does so well. Please wade through this as it really explains a lot about these video cards performances.

 

The Heaven Benchmark with the 580 GTX.

 

Unfortunately I sold the 480 GTX before I downloaded this program. According to online bench marks most single overclocked 480 GTXs seem to run in the 43 to 48 FPS range.

 

PassMark November 19, 2010 with 480 GTX at 850 MHzPassMark December 7, 2010 with 580 GTX at 900 MHz

 

This software tests and stresses a computer completely, evaluating and analysing it's strengths and weaknesses adding to their data base. Hundreds of thousands of computers have been categorized in this way. Please see my notes in the following linked thread and follow the other link to their website to see the latest numbers:

 

Evaluating and Analysing using PassMark SoftwareGo to PassMark Software Website

 

During the test the video cards are run and tested to the max. Because this machine provides a non-restrictive platform without bottlenecks the video cards are free to perform much better than those which are limited by other components, especially when highly overclocked. Here are the results of the video card tests:

 

480 GTX at 850 MHz Test November 19, 2010580 GTX at 900 MHz Test December 7, 2010

 

This 480 GTX outperformed the average 480 GTX by 30% for the reasons stated above. The 580 GTX did even better blowing by it's stablemates by well over 40%. Here is a chart of the other video card averages as tested and published by PassMark as of December 7, 2010.

 

275 GTX vs. 470 GTX vs. 480 GTX vs. 580 GTX

 

Back to testing, or I should say, more of a flashback comparison than anything else. This is not really apples for apples, but they are roughly equivalent if the changes are appreciated. 6 months ago I bought my brand new 480 GTX and ran a series of tests to compare it to the 470 GTX and the 275 GTX I had been using up to a month before (when I bought the 470 GTX).

 

Wait a minute, let me back up. In the last two years or so I went from a ATI 3800 to a 8800 GTX to a 9800 GTX to a 275 GTX to a 470 GTX to a 480 GTX to a 580 GTX. Each change was accompanied by all the appropriate CPUs, motherboards, ram, PSUs and so on. When the 480 GTX came out I could not get one right away because they were in short supply, so I bought an EVGA 470 GTX which a month later I traded in with their step-up program for the 480 GTX. That is why I have been able to test all these cards within the past few months.

 

Here is the other, earlier compiled and documented data and screenshots posted in this AVSIM thread:

 

275 GTX vs 470 GTX vs 480 GTX

 

So indeed, this is not really a direct comparison between video cards only, but more of between systems. The 470 GTX, 480 GTX and 580 GTX are nearly equivalent to each other in most respects with the computer ram, power supply and drives getting better all the time. So in the end it simply gives a real life imperfect look at how much better FSX has been able to work in new computers over the past year.

 

Here is the 580 GTX contribution:

 

Sydney Australia- 580 GTX at 880 MHz

 

Sydney Australia (580 GTX)580 GTX at 880 MHz 43.2 FPS Average480 GTX at 850 MHz 38.3 FPS Average470 GTX at 700 MHz 29.4 FPS Average275 GTX at 721 MHz 25.8 FPS Average

 

Melbourne Australia - 580 GTX at 880 MHz

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 45.4 FPS Average480 GTX at 850 MHz 27.3 FPS Average470 GTX at 700 MHz 24.7 FPS Average275 GTX at 721 MHz 17.7 FPS Average.

 

Jandacot Australia - 580 GTX at 880 MHz

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 60.0 FPS Average480 GTX at 850 MHz 51.9 FPS Average470 GTX at 700 MHz 50.7 FPS Average275 GTX at 721 MHz 46.3 FPS Average

 

Tamworth Australia - 580 GTX at 880 MHz

 

580 GTX at 880 MHz 56.5 FPS Average

480 GTX at 850 MHz 53.9 FPS Average

470 GTX at 700 MHz 52.8 FPS Average

275 GTX at 721 MHz 39.4 FPS Average

 

Combined Averages

 

Findings

 

There is enough wiggle room here for anyone to find what they are looking for to justify their decisions or inclinations. If you own a 480 GTX there is every reason for keeping it instead of selling it at a stiff penalty and paying top dollar for a 580 GTX, especially if you overclock the daylights out of it. On the other hand if you can't stand the heat and the noise and you get the occasional stutter, then the 580 GTX is everything you wished the 480 GTX was, and even more.

 

If you do not have a 480 GTX, then upgrading to a 580 GTX is a good thing to do for FSX performance, providing you have a machine that will feed it. The 580 GTX is an amazing card that will blow your socks off without you hearing or feeling it coming. It is nearly impossible to overload or to weigh it down with FSX scenery and detail. I set it at 60 FPS and it seldom if ever drops below 25 even over Seattle! That lifts the whole computer and FSX out of the stutter and shutter ditch. The ladder to the bottom of the FSX FPS common experience has been pulled up an average of 65.7% over the regular 480 GTX. That means if you are pulling 15 with the 480 GTX at 701 MHz over a congested city you can now expect to hold 25 FPS with a 580 GTX. A bottom of 25 FPS becomes almost 42 FPS. This is serious stuff.

 

Conclusion

 

Of course if you overclock your 480 GTX to 800 MHz, even though most don't for many different reasons, the improvement with the 580 GTX will be less, but still near 15-20%. On the other hand, if you have a water jacket on the 480 GTX, and can get away with really cranking it up some more, you can probably maintain a lot closer to the OC 580 GTX performance levels. However, I can't help to wonder what would happen though if you put a 580 GTX on water instead? Apparently having near 1,000 MHz is not uncommon in such a system.

 

It is still very early days for the 580 GTX so we will see what happens. Even EVGA is getting in on the overclocking act, having a version of the brand new 570 GTX that is clocked even higher than the stock 580 GTX, with the same fan and cooling system! Rumour has it that there is a lot more to come as Nvidia partners play around with these toys with new non-reference designed enhancments. It is very interesting days in the computer hardware business with both the Nvidia's 500 series and the upcoming Sandy Bridge CPU release.

 

I hope this short overview of the 480 GTX and the 580 GTX helps some of you. I don't apologize for being a 580 GTX enthusiast. In my humble opinion if there has ever been a time that a GPU company in this hobby deserves more than a clap and slap on the back, this is it. Nvidia has done something magnificent with the 580 GTX. The great news as far as I am concerned is that when running flat out in a strong computer it is a natural for FSX, just as if it was designed for it. The difference in performance is scaled in FSX just like in other applications.

 

The 580 GTX has more performance than we hoped for in the 480 GTX, without the heat and noise, bringing with it a credible promise of a lot more to come.

 

 

Thanks for reading.

 

Kind regards,

[Tabs 2,790]

Wow, that looks like a heck of a lot of work you put into these tests, thanks for the info!

[michal 44]

Stephen, you work is very much appreciated.

[Scott434 12]

Stephen, top notch as usual. I will upgrade for sure early 2011. I have not been following the vid card topic for a while since I thought the 480 was my "last card". What is the state of the drivers for the 5xx cards? Do you think that there is room for more perf when drivers mature?

[jjjallen 37]

Good work Stephen.  I agree that the 580 is a GPU that just keeps on giving.Thanksjja

[Guest 413X3]

Thanks for that writeup... I had to hold my wallet back from getting a 580, still stuck on 285gtx... Maybe beginning of next year!

[Epikk 62]

GREAT test there... Thanks for this.

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Stephen, top notch as usual. I will upgrade for sure early 2011. I have not been following the vid card topic for a while since I thought the 480 was my "last card". What is the state of the drivers for the 5xx cards? Do you think that there is room for more perf when drivers mature?

Hi Scott. There is just a single driver for the 500 series at this point, the 263.99 which the 400's can not even use. So, I imagine there will be a whole lot of driver improvement coming down the line.I though the 480 GTX would be the last I would get for a long while but lo and behold the 580 GTX runs circles around it in FSX and everywhere else. Your machine would love to feed it.Kind regards,

[SpiritFlyer 987]

I just ran this test but I don't know if it is good or poor, but here it is:Kind regards,

[SpiritFlyer 987]

A picture is worth a thousand words, they say.. If so, here are several thousand words that spell SUCCESS.Hardware Canucks ArticleThe question asked by the author: "So what are we looking at is a potential market-leading card from Nvidia that should be available soon after you read this. But will it maintain a sizable enough lead over the 480 GTX to justify its price of $499?"And the answer is? YESHere is the picture North America wide as of this date and time:www.nowinstock.netThe marketplace is the final judge, and it has rendered a decision. The 580 GTX is a runaway success, a sales tidal wave.Kind regards,

[kaydub 3]

Well, I was at my local shop, (it's like one of two indie shops left in the entire metro area), and they had a Zotac and an EVGA. Paced around, called the wife, (they ARE hard to find, dear). OK, so now I need to set mine up to see what it can do. With no tweaks it screams, but should I use bufferpools?Kaydub

[SpiritFlyer 987]

I have had a number of people asking about fsx.cfg settings to accompany the 580 GTX and a number of other issues. I do not use an outside FPS limiter asI set my frames at 60 FPS in non-test FSX which seems to work the best for this machine. In fact, it seems to be smoother than when set at even 30 FPS. It may or may not have something to do with that number matching the monitor refresh rates.Here are the relevant portions of my test fsx.cfg file. I would advise caution in adopting them without carefully testing and comparing as computers seem to vary from each other insofar as to which combination of tweaks seems to work best. These settings were used in the test in addition to the Nvidia Inspector profile as shown in the test references and documentation. In my own personal flying I do not use the Nvidia Inspector tool for setting the Nvidia control panel but instead use the Nvidia SLI Tool and import the Nvidia_Profiles_CBxQ profile.Partial FSX.cfg File[bufferPools]RejectThreshold=131072[GRAPHICS]HIGHMEMFIX=1SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED_10=1693500672SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED=1693500672D3D10=0TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024NUM_LIGHTS=8ALLOW_SHADER_30=1AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=1AIRCRAFT_REFLECTIONS=1COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD=1LANDING_LIGHTS=1AC_SELF_SHADOW=0EFFECTS_QUALITY=2GROUND_SHADOWS=0TEXTURE_QUALITY=3IMAGE_QUALITY=0See_Self=1Text_Scroll=1ForceFullScreenVSync=0ForceWindowedVSync=0[sOUND]AmbientUIMusicVolume=-6.000000SOUND=1SOUND_QUALITY=2SOUND_LOD=1UISound=1AmbientUI=0PrimaryDevice={DEF00000-9C6D-47ED-AAF1-4DDA8F2B5C03}VoiceDevice={DEF00002-9C6D-47ED-AAF1-4DDA8F2B5C03}SOUND_FADER1=0.080000SOUND_FADER2=0.080000SOUND_FADER3=0.090000SOUND_FADER4=0.990000AmbientUIMusic=FSX01[Display]ChangeTime=4.000000TransitionTime=4.000000ActiveWindowTitleTextColor=255,255,255ActiveWindowTitleBackGroundColor=0,28,140,64NonActiveWindowTitleTextColor=255,255,255NonActiveWindowTitleBackGroundColor=24,33,87,64InfoUpperRightTextColor=255,0,0InfoUpperRightBackGroundColor=0,0,0,0InfoLowerLeftTextColor=255,255,255InfoLowerLeftBackGroundColor=255,0,0,128InfoLowerRightTextColor=255,255,255InfoLowerRightBackGroundColor=255,0,0,128InfoBrakesEnable=FalseInfoParkingBrakesEnable=FalseInfoPauseEnable=FalseInfoSlewEnable=FalseInfoStallEnable=FalseInfoOverspeedEnable=FalseBLOOM_EFFECTS=0SKINNED_ANIMATIONS=1TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=60UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0WideViewAspect=False[Main]User Objects=Airplane, HelicopterSimObjectPaths.0=SimObjects\AirplanesSimObjectPaths.1=SimObjects\RotorcraftSimObjectPaths.2=SimObjects\GroundVehiclesSimObjectPaths.3=SimObjects\BoatsSimObjectPaths.4=SimObjects\AnimalsSimObjectPaths.5=SimObjects\MiscProcSpeed=15195PerfBucket=7HideMenuNormal=0HideMenuFullscreen=1Maximized=1Location=190,144,1199,922,\\.\DISPLAY1SimObjectPaths.6=SimObjects\UT2 Aircraft[PANELS]IMAGE_QUALITY=1DEFAULT_VIEW=0QUICKTIPS=0PANEL_OPACITY=100PANEL_MASKING=1PANEL_STRETCHING=1UNITS_OF_MEASURE=0[Weather]WindshieldPrecipitationEffects=1MinGustTime=10MaxGustTime=500MinGustRampSpeed=1MaxGustRampSpeed=200MinVarTime=5MaxVarTime=50MinVarRampSpeed=10MaxVarRampSpeed=75TurbulenceScale=1.000000WeatherServerAddress=fs2k.zone.comWeatherServerPort=80WeatherGraphDataInDialog=0AdjustForMagVarInDialog=1DynamicWeather=2DownloadWindsAloft=1DisableTurbulence=0CLOUD_DRAW_DISTANCE=3DETAILED_CLOUDS=1CLOUD_COVERAGE_DENSITY=6THERMAL_VISUALS=0[DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580.0]Mode=1920x1080x32AntiAlias=1Anisotropic=1[AccelerationPack]ControlsFirstRun=0HomePageFirstRun=0[TextInfo.3]Latitude=1,1Longitude=1,2Altitude=1,3Heading=1,4AirSpeed=1,5WindDirectionAndSpeed=1,6FrameRate=2,1LockedFrameRate=2,2GForce=2,3FuelPercentage=2,4AverageFrameRate=2,5FuelPercentage=2,4[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14[sCENERY]LENSFLARE=1DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5MAX_ASYNC_BATCHING_JOBS=3SmallPartRejectRadius=1[TrafficManager]AirlineDensity=100GADensity=100FreewayDensity=35ShipsAndFerriesDensity=20LeisureBoatsDensity=10IFROnly=0AIRPORT_SCENERY_DENSITY=1[TERRAIN]LOD_RADIUS=6.500000MESH_COMPLEXITY=100MESH_RESOLUTION=23SWAP_WAIT_TIMEOUT=2TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=29AUTOGEN_DENSITY=5DETAIL_TEXTURE=1WATER_EFFECTS=6Kind regards,

[kaydub 3]

I have had a number of people asking about fsx.cfg settings to accompany the 580 GTX and a number of other issues. I do not use an outside FPS limiter asI set my frames at 60 FPS in non-test FSX which seems to work the best for this machine. In fact, it seems to be smoother than when set at even 30 FPS. It may or may not have something to do with that number matching the monitor refresh rates.Here are the relevant portions of my test fsx.cfg file. I would advise caution in adopting them without carefully testing and comparing as computers seem to vary from each other insofar as to which combination of tweaks seems to work best. These settings were used in the test in addition to the Nvidia Inspector profile as shown in the test references and documentation. In my own personal flying I do not use the Nvidia Inspector tool for setting the Nvidia control panel but instead use the Nvidia SLI Tool and import the Nvidia_Profiles_CBxQ profile.Partial FSX.cfg File[bufferPools]RejectThreshold=131072[GRAPHICS]HIGHMEMFIX=1SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED_10=1693500672SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED=1693500672D3D10=0TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=1024NUM_LIGHTS=8ALLOW_SHADER_30=1AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=1AIRCRAFT_REFLECTIONS=1COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD=1LANDING_LIGHTS=1AC_SELF_SHADOW=0EFFECTS_QUALITY=2GROUND_SHADOWS=0TEXTURE_QUALITY=3IMAGE_QUALITY=0See_Self=1Text_Scroll=1ForceFullScreenVSync=0ForceWindowedVSync=0[sOUND]AmbientUIMusicVolume=-6.000000SOUND=1SOUND_QUALITY=2SOUND_LOD=1UISound=1AmbientUI=0PrimaryDevice={DEF00000-9C6D-47ED-AAF1-4DDA8F2B5C03}VoiceDevice={DEF00002-9C6D-47ED-AAF1-4DDA8F2B5C03}SOUND_FADER1=0.080000SOUND_FADER2=0.080000SOUND_FADER3=0.090000SOUND_FADER4=0.990000AmbientUIMusic=FSX01[Display]ChangeTime=4.000000TransitionTime=4.000000ActiveWindowTitleTextColor=255,255,255ActiveWindowTitleBackGroundColor=0,28,140,64NonActiveWindowTitleTextColor=255,255,255NonActiveWindowTitleBackGroundColor=24,33,87,64InfoUpperRightTextColor=255,0,0InfoUpperRightBackGroundColor=0,0,0,0InfoLowerLeftTextColor=255,255,255InfoLowerLeftBackGroundColor=255,0,0,128InfoLowerRightTextColor=255,255,255InfoLowerRightBackGroundColor=255,0,0,128InfoBrakesEnable=FalseInfoParkingBrakesEnable=FalseInfoPauseEnable=FalseInfoSlewEnable=FalseInfoStallEnable=FalseInfoOverspeedEnable=FalseBLOOM_EFFECTS=0SKINNED_ANIMATIONS=1TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=60UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=0WideViewAspect=False[Main]User Objects=Airplane, HelicopterSimObjectPaths.0=SimObjects\AirplanesSimObjectPaths.1=SimObjects\RotorcraftSimObjectPaths.2=SimObjects\GroundVehiclesSimObjectPaths.3=SimObjects\BoatsSimObjectPaths.4=SimObjects\AnimalsSimObjectPaths.5=SimObjects\MiscProcSpeed=15195PerfBucket=7HideMenuNormal=0HideMenuFullscreen=1Maximized=1Location=190,144,1199,922,\\.\DISPLAY1SimObjectPaths.6=SimObjects\UT2 Aircraft[PANELS]IMAGE_QUALITY=1DEFAULT_VIEW=0QUICKTIPS=0PANEL_OPACITY=100PANEL_MASKING=1PANEL_STRETCHING=1UNITS_OF_MEASURE=0[Weather]WindshieldPrecipitationEffects=1MinGustTime=10MaxGustTime=500MinGustRampSpeed=1MaxGustRampSpeed=200MinVarTime=5MaxVarTime=50MinVarRampSpeed=10MaxVarRampSpeed=75TurbulenceScale=1.000000WeatherServerAddress=fs2k.zone.comWeatherServerPort=80WeatherGraphDataInDialog=0AdjustForMagVarInDialog=1DynamicWeather=2DownloadWindsAloft=1DisableTurbulence=0CLOUD_DRAW_DISTANCE=3DETAILED_CLOUDS=1CLOUD_COVERAGE_DENSITY=6THERMAL_VISUALS=0[DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580.0]Mode=1920x1080x32AntiAlias=1Anisotropic=1[AccelerationPack]ControlsFirstRun=0HomePageFirstRun=0[TextInfo.3]Latitude=1,1Longitude=1,2Altitude=1,3Heading=1,4AirSpeed=1,5WindDirectionAndSpeed=1,6FrameRate=2,1LockedFrameRate=2,2GForce=2,3FuelPercentage=2,4AverageFrameRate=2,5FuelPercentage=2,4[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=14[sCENERY]LENSFLARE=1DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=5MAX_ASYNC_BATCHING_JOBS=3SmallPartRejectRadius=1[TrafficManager]AirlineDensity=100GADensity=100FreewayDensity=35ShipsAndFerriesDensity=20LeisureBoatsDensity=10IFROnly=0AIRPORT_SCENERY_DENSITY=1[TERRAIN]LOD_RADIUS=6.500000MESH_COMPLEXITY=100MESH_RESOLUTION=23SWAP_WAIT_TIMEOUT=2TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=29AUTOGEN_DENSITY=5DETAIL_TEXTURE=1WATER_EFFECTS=6Kind regards,

OK. Thank you so much! I am just getting into this card. I see that you are using anistropic and not trilinear. I am going to lower my texture bandwith multiplier to 70 from 80 and see what that produces. I'll keep you posted. The SLI Tool and profiles is a smaller footprint or what?Kaydub

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Update Dec. 15, 2010Unigine Heaven DX11 BenchmarkDownload Unigine here:http://downloads.guru3d.com/Unigine-Heaven-DirectX-11-benchmark-download-2414.htmlPassMark BenchmarkPassMark 580 GTX BenchmarkDownload PassMark here:http://www.cpubenchmark.net/Download 3DMark Vantage here:http://www.futuremark.com/benchmarks/3dmarkvantage/introductionDownload 3DMark11 herehttp://www.3dmark.com/3dmark11Kind regards,

[fakeflyer737 991]

what program do I need to overclock my 480?