Yeah...I know - Another 580 question

[Guest cloudflyer]

My computer:Antec 900 caseQX9650 3.8ghzGigabyte GA-X48-DQ6Seasonic SS-650HT 650WEVGA GTX285WD 10K 16M SATA WD1500AHFDWD 7200 360CORS TWIN2X4096-6400C4DHXSamsung 27" at 1920x1200Windows XP Pro SP3FS2004 with lots and lots of addonsIs it worth upgrading my video card? Will I benefit from the 580 with better, faster graphics?Thanks, Michael

[TechguyMaxC 516]

For FS2004? No. FSX, sure, but you'd probably want to bump up your CPU also.

[Guest cloudflyer]

FS2004, yes. Never tried FSX. So the card is no better than a GTX285?

[TechguyMaxC 516]

FS2004, yes. Never tried FSX. So the card is no better than a GTX285?

Sure it's better than a GTX 285, lots. Just not for FS2004. You can max out FS2004 on a GTS 250 or even a lesser card.

[Arklight1 140]

For FS2004? No. FSX, sure, but you'd probably want to bump up your CPU also.

Actually, depending on the levels of FSAA he uses, he will see quite a difference.I upgraded from a 285 GTX SSC to a GTX 480 SC+ and got quite a boost in FS9.

Sure it's better than a GTX 285, lots. Just not for FS2004. You can max out FS2004 on a GTS 250 or even a lesser card.

Not with any decent level of FSAA you can't.

[TurboKen 221]

Do you want the faster v-card for fsx or fs9? I have a Q9550 @ 3.7 and a gtx260 with tons of add ons and very smooth flight at all times in fs9.I am curious because I too am thinking about upgrading to the gtx570 for fsx but not sure with my cpu i will see a difference. Anyone done this with the same hardware choices?MAX we have the same cpu what did you have before the 570? was it really worth it.

[Arklight1 140]

Do you want the faster v-card for fsx or fs9? I have a Q9550 @ 3.7 and a gtx260 with tons of add ons and very smooth flight at all times in fs9.

In guess it depends on your definition of smooth and at what FSAA level you want to run. I prefer 16xFSAA, which can be quite a bear in heavy weather. The 285 GTX SSC could not hack it. The GTX 480 destroys it.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

Actually, depending on the levels of FSAA he uses, he will see quite a difference.I upgraded from a 285 GTX SSC to a GTX 480 SC+ and got quite a boost in FS9.

What are your settings? Add-ons? The average user will not see a benefit from such an upgrade. You have to go well beyond the bounds of the stock simulator to even approach causing a performance constraint with a GTS 250.

Not with any decent level of FSAA you can't.

Seeing as how FSX uses 300-500MB VRAM on most systems, you can bet FS9 doesn't use that much. Simple MSAA isn't going to push the boundaries of a 512MB or 1GB card with enough GPU horsepower. You want to run SSAA at high resolution with add-ons? You should know that a $100 card isn't going to pull that off.

[Kosta 122]

Umm, just for the info: I'm kicking the bejesus out of my systen with FS9. I can't even think of running FSX in my "online situations".Yesterday there was a big event on Vatsim, Heathrow overload, I was there of course. I tested FSX with mediocre settings, but with all the addon programs, Squawkbox connected, ASE, FSPassengers, EZCA, and it was kicking down my system to below 20fps... in aircraft external view. I didn't even check VC or 2D.So I decided to go my old trusty FS9 - tried the same situation with iFly 737, Nvdia Inspector set to 8xS and 4x Transp.SS, I got 40, with occasional drops of 1-2fps. Then I decided to give it a bit more work, set 8xSQ, and it was nicely dropping couple of FPS almost always, in VC it was going as low as 30fps. I have FS9 with absolutely everything cranked up. There were many online and there was really a lot for computer to chew on, but saying that FS9 can't max out my system, which is pretty in the high zone, except the card, is simply wrong.Trying 16xS is out of the question, and that is why I'm thinking about moving to GTX580. It's already so long since I'm using FS9, and still can't max out the FS9 with highest FSAA setting there is. Incredible.

[Arklight1 140]

What are your settings? Add-ons? The average user will not see a benefit from such an upgrade. You have to go well beyond the bounds of the stock simulator to even approach causing a performance constraint with a GTS 250. Seeing as how FSX uses 300-500MB VRAM on most systems, you can bet FS9 doesn't use that much. Simple MSAA isn't going to push the boundaries of a 512MB or 1GB card with enough GPU horsepower. You want to run SSAA at high resolution with add-ons? You should know that a $100 card isn't going to pull that off.

Very true. I run SSAA to eliminate the any shimmering (it works fantastic). I max out all settings in FS9 and max out FSAA (16xFSAA, IIRC) along with SSAA. In this regard, the GTX 480 works a treat. IMO, the oly reason to buy these expensive video cards is to puch the limits, otherwise they are just a waste of money. lol

[Guest cloudflyer]

The GTX285 was great when FS9 was fresh, with a new install on the new, sim only computer. I saw frame rates over 120 sometimes and was smooth as glass. Now, I have tons of addons, I have all settings in FS9 and Nhancer maxed out and fly (for example) out of FSDT KJFK in heavy HD clouds with CS and Eaglesoft X 2.0. I'm seeing drops as low as single digits sometimes. Just seems like the video card could make the difference here but I don't know without trying. Calling on user experience to make a decision.Thanks,Michael