FSXMark11

[mmosko76 0]

That sounds great Mike. Looking forward to seeing the results. Welcome to the forums by the way!Kind regards,

Thanks Stephen!Have been a looong time browser. Actually, you and a few other folks on these boards helped me put together a new rig. So I thank you for the valuable info :)

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Thanks Stephen!Have been a looong time browser. Actually, you and a few other folks on these boards helped me put together a new rig. So I thank you for the valuable info :)

Hey Mike, what a compliment to the hangers-out here! Sometimes it feels like not very many are reading what we have worked so hard to find out, usually the hard way. Let us know how it is going step by step! If any of us can help in any way, it is yours for the asking!Kind regards,

[mmosko76 0]

Thanks again, Stephen. Parts came a day early. I should have a FSXMark bench on here by tomorrow. I will run the bench twice; first with all stock, second with GPU/CPU overclocked. Should make for an interesting comparison. :Tounge:

[Kosta 122]

Thanks again, Stephen. Parts came a day early. I should have a FSXMark bench on here by tomorrow. I will run the bench twice; first with all stock, second with GPU/CPU overclocked. Should make for an interesting comparison. :Tounge:

Yes, but keep to the manual, be sure to exactly follow it, and officially post one result. That's the one that is going into an excel spreadsheet.

[whitav8 98]

@Word Not Allowed, Why would we NOT want to have both entries - one for standard clocks and the other for overclocks? What good is a benchmark unless it tells you whether a change helps? If we need a comments section for the CPU/GPU overclock info, then add it. Either that or let's open up a second thread/topic for those who want to make a change to their system (tweaks and hardware changes) and see if it is an improvement. So far we don't have enough data to understand some of the intracacies of the best systems. I appreciate your purity goals but some of us also want to see what slight changes to our system - not the FSX benchmark itself - will do to the results.Dave

[Kosta 122]

I didn't say don't post different clocks.As long as tests are on the same installation OK, different clocks are definitely interesting. Important thing is also two different replys. Do not put both tests into same post.

[fghdgdfdfgfgf 111]

560Ti vs 580 reference board? Let the games begin. :Big Grin:

[dazz 69]

560Ti vs 580 reference board? Let the games begin. :Big Grin:

Are you sure Vsync is off? those 60FPS max seem to point to Vsync on

[cmeeks 8]

Oooh, a showdown between the 560 and 580?!?! On the same system?! I will be looking forward to your results, FunknNasty! Your testing ought to put to rest a lot of questions regarding GPUs and FSX (with regards to the latest hardware at least). I know I'm not the only one wondering what you get for the $250 more you spend on the 580 over the 560.

[kaydub 3]

Oooh, a showdown between the 560 and 580?!?! On the same system?! I will be looking forward to your results, FunknNasty! Your testing ought to put to rest a lot of questions regarding GPUs and FSX (with regards to the latest hardware at least). I know I'm not the only one wondering what you get for the $250 more you spend on the 580 over the 560.

About 5% on this bench, but it is more apparent in clouds and down low over autogen...KDub

[fghdgdfdfgfgf 111]

I'll post my thoughts in another thread ....but it ain't looking good, through the monitor into the FSX world at 1680x1050, for the 580.Edit: I'll post my thoughts in the '''video card''' forum later today.

[mwilk 1,100]

Ok guys, Here are my benchmarking numbers. This is with a clean Windows 7 install on top of the clean FSX.

[fghdgdfdfgfgf 111]

Are you sure Vsync is off? those 60 FPS max seem to point to Vsync on

I know vsync isn't on -confirmed by panning camera outside aircraft. However, I can tell you that during the benchmark runs the internal fps counter touched 70 fps and ran extended periods in the mid to high 60's. So while I know vysnc is disabled , I'm a bit concerned as to why FRAPS fails to report my max FPS.

[fghdgdfdfgfgf 111]

Ok, 1 last submission: This is 50x100 with C1 and Speed Step enabled (my default, everyday config), as opposed to my previous 580 post which was 52x100 with C1 and Speed Step disabled.

[fghdgdfdfgfgf 111]

Are you sure Vsync is off? those 60FPS max seem to point to Vsync on

Hi Dazz-I think it's coincidental that I have 30 for a min and 60 for max. As I posted earlier, I dbl checked the VSYNC and also verified FRAPS. All is good.

Oooh, a showdown between the 560 and 580?!?! On the same system?! I will be looking forward to your results, FunknNasty! Your testing ought to put to rest a lot of questions regarding GPUs and FSX (with regards to the latest hardware at least). I know I'm not the only one wondering what you get for the $250 more you spend on the 580 over the 560.

Hi Cory-How about an X-tra 2 inches in form factor length and about 20 degrees Celsius in additional heat (560ti maxes out at 50c the 580 is at 70c -FSXMark11 bench readings/fans at idle/both cards at default settings). :-)

About 5% on this bench, but it is more apparent in clouds and down low over autogen...KDub

FSXMark11 with my own everyday settings, TAB's (See PMDG graphics guide) 8SQ driver settings and Rex HD textures at 2048 does produce some performance separation between the two cards: GTX 560TI Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 13317, 300000, 25, 59, 44.390 GTX580 Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 15191, 300000, 27, 67, 50.637 However, I do think the performance gap narrows significantly on final approach into places like FlightBeams's SFO and FSDreams's JFK. Now to the subjective stuff: The 560ti is as smooth as the 580. I would fail the """blindfold""" test in a side by side visual comparison on my rig. Conclusion: I'm taking the 580 back today, not because it's a horrible performer but because it's a pig next to the lean mean fighting machine that is the 560ti.