fair enough, and does it look any better to you? IMHO 4xSGSS ###### slaps 4v12 all the way. what A/C are you testing? PMDG744 maybe?EDIT:There we go now your 580 serves it's purpose, not only a line in your sig hehe

Yeah, you guessed it. Decided to update the post :Big Grin: It's amazing how lines get straightened up by this mode. And the card is literally cutting through it.

Yeah, you guessed it. Decided to update the post :Big Grin: It's amazing how lines get straightened up by this mode. And the card is literally cutting through it.

Could you please tell which mode you are using is that good? I´m not really happy about 4v12.

OHHHHH!!! I just checked at 100% load vs. overclock. Great!!! No more spikes!Apparently some hard clouds caused spikes and some graphical glitches, just OCed it on the fly and voila... no more. I think it really needs this edge.Superpilot: check couple of posts up. #41.

Oh and btw... I switched to 2x instead of 4x. Even my GTX580 OCed to 940/2240 is still fighting with 4x SGSS. It's mostly drawing 100% power out of the card, while 2x is almost identical and draws about 80-90%, rarely peaking and causing artifacting.

Oh and btw... I switched to 2x instead of 4x. Even my GTX580 OCed to 940/2240 is still fighting with 4x SGSS. It's mostly drawing 100% power out of the card, while 2x is almost identical and draws about 80-90%, rarely peaking and causing artifacting.

yeah, it's demanding, but only in bad weather and it's not too bad for me. Personally I'll run 4x, . Maybe Kepler will be able to handle it with no perf hit

yeah, it's demanding, but only in bad weather and it's not too bad for me. Personally I'll run 4x, . Maybe Kepler will be able to handle it with no perf hit

Oh don't tell me, another NEW architecture is coming? Just bought the card and its already obsolete?

You got a great card. I don't really understand that obsolete thing. It doesn't matter if new things come out, a piece of hardware is only obsolete when it's not able to run the software you use. You know that new faster & better GPU's are released every 2 - 3 months anyway. Enjoy it now and sell it when you want something better

You got a great card. I don't really understand that obsolete thing. It doesn't matter if new things come out, a piece of hardware is only obsolete when it's not able to run the software you use. You know that new faster & better GPU's are released every 2 - 3 months anyway. Enjoy it now and sell it when you want something better

Hehe... should have posted a smiley! I thought it was clear it was a joke I am extremely happy with my card - just wishing for a better CPU (one which will crack those big 5, and that's it).This card seriously reminds me on my "old" 8800GT - same kind of performance jump.

Guys, is it only me, or is the difference between 4.2 and 4.8 SO huge???My FSX is crashing with nvd3dum.dll error, randomly, so I clocked it down to check if it's the overclock.I was amazed with the "slowness" compared to 4.8.I didn't do any real benchmarks though...

Oh yeah, oh yeah... the Amazon chip is doing a bit better!!I had him at 5.2 already, just backed off to 5.0 to do thermal testing. Right now thermal paste is new so I expect it to go lower, besides I put very little of it. Later will do a decent work on it, right now gotta leave for work.Also with HT, my temps are touching 80c, so I turned it off to see what the chip can do and if I can manage an FSXMark11 @ 5.2 HT-off, to compare if HT is beneficial or not!

So I managed to get it stable at 5Ghz without HT unfortunately.BUT:When it comes to HT-testing, we thought that HT plays a role in those couple FPS I got with 4.8 in comparison to HLJames 5.2.But it doesn't.I managed only one test yesterday, which was:Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 15786, 300000, 34, 71, 52.620And finally if I additionally OC the GPU to 940/2240:Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 16012, 300000, 33, 70, 53.373Notice lower Min and Max. But higher AVG.Conclusion? 200mhz and quite a big OC on the GPU bring 5% performance at best.

check this out

Hyperthread is not recognized by the FSX render engine. The reason people get confused about HT and MSFS is because the proc has a physical cache for HT virtual cores, therefore FSX (which uses a very lame multicore code) sees the physical cache, assumes its a physical core, and spawns threads but those threads die and do nothing. The CPU meter shows activity but the activity on HT threads with FSX running is quite false.

Nono, I know FSX doesn't use HT.There was some confusion as to my reached 51fps @ 4.8 Ghz, where HLJames reached 49fps @ 5.2Ghz.Thus Stephen thought it's due to HT. But it clearly is not.I reached 53fps with 5.0 and a bit OCed GTX580.I have no explanation as to why this is happening, but all I know my tests have been run more times and I checked all settings couple of times...I will probably see how my CPU runs with HT-on and 4.8Ghz, and if temps are OK, gonna be running at that...

Nono, I know FSX doesn't use HT.There was some confusion as to my reached 51fps @ 4.8 Ghz, where HLJames reached 49fps @ 5.2Ghz.Thus Stephen thought it's due to HT. But it clearly is not.I reached 53fps with 5.0 and a bit OCed GTX580.

:Nerd: I wasn't convinced at all, but in the face of such numbers was open to any reasonable explanation. Experimentation has once again proved that HT does not work to improve performance in FSX. Any preceived improvement, was just that, preceived, a placebo effect. Still, there is some yet unknown reasonable explanation why Word Not Allowed's computer has such higher numbers. It is most likely not to be hardware related, but rather a result of an unnoticed bios or software variance. The more we broaden our sample selection for the Mark11 test, the greater the accuracy of our understanding will be. Let's try to get more people to run the test. Not a lot of people visit this part of the forum. Perhaps we should PM likely candidates that indicate they are new or considering doing a reinstall.Kind regards,

Nono, I know FSX doesn't use HT.

Yeah, that's what tests seemed to always show, I just had no idea how or why it was like that and thought Nick's post was a great explanation.