Hey guys just sold my multi gpu setup. I am going to a 2500-2600K and 580 Lightning, I just for grins launched FSX with only my integrated 8800gt on the mobo and it ran lol! I had no idea it was so cpu bound! It was thrashing my Phenom II 965 like all 4 cores at 80%! I mean the frame rates were down in the 10-15 FPS range but still I couldn't believe that it would be that CPU bound at 1920x1080. I figured that it wouldn't barley run with out a decent gpu. I mean I tried some games from a couple years ago and they are struggling on this integrated but FSX was still kicking lol.Guess you learn something new everyday.

Yeah...but you also need to realize that the 8800gt is still a good card however being three years old. Remember when we were recommending them and we were in full fsx swing?

Yeah...but you also need to realize that the 8800gt is still a good card however being three years old. Remember when we were recommending them and we were in full fsx swing?

It's really not - the point is that FSX is almost entirely dependent on the CPU, and that makes it look as if the 8800 is still a good card if all you're doing is FSX. Compare an 8800GT to the current gen cards in a modern game that actually uses the GPU and it's gonna get completely crushed.Here's a thread showing a 560 Ti directly benched against an 8800GT:http://forums.anandt...096&postcount=6Not even close...

Strictly out of curiosity, why is the 560 Ti being recommended for FSX so highly? Don't get me wrong, I am building a new rig with the 560 Ti, but I was just wondering if it was the value or indeed the performance. Or is it the price-performance ratio?

It's really not - the point is that FSX is almost entirely dependent on the CPU, and that makes it look as if the 8800 is still a good card if all you're doing is FSX. Compare an 8800GT to the current gen cards in a modern game that actually uses the GPU and it's gonna get completely crushed.Here's a thread showing a 560 Ti directly benched against an 8800GT:http://forums.anandt...096&postcount=6Not even close...

No kidding Ryan an 8800 would get squashed by any newer game and yet it can run FSX it is unreal. Cant wait too see the boost I get from an 2600K!The 560 is right in the middle of the current Price to Performance ratio it is a sweet card that will give you the most bang for your buck!

Strictly out of curiosity, why is the 560 Ti being recommended for FSX so highly? Don't get me wrong, I am building a new rig with the 560 Ti, but I was just wondering if it was the value or indeed the performance. Or is it the price-performance ratio?

I would say the price/perf ratio because there is no need to get a 580 just for FSX as it will probably make little to absolutely no difference compared to the 560TI unless running super high resolutions with multi-monitor setups. Then, you might benefit. Just my $.02

No kidding Ryan an 8800 would get squashed by any newer game and yet it can run FSX it is unreal. Cant wait too see the boost I get from an 2600K!The 560 is right in the middle of the current Price to Performance ratio it is a sweet card that will give you the most bang for your buck!

Hey now, all this 8800GT bashing is starting to make me need to do a little defending!In all seriousness though, I have an aging system with a single 8800GT 512MB OC series and was playing the latest Crysis MP demo with decent frames at 1680x1050 and the game looked brilliant. I currently play AA3 at almost full settings at 1680x1050 and always have above 30FPS. Same goes for Just Cause 2, the game looked and played great. GTA IV also, looked and played brilliantly, only thing was you could tell I needed >512MB VRAM. Now, would I have an advantage with the GTX560TI over my 8800GT, hands down YES. But, I get by pretty good with this old &@($* card.

30FPS in any game besides FS would be considered pretty low - 60 is what's considered perfectly smooth for most shooters and stuff... Crysis 2 was heavily optimized to run on consoles and stuff, it's not surprising it runs somewhat ok on the 8800GT - the Xbox 360's GPU for instance is essentially a 7800 series chip, even less powerful. They're working on a DX11 patch for it now that's going to bring it up to the current PC hardware standards.

Ohhh Ryan!!! You're alive!!! :(

30FPS in any game besides FS would be considered pretty low - 60 is what's considered perfectly smooth for most shooters and stuff... Crysis 2 was heavily optimized to run on consoles and stuff, it's not surprising it runs somewhat ok on the 8800GT - the Xbox 360's GPU for instance is essentially a 7800 series chip, even less powerful. They're working on a DX11 patch for it now that's going to bring it up to the current PC hardware standards.

Believe me, I understand FPS and shooters and I'm pretty sure I said I'm always above 30FPS. :( The DX11 subject with Crysis2 is somewhat of a headache isn't it. I don't know all the details but hearing that they are actually working on DX11 support is a good thing.Honestly Ryan, I know you can't answer for Crytek, but wouldn't you think twice before releasing a super buggy game with no DX11 support? This is the exact reason many of us are so happy that PMDG doesn't answer to a bunch of Board Members who are trying to increase shareholders wealth. That is basically what happens when development decisions are affected by LARGE producers. Same thing if Aerosoft was deciding when the development stages were to occur and when the product was considered "Finished" and "Ready" for release.