I have noticed in the forum that there are several GTX cards in use with FSX, and several seem to be working well. I have a GTX-275-1792 mb card, but it seems the 285 is the most popular. What is the best NVIDIA card today for FSX??Also, I just read one post about Inspector really slowing down FSX. I just downloaded it and before I decide to try it and mess things up, is there a manual or tutorial out there somewhere? The only documentation I got with the download is a file showing changes in each version. Thanks, Tom

If we're only talking single-GPU GTX cards, the 580 is currently the fastest (and most expensive) one so it would be hard to argue that anything else than an overclocked 580 is the best one. Inspector will not by itself slow down FSX, it all depends how you configure it. Higher settings means a higher performance impact. You will have to find the right balance you're most happy with. You can always simply change back the settings so don't be afraid to experiment. Search the forums and you will find many guides for inspector/FSX, e.g. http://forum.avsim.net/topic/324786-nvidia-configuration-guide-inspector-2xxxx-drivers-version-20-explanations-of-all-settings/ and http://www.simforums.com/forums/nhancer-settings-for-new-drivers-updated-v1932_topic36586.html.

Best bang for buck today for FSX is probably the GTX 560 Ti. The 570 is a small increase on that and the 580 is small again on top of that.

I am no expert by any means regarding hardware for the computer. But I have done a lot of reading on the web in reference to the different GPU's out there. The result was total confusion. Yes, I know the 580 is the top card, but also at a top price, beyond my budget. I also saw that many were having very good results with some overclocked 460's, so that is what I searched for. After buying a couple of different ones and then investigating them on the web, I returned them. I finally settled on the ASUS ENGTX 460 TOP Direct CU as the reviews indicated that it was an outstanding card, already overclocked but with the ability to add to the overclocking. I purchased it from AMAZON for about $180.00 and I received it in 2 working days. I haven't installed it yet, but I am confident that I made the right choice. It will be installed with my new Intel i2500K CPU and a new ASUS MB, the P8P67 along with 4g of Corsair Vengance Memory. Jim D.

Thanks for the help and information, guys. That helps a lot. Tom

I'm happy with my 470 GTX OC and have no intention of upgrading to a £300 + card just for a few extra fps. The 460 will be fine until the next gen arrives.

You can spend 400,00 for a 580 if you like for MAYBE 1 or 2 FPS. I run a 470 GTX OC just perfect with excellent texture qualities.

All of the high-end Nvidia cards are great and of course everyone might not think that the 580 is worth the price. If your experience is that there is a "1 or 2 FPS" difference between a 470 and a 580, I'll have to say that your experience is very different than mine though. http://forum.avsim.net/topic/320755-480-gtx-vs-580-gtx/ is still a good read in case anyone missed it.

You can spend 400,00 for a 580 if you like for MAYBE 1 or 2 FPS. I run a 470 GTX OC just perfect with excellent texture qualities.

tokermax I am not trying to indulge in any kind of argument but you have to look at the overall system , e.g. take my system I have the lowest system probably for FSX and I am running everything almost mid-high with a few tweaks and the way I see it my display card is the bottle neck. I still get around 19-20 on ground and 27-30 in air. But will it matter if I change the card to a higher spec it may not as my CPU will bottle neck it. I can have best and the fastest ATI / Nvidia but it will depend on the processor too as when the card is sending high data but the cpu cannot cope up so there you have your lag and it will be vice verse.

IronMaiden - you hit the nail on the head. Just because you put a Ferrari engine in a pick up truck doesn't mean you are going to get better performance. It's really about the balance between the parts. With a top end GPU you could easily overwhelm a slow processor and get worse results than with an older card. You must look at the whole system as a unit and not focus on a specific part. That approach has not and will not give good results. Vic

Hey Tom, I realize this is very imprecise and also very subjective but it might provide you with some anecdotal information. I am running a modestly robust system. CPU is very modestly O/C'd, GPU is not. My display settings are: GRAPHICS:Target frame rate - unlimitedGlobal texture resolution - Very highScreen resolution - 1920X1080X32Filtering - BilinearAdvanced animations - checkedAnti -aliasing - unchecked (use the card)Lens flare & Light bloom - unchecked AIRCRAFT: Default cockpit view - 3-D virtualTool tips - checkedHigh-Res 3-D virtual cockpit - checkedAircraft casts shadows - unchecked (both boxes)Aircraft landing lights illuminate ground - checked SCENERY: LOD radius - largeMesh complexity - 72Mesh resolution - 10 mTexture resolution - 30 cmWater effects - Mid 1.xScenery complexity - DenseAutogen density - DenseGround scenery shadows - uncheckedSpecial effects detail - High WEATHER: Cloud draw distance - 60 miThermal visualization - NoneDetailed clouds button - selectedCloud coverage density - MaximumDownload winds - uncheckedDisable turbulence - uncheckedRate at which WX changes - Very High TRAFFIC: Airline traffic density - 30%GA traffic density - 30%Airport vehicle density - MediumRoad vehicles - 15%Ships & ferries - 15%Leisure boats - 15%A/C labels - on I typically use ASE & MCE. I do not have TH2go or IRtracker. I fly GA A/C exclusively and usually stay around 3,500 to 10,000 ft. I have not taken advantage of the various tweaks available so FSX is running pretty much "as-is" on my system. I typically operate with 3 wide screen Acer monitors and 1 regular Samsung (driven by the GTX 240 you see in my sig) - all operating in "windowed mode". Using the Carenado Cessna Centurion T210M and flying during the day from KCDN (Camden, SC) to KCAE (Columbia, SC) maintaining an altitude of 4,500 ft +/-, my fps will hover around 39 - 47. If I shut down all the monitors except one wide screen, the fps jumps to 87+. I have Orbix PNW installed and when I fly the same A/C at the same altitude in and around KSEA during the day using the 3 wide screen monitors all in windowed mode, my FPS stays between 11 - 17. As you can readily see, I am not a very sophisticated FSX user. I am certain I could improve on those numbers if I understood computers better. Even so, the GTX 580 coupled with the other components of my system still appears to perform pretty well. Hope this gives you some idea of how the card performs under this type of environment. Regards, John.