Possible she may be right , if anyone has the SLI connected setup and can reach above 1920x1080 then maybe we get the answer

Would 1920x1080 or below show any benefit from SLI. The answer is no. If you want to run a 30 inch monitor at 2560x1600 resolution then yes you can do that with multiple cards and yes they will be needed unless you got a GTX580 which would probably run that on one card.

Regardless of the FPS issue...works for me with a couple of cards and resolutions are different. [/img]

Nice tidy setup !! It reminds me of my first venture into cockpit building.

Another, topicDown the drain.

Would 1920x1080 or below show any benefit from SLI. The answer is no. If you want to run a 30 inch monitor at 2560x1600 resolution then yes you can do that with multiple cards and yes they will be needed unless you got a GTX580 which would probably run that on one card.

Ah alright.

Sli is a no no with FSX !!

Ryan it might be a no no, however if you have a 30 inch monitor, you will need at least 2 Video Cards, with more than 1 gig of memory on each card if you want to run that resoultion, especially with high amounts of AA and AS.There will be a performance hit from running it in SLI but it doesnt mean it can't be done. It just won't be optimized as if FSX would supporting it. Or you could just get a GTX580 and run the whole thing off 1 card.

Ryan it might be a no no, however if you have a 30 inch monitor, you will need at least 2 Video Cards, with more than 1 gig of memory on each card if you want to run that resoultion, especially with high amounts of AA and AS.There will be a performance hit from running it in SLI but it doesnt mean it can't be done. It just won't be optimized as if FSX would supporting it. Or you could just get a GTX580 and run the whole thing off 1 card.

It's worth noting that the more video card ram you have, the more it takes from the 3.8 gigs that FSX needs to run.FSX is only a 32 bit program. A top spec card with 2 gigs of ram will starve FSX of the memory it needs.

It's worth noting that the more video card ram you have, the more it takes from the 3.8 gigs that FSX needs to run. FSX is only a 32 bit program. A top spec card with 2 gigs of ram will starve FSX of the memory it needs.

If you have 64-bit windows and 8 gig of ram you dont have that issue. I can't really see any of these guys with money to burn on all this hardware using 32-bit windows anyway.

It isn't possible. FSX IS NOT coded for SLI/Crossfire. If anything it will decrease performance, not increase. FSX does not support it, no matter what anybody says. FSX is CPU dependant, changing a single graphics card has minimal effects, adding another usually has detrimental effects on FSX. You must've made other hardware changes at the same time because I can guarantee you, adding a second GPU will NOT increase performance. And you most certainly are not running every setting on max because even a sandy bridge at 5GHz cannot do this without stutters

I can testify that! Anytime! Crossfire for FSX is totally pointless! Its like using water cooling for your Amiga commodore..My CPU:i5 2500K 3.2Ghz.. Does FSX stutter now and then? You bet! My GPU: GTX560.. If I got one more, would it increase FPS..? most likely never..

If you have 64-bit windows and 8 gig of ram you dont have that issue. I can't really see any of these guys with money to burn on all this hardware using 32-bit windows anyway.

It's not quite that simple !!FSX uses the now obselete Shader 2 so if you use a graphics card say 4 years old with 1 gig of ramor the very latest GTX 590 with 3 gigs of ram you won't get any better FPS.The faster the CPU the better but again since FSX Sp2 it still can only use 3 maybe 4 coresso even the very latest and fastest CPU's can't give you better FPS. The whole 64 bit windows and 8 gigs of ram are only of use if you are using lots of addons etc. FSX is still only 32 bit. Running it on a 64 bit windows makes little if no difference. I have gotten better frame rates with an old GTX 280 and an intel quadcore running Win 7 32 bitthan most of my buddy's who have the latest i7 and GTX 580/590 using Win 7 64 with 8 gigs ram.

Actually having a GTX 590 with 3 gigs of ram will slow down everything in FSX. FSX IS a 32 bit program and mostly uses CPU for it's graphics performane.Having a graphics card with more than 1 gig is starving FSX of memory. I think this is one of the reasons that people with very high spec machines are having the most problems with the NGX.

I don't think having more VRAM will necessarily translate in a higher VAS in FSX. It depends on how much VRAM is in use. I'm pretty sure a 2GB GPU will take up just as much VAS as a 1GB GPU with the same resolution and AA.

Despite what all the self appointed experts will tell you, FSX can and will make use of a second GPU to increase performance. The caveat however is that it will only do so for a specific type of setup, and in certain sim conditions. Anyone running huge resolutions, and/or massive levels of AA will see a benefit from a second card in a high GPU stress area of FSX (think thunderstorms at altitude, where the cpu isn't bound). There's a couple of threads kicking about where people who have actually bothered to test and prove this, and in fact even Phil Taylor himself has confirmed this in his blog (anybody going to question him?). Granted, it's not really much use for the majority, but it just riles me a little when people spread what is ultimately misinformation as absolute fact. There's so much of that around here, and I often see it waste many peoples time.

Callum, can you link those threads please? I totally agree that you can see a benefit from SLI with high enough AA levels... but just in DX10 mode in my experience. I'd love to know if someone has distinctly messured an improvement in performance going SLI in DX9Well, actually I could see a nice improvement in DX9 too at massive AA levels in bad weather, but only in external views, 2D panels or some default A/C virtual cockpits

FSX is still only 32 bit. Running it on a 64 bit windows makes little if no difference.

There's a big difference since the VAS limit in 32 bit is just 2GB (3GB with the switch) as opposed to 4GB in a 64b OS

Ryan, every review ever done on the PMDG 747-400X and MD-11X recommended 64-bit and having a 6 to 8 gigs of memory for Ultimum performance and to avoid OOM Errors. Even PMDG recommends 64-bit for the Stability provided by the 64-bit OS. I used to have OOMs myself when I had 32-bit Vista and 4 gig of memory with the 747-400X. After upgrading to 64-bit Vista and 8 gig of ram I have never had an OOM since 2008 when I made the switch. I think the Sim community that does the reviews and the people that made the NGX would be more knowledable about the facts of FSX than you are. If they all recommend 64-bit then that is who I am going to go with. (shrug).There may not be an FPS boost or increase of performance but there is stability and that fact alone is a good enough to upgrade to 64-bit. Finally most of the hardcore simmers in here have a ton of add-ons anyway. So recommending a 32-bit operating system and 4 gigs ram these days is ridiculous. 64-bit is the future so why limit yourself? There is a world out there besides FSX and plenty of applications that are 64-bit. The you don't need a 64-bit OS or more than 4 gig of ram line seems to be getting a little outdated considering whats on the horizon. Finally if your using a 64-bit processor why in the world would you use a 32-bit OS? Maybe FSX can't use it but Windows can take advantage of it.

So recommending a 32-bit operating system and 4 gigs ram these days is ridiculous. 64-bit is the future so why limit yourself ?

I agree with you !I am not recommending 32 bit but more pointing out that with FSX the actual differences between 32 and 64 bit are very small. I am looking forward to Microsoft Flight and hope that they have done nice things with the simulation platform.It will be nice to see a full 64 bit flight simulation that can take advantage of the very nice hardware that is available these days.So for the people who have spent lots of money on the latest CPU's and GPU's it will have been money well spent. Here's to the future of Flight Simulation and having the pleasure of flying such incredible planes like the NGX.I really think that there are exciting times ahead. Fred. PS. You might find Ryan's post on this thread interesting.http://forum.avsim.net/topic/346877-what-do-you-knowanother-frozen-panel/

Why I have always believed a GYX 470 is the best Nvidia card for FSX.

Yeah right!!