Do you have tests with both cards and same settings somewhere? Right now, you are talking apples and oranges... if to compare and decide, numbers are needed. Running FSX through FSXMark11, both cards, same settings, same computer. Then we can say if it's worth or not. This way it's impossible to know. Just saying 580 can't handle 64_v12 has no meaning whatsoever.

Had a gtx 460, a gtx 580 3gb and I am back to a gtx 560 2gb now. My test is flying with TrackIR. If panning gets jerky with TrackIR (and can be solved by reducing AA) the gpu can't cope with the load.

Really? Why not? I have AA_MODE_METHOD_SUPERVCAA_64X_4v12 with my settings all cranked to the right with water back a notch and full clouds with REX and ASX and UTX2 at 100% with complex aircraft while in ORBX PNW with FPS rarely dropping below 25 to 30 and usually enjoy around 35 FPS when locked there in Nvidia Inspector. What's the problem?Kind regards,

Maybe yours at 900 does cope, mine did not. Tested at TNCM and KBOS (flytampa)

:Nerd: yness.

You gotta translate that for me. I don't speak smileyguage.

nerdiness.

ty :drinks:

Well after all that I would like to say if it hasn't been said before that you are probably better off finding a little bit of extra cash and getting the GTX 570. I have read around that the 448 Core is probably not as good value compared to the GTX 560 Ti or the 570 and doesn't quite fit that middle area. so give it a thought.

Thanks for the advice so far guys (although the nitty gritty of the graphics card went well above my head :Thinking: ). I would probably be able to stretch to a GTX 570 if the general consensus is it is better.Other than the card does the rest of the system seem okay?The machine is going to be bought from PcSpecialist.co.ukAll thoughts and suggestions gratefully received.

Edited January 9, 201214 yr by Ceddy

Yeah, the rest is good. I always like the stronger GPU, being the optical type. But hey, some are satisfied running low antialiasing settings.

I think you will be fine with the GTX 560ti as far as FSX is concerned. Word Not Allowed has a funny definition of "low AA", but he's not making it up. The 570 or 580 would do a little better with hi-def clouds in view and very stong anti-aliasing settings.Personally I would save the money and get a few fans for your case (or TrackIR 5).

Hi Guys,Thanks for your advice. Do you have any suggestions as to whether the I7 overclocked would be better than the I5 overclocked?

Hi Guys,Thanks for your advice. Do you have any suggestions as to whether the I7 overclocked would be better than the I5 overclocked?

Uh, a big subject here. Has been beaten to death - some are on the i7 side, some on i5. Yeah, the i7 brings that "edge" everyone is talking about, but in the end, it's probably not worth the money, and I'd decide yourself: wanna go the edge or wanna go best bang for buck. i7 probably has little bit more chance reaching 5Ghz, while i5 is going to do 4.6-4.8. Performance difference? We are talking peanuts..., like maybe 10%. Cache difference? Noone could prove how much more, if at all, FPS or smoothness it brings.On i7 you are going to end up turning HT off.I like having the "better". Same with GTX580 :)

Edited January 10, 201214 yr by Kosta

If you really want the "edge", you should wait for Ivy and motherboards sporting PCI Express 3.0. Autogen could benefit of that.ATI's 7970 is around the corner, which seens to be a very potent pci express 3.0 card. If it has the same issues within fsx as other ATI cards had only time will tell. Otherwise keep your money together and wait for nv Kepler.

Ah, that is also correct. But when you start doing like that, you are never going to upgrade... Depending when this hardware is coming, see yourself if you can wait or it must be now.

Ive had both, the 580 cannot fix what the 560ti can't handle ....heck, the 560ti does BF3 more than good enough. IMO, the 580 is to the 560 like cas 7 ram is to cas 8.....