Anyone tested GTX 680 with FSX yet? I'm curious.

[ArjenVdv 190]

I've been running FSX with a Gigabyte GTX680 and it runs perfectly fine although no noticable difference in comparison with my previous card which was a GTX 480.As for other games it's much more of an improvement i'm glad to say

I have a few questions.Is there really no difference at all? 0 FPS increase?Does FSX microstutter or hitch more with that card compared to GTX 480 or is it better?Any other improvements in FSX when running that card?

[JohnFromCO 15]

I have a few questions.Is there really no difference at all? 0 FPS increase?Does FSX microstutter or hitch more with that card compared to GTX 480 or is it better?Any other improvements in FSX when running that card?

I flew a small circuit from SEA to ILS 13R into BFI using gray & raining in the J41 with my 580. I put the 680 in last night and played around with it for a bit then tried the circuit again. I only saw minor improvements of a few frames here and there. It was not a solid improvement of X frames throughout. That was on a i5 2500k @ 4.7.With that being said, I have not messed with the OC nor have I tried FSMark. That is my goal for this weekend if I don't get another trip. Now on other games the 680 is an absolute monster and is a large improvement over the 7950. BF3 runs amazing at 1080p with everything turned to max even on 64 server metro. Biggest improvement was in DCS A10. With the 7950 the HUD was constantly blurry (almost unreadable) and would get worse if I leaned forward. Spikes were common while panning in the pit at low level. Overall A10 looks and acts noticeably better between the two cards.

[Ben Cap 89]

I'll be getting my 680 late this week.(hopefully)I am just waiting for them to be in stock again! Haha

[ArjenVdv 190]

I flew a small circuit from SEA to ILS 13R into BFI using gray & raining in the J41 with my 580.I put the 680 in last night and played around with it for a bit then tried the circuit again. I only saw minor improvements of a few frames here and there. It was not a solid improvement of X frames throughout. That was on a i5 2500k @ 4.7.With that being said, I have not messed with the OC nor have I tried FSMark. That is my goal for this weekend if I don't get another trip.Now on other games the 680 is an absolute monster and is a large improvement over the 7950. BF3 runs amazing at 1080p with everything turned to max even on 64 server metro.Biggest improvement was in DCS A10. With the 7950 the HUD was constantly blurry (almost unreadable) and would get worse if I leaned forward. Spikes were common while panning in the pit at low level. Overall A10 looks and acts noticeably better between the two cards.

Ah well, I mean if it improves a few frames, I think it's worth it considering the price is around what the 580 always was. And IF PMDG will switch to P3D, (ONLY IF they get their license and all that stuff sorted out with them), then it might be worth it. FSX is not the only game, it might be a great choice for future platforms.One question that you didn't answer though: Does the 680 hitch or microstutter more than the 580 or is it exactly the same, or is it better?

I'll be getting my 680 late this week.(hopefully)I am just waiting for them to be in stock again! Haha

i'd wait for the more overclocked versions, might just give you 5 FPS more.I hope that with PCI 3.0, Z77, and i7 3770K @ 5 GHz+ we will be seeing a more significant improvement compared to the GTX 580.

[JohnFromCO 15]

One question that you didn't answer though: Does the 680 hitch or microstutter more than the 580 or is it exactly the same, or is it better?

It was 2am by the time I got to FSX and didn't really pay attention TBH. I will test it this weekend and let you know.

[ArjenVdv 190]

It was 2am by the time I got to FSX and didn't really pay attention TBH.I will test it this weekend and let you know.

Thanks bro. Keep us updated!

[Noel 4,565]

Man, what processor is it going to take to get FSX to fun flawlessly without intense massaging of sliders and such! I bought a new 2600K system and the improvement was noticable from my older system but not a night and day difference. Overclocking doesnt make a huge difference either. Perhaps in 5 more years FSX will find its CPU match.

Pray instead Prepar3D somehow some way upgrades the core to 64bit native, advanced GPU/DX11 functionality, or something along those lines. I know Outerra is looking at a how to generate funding for their nice looking 3D engine. FSX it would appears has too many core issues to prevent it from really performing perfectly no matter what the hardware. I can believe what you are saying about your 2600K not being night and day. I'm on a pretty date Q9600/GTX280 and really, it's good enough to still enjoy. Can't see a major upgrade at least until we see if IB offers some serious over clocking, as in somewhere above 5GHz. FSX just has issues shall we say, that we can minimize as I have with some effort, but when you hear stories of people owning up to the fact even their high end system's can't quite do what they'd like it to do for FSX I'm glad I still am getting some use out of a relatively old and slow system. I compensate for it's less than sterling raw power by being mindful to fly in areas that aren't too tough to process, or fly in aircraft that can easily handle it. The Super MD80 Pro is great when I fly FTX scenery into dense scenery--even my sys can easily manage that. I can fly the NGX in Hawaii as long as I stay in the smaller FSDT terminals, and try to stay out of PHNL. It can handle it for sure there, but frames will dip to 18 or so and it can get a little less smooth when that stressed.I think the real salvation will come w/ another flight sim, though it remains to be seen if that will ever happen. Noel

[RobbieHe 0]

"I'm running an i7 2700k at 4.7Ghz 16gb DDR 1600mhz ram with FSX running off an SSD, in the VC at UK2000 Manchester I get 30-40fps in the cockpit."Hey Jason. Are you using a PCI 3.0 motherboard? From my understanding, the GTX 680 uses that bus which should allow more data through and supposedly a smoother experience in FSX - or some people believe.RH

[Jason-118 0]

Hey Jason. Are you using a PCI 3.0 motherboard? From my understanding, the GTX 680 uses that bus which should allow more data through and supposedly a smoother experience in FSX - or some people believe

Yes I am running a PCI 3.0 motherboard but I was under the impression that it will only be utilised once an Ivy Bridge processor is installed.

[Manny 1,293]

It would be interesting to see PCI 3.0 motherboard and 680 card with 3 or 4 monitors. Otherwise the card would not be stretched I would thinkJason, I have a question for you.How about if you disable AA (and get extra FPS) and then enable TXAA instead (which does not take FPS away)?http://youtu.be/4SfPLhTgRPQCheck out from 1.16 for TXAAManny

[RobbieHe 0]

"Yes I am running a PCI 3.0 motherboard but I was under the impression that it will only be utilised once an Ivy Bridge processor is installed."Oh, OK... hopefully you weill see the extra 680 benefit then.RH

[fly_like_an_eagle 10]

"PCI 3.0 motherboard? From my understanding, the GTX 680 uses that bus which should allow more data through and supposedly a smoother experience in FSX - or some people believe."some believers should go to church.disappointing as it may sound, PCIe 3.0 won't yield any noticable FPS increase in FSX whatsoever, nor a GTX680. It has been said and proven many times FSX needs high CPU clock more than anything else. MS FLIGHT, xplane10 etc.might be different, depending on whether /how effective use they make of the advanced GPU features, incl. instancing, shader programming etc. you can check how much load is running on the GPU using GPU-Z from www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/ a crude test is GPU heat and fan speed/noise increase. both rise immediately under FLIGHT and XPX. FSX is just too old to know/use modern 680 technology. unfortunately.

[Noel 4,565]

It has been said and proven many times FSX needs high CPU clock more than anything else.

That is provided all the other potential bottlenecks aren't holding it back, i.e. there comes a point at which adding more clock cycles adds little to naught. Because of this, questions of this nature, will PCIe 3 add anything, do become relevant at least to ask.Noel

[jjjallen 37]

FSX - since it has so much going on - has a really BIG engine deficiency and that is its thread scheduler which is currently limited to run only on core #1. You can see the problem by overclocking your i7 2600 to 5+ghz and watch core 1 (in task manager) in a scenery rich area or major airport. Core #1 will or should be maxed out and the result will be a stuttery FSX.The best we can do at this point is use the Affinity Mask = 14 (4 core) setting to offload any activity from the first core.Cheersjja

[fly_like_an_eagle 10]

"questions of this nature, will PCIe 3 add anything"no, it won't, zilch. unless you consider 0.5% FPS increase noteworthy