HelloWhen I look at benchmarks, I see that in several games, the new Nvidia 680 is outran by the old 580 or the difference is almost nihil. This certainly at high resolutions.http://tweakers.net/benchdb/suite/224Is this a matter of waiting for new drivers? Has anyone seen this thing perform in FSX/NGX?Also for the new gen. of Intel processors: from what I read, the 2500k is still the best choice?Best Regards,Bert Van Bulck

Its important to understand some changes they made in the 680. Best way to understand it is read the article below.http://www.tomshardw...hmark,3161.html2500K or the 2550k for 10 bucks more is the best solution until Ivy Bridge.Now before people go rushing off to waste a ton of money keep the following in mind. If you already have a stable overclocked 2500k and a GTX580 and your only using it for FSX it makes no sense to upgrade again right now. There is not gonna be a miracle performance boost with your FPS and you may not even notice a difference. The only reason to waste money in this situation is if you gotta have the latest greatest hardware and your willing to spend a boat load of money to get it.But if your like me and still using an 4 year old rig it makes sense to upgrade to an IVY Bridge and a GTX 600 series.

As far as I can see in those benchmarks, the GTX 680 outperformns the 580 by around 25% - 35%. In FSX the difference will certainly not that big on Z68 PCI 2.0 motherboards. I heard that the 680 only performs a tiny little bit better than the 580 in FSX. But if we have a Z77 PCI 3.0 motherboard, with an i7 3770K @ 5.5 GHz (yes it will probably easily go this high as far as I've heard), then we might see a noticeable difference to the 580.At the monent it's really a bad time to buy new hardware. Z77 mobo's are already in the stores, and Ivy Bridge will be released at the 29th op April in Europe. I'm gonna wait how that thing overclocks, and if it's really impressive, I might upgrade my mobo, CPU and GPU (well I don't really own my current GPU, so...)

So its by far not worth spending an addition 200.00, or whatever it is. Cost vs benefit factor.

As far as I can see in those benchmarks, the GTX 680 outperformns the 580 by around 25% - 35%. In FSX the difference will certainly not that big on Z68 PCI 2.0 motherboards. I heard that the 680 only performs a tiny little bit better than the 580 in FSX. But if we have a Z77 PCI 3.0 motherboard, with an i7 3770K @ 5.5 GHz (yes it will probably easily go this high as far as I've heard), then we might see a noticeable difference to the 580.At the monent it's really a bad time to buy new hardware. Z77 mobo's are already in the stores, and Ivy Bridge will be released at the 29th op April in Europe. I'm gonna wait how that thing overclocks, and if it's really impressive, I might upgrade my mobo, CPU and GPU (well I don't really own my current GPU, so...)

It won't help with frame rate in CPU bound conditions (big hubs with the scenery slider cranked right and tons of traffic) but I want to see how it handles demanding antialiasing settings like 4x Sparse Grid Transparency AA.The card is a beast, but it has less ROPS than Fermi, and ROPS are supposed to handle AAI'm not holding my breath for PCIe 3.0. Time will tell, but I suspect it's going to bring close to nothing

It won't help with frame rate in CPU bound conditions (big hubs with the scenery slider cranked right and tons of traffic) but I want to see how it handles demanding antialiasing settings like 4x Sparse Grid Transparency AA.The card is a beast, but it has less ROPS than Fermi, and ROPS are supposed to handle AAI'm not holding my breath for PCIe 3.0. Time will tell, but I suspect it's going to bring close to nothing

I am actually more interested in whether there will be a difference in smoothness, in terms of microstuttering and hitching. Because on the P67 and Z68 mobo's with PCI 2.0 + GTX 500 series there's always a very tiny bit of hitching, in the NGX at least, unless your getting very high FPS like 50+.

I am actually more interested in whether there will be a difference in smoothness, in terms of microstuttering and hitching. Because on the P67 and Z68 mobo's with PCI 2.0 + GTX 500 series there's always a very tiny bit of hitching, in the NGX at least, unless your getting very high FPS like 50+.

If autogen is what clogs the PCIe bus, try sparse or normal AG. It doesn't make my sim any smoother, and AG doesn't hit my frame rate all that much, so I'm pretty sure PCIe 3.0 won't help smooth things out.Of course 30 FPS is not going to be as smooth as 50, it's common sense, and I doubt PCIe 3.0 will do anything for our frame rate either

If autogen is what clogs the PCIe bus, try sparse or normal AG. It doesn't make my sim any smoother, and AG doesn't hit my frame rate all that much, so I'm pretty sure PCIe 3.0 won't help smooth things out.Of course 30 FPS is not going to be as smooth as 50, it's common sense, and I doubt PCIe 3.0 will do anything for our frame rate either

Well in my opinion 30 FPS is pretty much as smooth as 50 FPS (in terms of framerate), but at the <40 fps areas I'm seeing sometimes a little bit more hitching than with 50 FPS+. at 50 FPS + things are pretty much 100% smooth.And autogen doesn't effect my framerate too much either, but for me it does effect hitching quite a lot. I noticed that after I got faster RAM and overclocked to 4.7 GHz instead of 4.5 GHz that things got qute a little smoother to be honest, but not 100%. I just wonder if everyone is seeing this a tiny bit? I hope that PCI 3.0 + high GHz + Z77 + 600 series (combination of all) is gonna smooth things out.

Do you have TrackIr? with TrackIr the difference between 50 and 30 FPS is VERY apparent. Even between 50 and 40

demanding antialiasing settings like 4x Sparse Grid Transparency AA.

Where is this notion that Sparse Grid transparency AA is a computationally intense setting coming from exactly? Every source I've seen says that's a quality for performancy tradeoff mode, like a multisample/supersample hybrid that runs better than pure supersampling.

Nevermind... I'm wrong on that.http://naturalviolence.webs.com/sgssaa.htm

Where is this notion that Sparse Grid transparency AA is a computationally intense setting coming from exactly? Every source I've seen says that's a quality for performancy tradeoff mode, like a multisample/supersample hybrid that runs better than pure supersampling.

Simple experience Ryan. I have no idea what it does internally, but I know it has the bigger impact on autogen shimmering and IQ in general, but it can and will bring an overclocked GTX580 to it's knees in bad weather (clouds/fog)4x SGSS looks amazing, but it takes a big toll on FPS.EDIT: thanks for the link

Edited April 1, 201214 yr by dazz

Yeah that's what it is - the one that's called "Supersampling" is SGSSAA applied just to alpha test textures, the one actually called "Sparse Grid" is applied to the entire scene.