April 9, 201214 yr Look pretty good to me..... http://videocardz.com/31650/geforce-gtx-685-gk110-features-4gb-512bit-memory
April 9, 201214 yr Looks very powerful! This card was originally supposed to be called the GTX680 but since these cards were so fast, they bumped them up to the '685'.
April 9, 201214 yr Look pretty good to me..... Oh No!!!! My tempt-o-meter will be bouncing off the ceiling!
April 10, 201214 yr Ah this could be the real upgrade I've been waiting for (560Ti/448 was just planned temporary waiting for Kepler) --John near KPAE
April 10, 201214 yr what will the buggers at AMD have for this? Both optimists and pessimists contribute to our society. The optimist invents the airplane and the pessimist the parachute. ~Gil Stern
April 10, 201214 yr 4G with FSX? Andrew Dixon"If common sense was compulsory everyone would have it but I am afraid this is not the case"
April 10, 201214 yr 4G with FSX? Unless you somehow manage to use up all 4GB of VRAM on your GPU, you will never have any problems. From my observations, the FSX memory usage is the VRAM usage plus the sysRAM usage. Those two numbers end up somehwere around 2.9-3.2GB for me when flying with ORBX with LOD6.5.
April 10, 201214 yr Probably isn't gonna make a big difference in FSX, just like the GTX 680, but I might be wrong of course. The GTX 680 is totally different from the GTX 580, but for some reason doesn't perform much better than the GTX 580. I think it will be the same for the GTX 685. I think we are pretty much on the limit of graphics cards for FSX, in terms of GPU power, FSX is not gonna get much better than this. Arjen Vandervelde
April 10, 201214 yr FSX is not gonna get much better than this. Just exactly the same thought I had last night on a flight. High and smooth FPS, fantastic graphics, and a sense of reality within the screen. That is just about all anyone could ever hope for in flight simulation. Now, if it would just last for awhile...
April 10, 201214 yr The only way you can reasonably say, 680/685 is not going to do much better than 580 or something like that is, if you have used 580 with 4 monitors (4 X 24" dell) or something equal and been totally satisifed with 580.It maynot be any better if you are using a single monitor with 580 vs single monitor with 680. I am looking for three big monitors for the front view + 1 19" touch screen ELO monitor for some FMC or MFD. I'd also like to have a left window view where I can open another window. It all depends on your scope and scale. JMO. Manny Manny Beta tester for SIMStarter
April 10, 201214 yr Just exactly the same thought I had last night on a flight. High and smooth FPS, fantastic graphics, and a sense of reality within the screen. That is just about all anyone could ever hope for in flight simulation. Now, if it would just last for awhile... Well, I said that in terms of GPU performance FSX is about to reach it's limit. But I think there still might be a significant difference in CPU performance with Ivy Bridge. I heard that at the same clockspeed, it will perform around 5-15% better than Sandy Bridge. So that means maybe 3-5 FPS more. And it's more efficient, which (might) means that it's less voltage hungry, and thus might overclock better. Arjen Vandervelde
April 10, 201214 yr The only way you can reasonably say, 680/685 is not going to do much better than 580 or something like that is, if you have used 580 with 4 monitors (4 X 24" dell) or something equal and been totally satisifed with 580.It maynot be any better if you are using a single monitor with 580 vs single monitor with 680. I am looking for three big monitors for the front view + 1 19" touch screen ELO monitor for some FMC or MFD. I'd also like to have a left window view where I can open another window. It all depends on your scope and scale. JMO. Manny Disagree. High AA settings. Extreme Autogen settings. Hi-res Clouds/cockpits. High water effect settings. You'll know the difference if you make the upgrade, I'm positive. ___________________________________________________________________________________ Zachary Waddell -- Caravan Driver -- Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/zwaddell Avsim ToS Avsim Screenshot Rules
April 10, 201214 yr I tend to disagree with above posts (except Zach) - FSX didn't reach it's limit and it depends on the card, how it's going to handle stuff, but I can push my 580 without a slightest problem to the limit. 560Ti was suggested as a card for FSX because "FSX is CPU limited" - yay, and somehow there was a recent thread where a guy complained about shimmering, and how 8xS+2xSGSS gets rid of it, but also kills the performance on it. So yes, I believe 685 is going to be a new step in right direction, if the card really fullfills its promises - and Nvidia almost never missed that. Why do many forgot about the IQ settings, autogen-extreme, high resolutions on clouds and cockpits is beyond me...
Create an account or sign in to comment