Which Video card is best for XPX

[PingPong 60]

Hey guys I am in a unique position here.

 

I have XPX up and running and am very happy with the results thus far.

 

But...

 

in a unique situation(for most FSX users anyway) I noticed the system is now graphic-card limited.

 

I have two options to use in my main simming rig.

 

2 ATI 6990s in Quad-fire/SLI

 

or 2 GTX 580s in SLI

 

I am currently using the 580 and SLI works quite nicely giving a big boost in performance, but the cards run HOT and LOUD.

 

Would the 4 GPUs in the 2 6990s be a better choice? I know that XPX had a problem with cloud rendering with ATI cards, is that fixed or still a problem?

 

Thanks.

[GoranM 3,764]

IIRC, X Plane does not take advantage of SLI. If you have the money, a GTX 670 would be ideal.

[fvapres 7]

Multi-GPU is not anything XP can take hold of at this time. It would be no different in performance graphics-wise as XP sends the data through a standard video rendering pipeline. You don't benefit from the 2x 2GB memories as the mesh and textures have to be copied to both cards for them to process side-by-side, and due to the lack of API-specific multi-gpu code, a ATI Crossfire or nVidia SLI is a moot point.

[PingPong 60]

Ben Supnik himself told me that XPX takes advantage of SLI and cross-fire

 

In fact I can watch my FPS increase when the second card kicks in.

 

I am just wondering if the ATI cards with more memory might help when I have a large photoscenery loaded.

 

Either way I can try them both myself I suppose.

 

But do the ATI cards still have a problem with drawing clouds? That would make me take a pause.

[CarlosF 1,239]

Hello there, off topic question here.

What motherboard are you using for you I7 2600k? and what water cooling solution (brand/model) are you using?

 

I'm planning to upgrade my pc to a I7 2600 and would definitely would like to OC it to 5Ghz.

[JasonHarris 96]

For a long time in FSX land it has seemed that nvidia has had the edge over ATI. I think that this was supposed to be true for xplane as well due to better support for opengl from nvidia.

 

I would weigh up more than just that though. If you are looking for a top end card and are only driving up to a few monitors then I think either will do fine. If you are looking to push more than a few monitors then you have to look more at ATI right now.

 

I have a 7970 driving 4 1920x1080 monitors and I am getting 40+ most of the time. The big 680 should do the same. If you are looking at the latest gen I dont think you can go wrong either way.

[BimmerCop 332]

I have a GTX680 4GB and will try XPX soon... I will let you know then... :P

[PingPong 60]

Thanks guys for the info

 

Currently my 2 SLI 580s 1.5 gb each are getting maxxed on video memory when I load my photoscenery at a high viewing distance(I made HUGE sceneries of Florida at 18 LOD with G2XPL)

 

I was thinking the 2 GB on each GPU on the 6990 would give more breathing room, as I have never seen XPX ask for more than 1.6 GB.

 

I was just worried about the cloud rendering, which was a problem with ATI cards in the past.

 

@ Pirata: this is my Mobo: MB GIGABYTE|GA-P67A-UD7-B3 P67 R

 

here is my memory: MEM 4Gx2|CORSAIR CMZ8GX3M2A1600C9

 

here is my water cooling block: CORSAIR Hydro H70 CWCH70 120mm High Performance CPU Cooler

 

I got very lucky with this whole setup, it's been great so far esp for P3D, but I would like to get a really solid XPX sim going as well. It really appeals to me.

[Luis_KMIA 242]

I would go with GTX 6xx series. I initially tried XP-10 on my laptop that had two ATI Mobility Readon HD4870s at 1MB each, then on my desktop that has a GTX 580 with 3GB, and I noticed much better performance on the latter.

[JasonHarris 96]

I would go with GTX 6xx series. I initially tried XP-10 on my laptop that had two ATI Mobility Readon HD4870s at 1MB each, then on my desktop that has a GTX 580 with 3GB, and I noticed much better performance on the latter.

 

There are good reasons to go with nvidia. Also good reasons for ATI.

 

Comparing a high performance gtx 580 with 3gb against a much older mobility edition of a 4870 isn't a very good reason to choose one over the other though.

[CarlosF 1,239]

@ Ping Pong

 

thanks a lot, I will definitely look into your setup.

[fvapres 7]

Hello there, off topic question here.

What motherboard are you using for you I7 2600k? and what water cooling solution (brand/model) are you using?

 

I'm planning to upgrade my pc to a I7 2600 and would definitely would like to OC it to 5Ghz.

 

Just FYI, I have the i5 2500K and it upscaled very nicely to 5.0gHz but the i72600k my buddy got (he spent the extra $190 for the quad core with hyper threading compared to my simple quad core) and the stock speed was 3.4 versus my 3.5. We ended up with 4.7gHz on his due to stability issues. No matter what we did, getting his over 4.7 without messing with timings and FSB and other tweaks was impossible. My i5 though, clocked beautifully up to 5.0gHz and I backed it down to 4.8 just due to the heat it put out. I too have the H70. that .2gHz took me from 70C to 60C, even with the hydro cooling (my house lacks good A/C and insulation - something I'm working on fixing soon).

 

I have the ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution and so does my buddy. At the time we purchsed, we researched the parts and got nearly identical setups. His was same RAM/Mobo/Power Supply/HDD and he bought a GTX 295 while I kept my 2x 9800GTX around and I kept the i5 2500K and he went with the i7 2600k. In the end, my setup worked better as the 295 had some stability issues I didn't have with the 9800GTXs as well as the overclocking being less stable due to the lower base clock of the i7.

[CarlosF 1,239]

Just FYI, I have the i5 2500K and it upscaled very nicely to 5.0gHz but the i72600k my buddy got (he spent the extra $190 for the quad core with hyper threading compared to my simple quad core) and the stock speed was 3.4 versus my 3.5. We ended up with 4.7gHz on his due to stability issues. No matter what we did, getting his over 4.7 without messing with timings and FSB and other tweaks was impossible. My i5 though, clocked beautifully up to 5.0gHz and I backed it down to 4.8 just due to the heat it put out. I too have the H70. that .2gHz took me from 70C to 60C, even with the hydro cooling (my house lacks good A/C and insulation - something I'm working on fixing soon).

 

I have the ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution and so does my buddy. At the time we purchsed, we researched the parts and got nearly identical setups. His was same RAM/Mobo/Power Supply/HDD and he bought a GTX 295 while I kept my 2x 9800GTX around and I kept the i5 2500K and he went with the i7 2600k. In the end, my setup worked better as the 295 had some stability issues I didn't have with the 9800GTXs as well as the overclocking being less stable due to the lower base clock of the i7.

 

Aaron, thanks a lot for the detail information, I was also thinking of getting the i5 as it is about $100 less. My son has the i7 and is running into overheating problems so he just ordered a water cooling solutions. I may just very well go with the i5, it will all depend on my budget.

Anyway thanks for the info.