Will I benefit with the GTX680 anyhow here?

 

You will see quite a large jump in performance in those GPU limited scenarios that you described. Your FPS will probably be somewhere in the low 20s rather than 10-14.

The answer to your question is evga 4gig 680 ftw - check the hardware forum for a very recent thread (about butter) that leads you to this answer.

 

I'm using the evga 4gig 670 ftw with my Dell U3011 30" monitor and its been rock solid with my Sandy @ 5ghz. The 680 at the time (last June) was just way over the top in price.

In my opinion, if you are solely playing FSX, you don't need a more powerful graphics card than the GTX580. It won't do anything in terms of FPS in FSX. The reason I have the GTX690, is I am running much more, modern games and hardware.

Wow GTX690, that's a beast!! Must run all games at Max even if you are using triple screen! =p

 

I love my GFX670! It's a very powerful card, and runs much cooler and using less power than the previous 570. The difference between it and the 680 is much less than it used to be between 570 and 580. Anyway, if you can sell your current 580 for a nice price, then it's worth making the upgrade to newer tech, if not, stick with it, that's my opinion.

You will see quite a large jump in performance in those GPU limited scenarios that you described. Your FPS will probably be somewhere in the low 20s rather than 10-14.

 

BEN! You're at it again 'me old fruit :lol: How on earth will ANYONE gain 40% in performance by changing their GPU. I'm assuming you're talking FSX? I'm not usually so vocal, but that is codswallop!

Right now I am playing with the GTX 690. Based on that, I am predict the GTX 680 would be a waste of money for FSX.

 

A GTX 690 is a waste of money for FSX. The slight performance gain over a 680 doesn't justify the outlandish cost of a GTX 690.

A GTX 690 is a waste of money for FSX. The slight performance gain over a 680 doesn't justify the outlandish cost of a GTX 690.

 

Yeah but what about bragging rights :Big Grin:

BEN! You're at it again 'me old fruit :lol: How on earth will ANYONE gain 40% in performance by changing their GPU. I'm assuming you're talking FSX? I'm not usually so vocal, but that is codswallop!

You will see quite a large jump in performance in those GPU limited scenarios that you described. Your FPS will probably be somewhere in the low 20s rather than 10-14.

OK guys, time to small conclusion:

In my rig, there is a big improvement - I have made a test scenario with tons of clouds:

GTX580 30 FPS (no fluctuation)

GTX680 37 FPS (no fluctuation)

 

I did not change anything in nVidia, FSX or any other settings.

 

This is a big upgrade. As big as VAT in Poland (23%).

I also gave a try in DX10 in the same scenario, but only on Kepler card (I have never used DX10 on my older card). My guess is - it is far better performer now, but I do not have the numbers to prove this. I was able to achieve ~50 FPS so I push the AA/AF to the limit achieving pretty much the same FPS as in DX9 but with more smooth experience and better IQ. Unfortunately, there are few issues in DX10, so I will have to hang around in DX10 forums

 

Conclusion: there is a BIG improvement between factory OCed GTX580 (1.5 GB RAM) and factory OCed GTX680 (4 GB RAM)

 

Hey Ben, I want you to be right, honestly I do...I must apologise if I came across a little too opinionated, that was not my intention. I'm just very wary of people who might invest a lot of money on hearing that they'll get a 40% increase in performance in some scenarios. If that is the case, then I will jump ship and get hold of the card myself!

 

OK guys, time to small conclusion:

In my rig, there is a big improvement - I have made a test scenario with tons of clouds:

GTX580 30 FPS (no fluctuation)

GTX680 37 FPS (no fluctuation)

 

I did not change anything in nVidia, FSX or any other settings.

 

This is a big upgrade. As big as VAT in Poland (23%).

I also gave a try in DX10 in the same scenario, but only on Kepler card (I have never used DX10 on my older card). My guess is - it is far better performer now, but I do not have the numbers to prove this. I was able to achieve ~50 FPS so I push the AA/AF to the limit achieving pretty much the same FPS as in DX9 but with more smooth experience and better IQ. Unfortunately, there are few issues in DX10, so I will have to hang around in DX10 forums

 

Conclusion: there is a BIG improvement between factory OCed GTX580 (1.5 GB RAM) and factory OCed GTX680 (4 GB RAM)

 

Well, I must admit, that is very interesting... I'd be interetsed in some other opinions...

I have noticed a large improvement as well, over the 1.5GB GTX 580 I had,

I have noticed a large improvement as well, over the 1.5GB GTX 580 I had,

In what areas specifically John?

Same here when going to a GTX 670 from a GTX 580. In the NGX at Aerosoft Schiphol I went from 31 FPS to 36 FPS.

 

And I no longer experience stuttering in clouds with 2xSGSS where I previously did so with my GTX 580.

 

Some facts:

 

Upgrade from 580 to 680: quite an improvement

 

Upgrade from 660Ti/670 to a 680: little to no improvement.

Haven't tested the above, but some people said there was a difference of only 0.5 FPS when benchmarking and 3 FPS with multiple monitors.

 

So, conclusion, buy a GTX 660Ti or GTX 670, a GTX 680 isn't even much quicker in 3D Mark, let alone in FSX.

 

If you are going to try and achieve better frames with the upgrade then I believe you will be sorely disappinted. However, if you simply wish to have the benefit of running three monitors off the single card and maybe experience some improved AA, then go for it. But IMO the diffrence will be extremely marginal.

 

I can somehow understand why you're thinking that, because after all FSX isn't that GPU hungry. BUT - you're being a bit conservative, and after all you haven't even tested both cards have you? So how can you judge?

What I'm interested in is using a 680 or 690 with triple 42" or triple 52" HDTVs with FS9/FSX/Prepar3d. This is for a full size LJ45 sim. Currently very happy using FS9 still, so I'm guessing the 680/690 will push FS9 on those three HDTVs nicely.

 

Thoughts?

I can somehow understand why you're thinking that, because after all FSX isn't that GPU hungry. BUT - you're being a bit conservative, and after all you haven't even tested both cards have you? So how can you judge?

 

Hi Arjen, no you're right, I haven't tested the two side by side. It is interesting to read your post where you have had experience of a direct comparison. I have tested a GTX480 vs GTX580 and base my opinions on that comparison and also on other simmers' experiences when upgrading their GPUs. We all know that FSX is mainly CPU bound and so it's difficult for me to accept such statements that suggest there are performance gains to be had. I saw none when going from the 480 to the 580, except as I have said, some improvement with AA. BTW, can you clarify, as I am interested in what you have said:

 

Upgrade from 580 to 680: quite an improvement But then you say... buy a GTX 660Ti or GTX 670, a GTX 680 isn't even much quicker

 

BTW, Ben is a good chap, and I hope you can both persuade me about your claims...

 

Edit: I forgot to mention, any OCing of my 580 has shown no improvements in any area!