Ok, that's in general, but we already knew that there was a difference, in general But FSX is a completely different story, and that was what I was referring to.

Ah I see well thats going to be a bit hard to find I would assume you would have to find someone who has spent a lot of money on a card and then went out again not to long after and bought the newer one.

Ah I see well thats going to be a bit hard to find I would assume you would have to find someone who has spent a lot of money on a card and then went out again not to long after and bought the newer one.

 

Exactly, I'm looking for exactly that kinda person.

 

My guess is the difference is zero in non GPU bound scenarios, and maybe 5% with lots of clouds, but I could be completely wrong.

First of all incrementally the difference between each 6x0 card has been relatively small compared to older NVIDIA generations, so in FSX the differences should be even smaller. But how big or small exactly, I dunno. Hope it's little to none, otherwise I will regret my 670 purchase I made in June.

That's what I am waiting for Arjen, whether to go for a 670 or a 680.

That's what I am waiting for Arjen, whether to go for a 670 or a 680.

 

I just remembered something. Someone reported a 0.5 FPS difference with 1 monitor, and 3 FPS difference with 3 monitors. And oh, he was using FSX Mark 11.

 

On the other hand, many people perceive completely different things. Some noticed no improved after going from a 580 to a 680, other noticed a big improvement, and other - like myself - noticed a small, but noticeable improvent. So in other words, many people will always give you conflicting information.

Arjen what I have to say here is your purchase is a 2gig card not a 4gig FTW card I still think the 4gig would have been a noticeable difference I know you dont want to hear that but its true more ram = more horse power no doubt about it my friend. Hey I wanted the 690 but a 1,000 dollars right now is a bit much.

Arjen what I have to say here is your purchase is a 2gig card not a 4gig FTW card I still think the 4gig would have been a noticeable difference I know you dont want to hear that but its true more ram = more horse power no doubt about it my friend. Hey I wanted the 690 but a 1,000 dollars right now is a bit much.

 

I got the 2 GB one because everybody always says the cards don't use much video memory anyway, and secondly I couldn't even afford a better one back then.

Luckily I now got a job and I will perhaps be upgrading to a GTX 780. And if it turns out good wait until a GTX 880.

 

Oh, and what about OOMs with a 4GB card? I can imagine those happening a lot when you're running lots of add-ons too.

 

EDIT:

 

Quote from "waygo" in the GTX 680 + TileProxy thread:

 

I had a 670 and now I have two 680's. No I do not think it is worth going to 680 over 670.

 

Running 5760x1080 on Unigene Heaven set to extreme, my fps were 18 and my score was 460s. When I switched to the 680, it went to 19 fps and a 490 score. Not worth the extra $150. When I added the second card it went to 31 fps and a score of 790.

 

I would go with two 670's.

 

 

See? A 680 isn't much better than a 670, but any 660Ti, 670, or 680 is quite a bit better than a 580. I think that would be a correct consensus here.

It's barely even faster in another game than FSX, not even faster with high resolution, let alone in FSX.

I can also remember going from a 560Ti to a 580 and there wasn't a single FPS difference, but going to a 670 I suddenly saw a noticeable difference.

I am thinking whether if that is the case Arjen whether a 670 would be sufficient for my 27 in monitor 2560 x 1440. I don't mind paying the extra for the 680 if there is a big difference. Out of interest I changed my resolution to 1920 x 1080 with my 560 ti and there was no difference in FPS.

I am thinking whether if that is the case Arjen whether a 670 would be sufficient for my 27 in monitor 2560 x 1440. I don't mind paying the extra for the 680 if there is a big difference. Out of interest I changed my resolution to 1920 x 1080 with my 560 ti and there was no difference in FPS.

 

Wait, so you're getting the exact same FPS with 1440p compared to 1080p?! In that case I might consider buying a 1440p monitor instead of 1080p!

 

And yes, I do think a 670 is sufficient, in my case I barely go under 30 FPS so that's great. In Heaven there was no FPS difference between the two cards, 1 FPS, so let alone you might notice a difference in FSX between the two. Compared to your 560Ti however, any 660TI or better should be a great upgrade. It just depends on what else you play. In other games the 680 might be just that little bit extra powerful. If you only play FSX just get a 660Ti. Look at Ben, he previously had a 580 and now he's very happy with his new 660Ti.

I got myself a 670 because I do play other games, but not so much. I play racing sims mostly besides FSX, so I got something in between, a 670, and it's a great card and never had any problems and it overclocks to 1150 MHz just fine.

I will probably wait for the 7 series, early suggestions say that the jump in performance will be as big as from the 5 series to the 6 having to support the new games coming out in 2013. Who knows ?

I will probably wait for the 7 series, early suggestions say that the jump in performance will be as big as from the 5 series to the 6 having to support the new games coming out in 2013. Who knows ?

 

I heard the 7 series aren't gonna feature a completely new architechture. So first of all they are not going to impress as much as the 6 series did. Secondly, the improvement in FSX is not gonna be big. Remember 4 series to 5 series in FSX? Same architechture and performance difference was little to none. Now, new architechture and a good improvement. So I recommend you to just buy now. When the 7 series are out you can say "I'll wait for the 8 series because they'll have a new architecture", and you can keep playing the waiting game forever, and in the end you'll end up buying nothing.

I bought a ZOTAC GeForce GTX 680 AMP with 2GB VRAM for my single monitor rig.

The 10% enhanced memory bandwith of 211.5 GB/s (vs. 192.2 GB/s of the standard model)

won me over.

OK, OK, I'm won over... darn it, looks like it's gonna cost me some dosh :( :unsure: :rolleyes: So, guys, looking at this card...MSI GeForce GTX 660Ti Power Edition 2048MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card, from what has been said, would be a good upgrade? I really don't think I can justify getting rid of my one year old 580 just yet, unless I could justify the 660ti if there was an improvement, or do I really need to move to the 680?

 

Go for EVGA due to outstanding customer support. I used their RMA service and it was truly hassle free and fast shipping. Tech service is also helpful too.

 

BUT, if you really want smooth cloud performance, I would reccomend the 680. 660Ti~20% faster than the 580 in clouds while the 680 is 40+%.

I would reccomend the 680. 660Ti~20% faster than the 580 in clouds while the 680 is 40+%.

 

Thanks Ben, when you say the 680, are you suggesting a standard spec card or one of the OC versions?

I was looking at this one Howard but its so wide I don't think it would of fitted in my case.

 

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/EVGA-GTX-Graphics-Card-Backplate/dp/B008A1Q43I/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1357553343&sr=1-1