So I've finally decided to upgrade my ATI 5850 to a better card, after some on here suggested that going Nvidia would give me a boost with clouds and weather situations. I run the 2600K at 4.8 Ghz and i'm generally 30 fps locked, but in heavy weather or near KSEA that can drop down to 17 depending on aircraft.

 

I've been eyeing up a gtx 670 series card. But usually by february there is a price drop on cards, so I'm thinking maybe just waiting and getting a 680.

 

Still unsure which exact model of either to get, though i definitely need dual DVI (I output to 3, 24" screens which are flaky on hdmi per say). I want a card that isn't super noisy overall. One possible choice was either the PNY VCGGTX670XPB or the MSI N670GTX-PM2D2GD5/OC. These have been as low as $280 after rebates, though right now the price is higher at around $370. By comparison the EVGA 02G-P4-2680-KR 680 gtx is around $450. Also a Gigabyte 670 OC GV-N670OC-2GD which looks solid at $398.

 

Has anyone ever upgraded from a 670 to 680 to note a difference.. I'm guessing this would be rare to find someone who has

 

Either way, appears its time to leave AMD and switch back to NVIDIA again.

 

Thanks for any input.

Since you want an upgrade that will power 3 24" displays, you are going to need every ounce of GPU power possible. Unfortunately, you might have to compromise in the area of noise. You can lower fan settings through EVGA Precision X but, you will get hotter temps when fans are slower.

 

Anyways, I recommend the EVGA GTX680 FTW+ Edition. - Total Beast

Since you want an upgrade that will power 3 24" displays, you are going to need every ounce of GPU power possible. Unfortunately, you might have to compromise in the area of noise. You can lower fan settings through EVGA Precision X but, you will get hotter temps when fans are slower.

 

Anyways, I recommend the EVGA GTX680 FTW+ Edition. - Total Beast

 

I think you are referring to the 4GB model correct?

 

Here is a 2GB version. I'm not sure what the + adds, as there is also a non "+" 4GB version. Either way that may (currently) be a bit out of price range.

 

I think you are referring to the 4GB model correct?

 

Here is a 2GB version. I'm not sure what the + adds, as there is also a non "+" 4GB version. Either way that may (currently) be a bit out of price range.

 

I should also mention that the fps i currently get with my 5850 (17-24 with heavy weather, otherwise 30fps) are on the triple screen setup as well. I run at 5760x1200.

 

There was also this zotac 680 ZT-60101-10P for around $399, but I've not heard much about that brand before

Since you want an upgrade that will power 3 24" displays, you are going to need every ounce of GPU power possible. Unfortunately, you might have to compromise in the area of noise. You can lower fan settings through EVGA Precision X but, you will get hotter temps when fans are slower.

 

Anyways, I recommend the EVGA GTX680 FTW+ Edition. - Total Beast

 

Also, i'm not sure what enhancements the FTW+ would give over the regular version and also compared to $100 less 680's out there? I was always under the impression that 670 is probably enough, but what additions boost the 680 into a more glorified position FSX wise?

 

For instance, the 670 cuda cores is 1344 with a core of 980MHz and 1058 MHz (gigabyte) with a memory clock at 6008 MHz and 2GB memory..

While the 680 Zotac has 1536 cores and a core of 1006MHz with a memory clock of 6.0 GHz and 2GB memory.

 

Jump to the FTW+ 680: the cores are 1536, with a core of 1084MHz and effective memory clock at 6008MHz with 4GB of memory (256-bit as were the other two).

 

I can see the 4GB FTW+ being great for other games with tons of textures and needing the memory, but even with FSX and 4096 cloud textures, wouldn't this be overkill, even on a three screen system. Thus making either the 670 or regular 680 just as well off, though the 680 having about 12% more cores, which may or may not be useful.

 

Just curious on the tech side of this, I know that FTX+ would definitely crush anything out there on the most demanding GPU based game, but since FSX is mostly CPU bound, I'm curious Also, didn't i read in another post, where you had commented, you had the 670 at one point? Did you see a big jump in weather/traffic performance if you got the FTW+ ?

I'm curious as to wether GPU makes much of a difference too.

I run the 2600K at 4.8 Ghz and i'm generally 30 fps locked, but in heavy weather or near KSEA that can drop down to 17 depending on aircraft.

 

 

Man that is not so inspiring for me to hear. I guess that is w/ all sliders hard right in something like the NGX? I fly into KSEA in the QW757 in weather & FTX PNW scenery and she goes no lower than about 23fps. I am on 4.5 y/o hardware now. When I do my big upgrade later this year I am going to have to leave my sliders where they are now because there is no way I want to nearly double my system performance (Haswell if it pans out, if not then IB/SB which are proven) and end up w/ frame rates in the 17's. By my estimations Haswell at 4.8Ghz should get me nearly 175% of the CPU performance I have now--maybe a little more. I wonder if your video card is holding you back that much. These kinds of reports make me realize no matter what your PC is capable of you aren't going to be able to drive FSX to solid, >=30fps in every conceivable situation, meaning you have to start compromising.

Man that is not so inspiring for me to hear. I guess that is w/ all sliders hard right in something like the NGX? I fly into KSEA in the QW757 in weather & FTX PNW scenery and she goes no lower than about 23fps. I am on 4.5 y/o hardware now. When I do my big upgrade later this year I am going to have to leave my sliders where they are now because there is no way I want to nearly double my system performance (Haswell if it pans out, if not then IB/SB which are proven) and end up w/ frame rates in the 17's. By my estimations Haswell at 4.8Ghz should get me nearly 175% of the CPU performance I have now--maybe a little more. I wonder if your video card is holding you back that much. These kinds of reports make me realize no matter what your PC is capable of you aren't going to be able to drive FSX to solid, >=30fps in every conceivable situation, meaning you have to start compromising.

 

Well.. in my case sliders aren't all maxed necessarily... Here are mine for reference (I think I have these referenced somewhere else as well).. I have three 24" screens (1920x1200 each)...

-------------------------------------------------------------

Eyefinity mode on.

5760x1200x32

Anisotropic

AA unchecked

all check boxes enabled (including directx10, using the directx mods and i have seen a slight boost in fps from the 17-24 worst case situation by using dx10)

Aircraft high res 3D, all others unchecked except aircraft landing lights illuminate.

LOD large

Mesh 90

Mesh res 5m

text res 7cm

Water effects low 2.x

land detail textures checked

scenery complexity: extremely dense

autogen norm

ground shadows off

Special effects high

cloud draw 100 miles (for rex essentials plus overdrive)

thermal vis: none

detailed clouds/max

traffic 0%

ga 0%

airport vehicles none

rest at 0

*i do have ultimate traffic 2, i think 60/30 split there (no real impact fps wise).

----------------------------------------------------

 

 

That 17-24 fps is only worst case.. near very big airports with rain etc.. rain is a killer for fps.

 

For most situations I fly in (to simulate real training) i'm locked at 30.. again this being with the 5850 ati.. ati wise its a good "bargain" card i'd say. Overall i'm pleased, but still not quite satisfied

 

There are some on here who swear that if you dump the ati or lesser video card and head for a 580, 670 or even 680, you will nearly stay at 30 in heavy weather, or maybe 25 worst case (still great).

 

So for me, its a matter of a 670 or 680 kepler series.. Personally spec wise, the 670 should blow away my old ati and give me the fps boost needed in more complex weather/traffic.

Well.. in my case sliders aren't all maxed necessarily... Here are mine for reference (I think I have these referenced somewhere else as well).. I have three 24" screens (1920x1200 each)...

-------------------------------------------------------------

Eyefinity mode on.

5760x1200x32

Anisotropic

AA unchecked

all check boxes enabled (including directx10, using the directx mods and i have seen a slight boost in fps from the 17-24 worst case situation by using dx10)

Aircraft high res 3D, all others unchecked except aircraft landing lights illuminate.

LOD large

Mesh 90

Mesh res 5m

text res 7cm

Water effects low 2.x

land detail textures checked

scenery complexity: extremely dense

autogen norm

ground shadows off

Special effects high

cloud draw 100 miles (for rex essentials plus overdrive)

thermal vis: none

detailed clouds/max

traffic 0%

ga 0%

airport vehicles none

rest at 0

*i do have ultimate traffic 2, i think 60/30 split there (no real impact fps wise).

----------------------------------------------------

 

 

That 17-24 fps is only worst case.. near very big airports with rain etc.. rain is a killer for fps.

 

 

 

Yikes, that is worse than expected. My sliders are MORE RIGHT than yours! No 3x displays though. That must be big. It's same old same old: people go for high end machines and overclock them then commence to set it up so it can be on the brink of poor performance. The only thing I plan to change is to leave autogen at the farthest right. Right now it's set mostly at Dense, however my flight into Vegas a moment ago was at hard right and frames dropped to 22 or so, but no weather to speak of. Truly, my hope is to keep my set up config as it is now but enjoy rock solid frame rates even in places like KSEA--even if I have to use the QW757 to do it!

Yikes, that is worse than expected. My sliders are MORE RIGHT than yours! No 3x displays though. That must be big. It's same old same old: people go for high end machines and overclock them then commence to set it up so it can be on the brink of poor performance. The only thing I plan to change is to leave autogen at the farthest right. Right now it's set mostly at Dense, however my flight into Vegas a moment ago was at hard right and frames dropped to 22 or so, but no weather to speak of. Truly, my hope is to keep my set up config as it is now but enjoy rock solid frame rates even in places like KSEA--even if I have to use the QW757 to do it!

 

More screens mean more pixels and each pixel has to be calculated....

Rain and lots of clouds are making the framerate drop a lot on a 3 monitor view setup.

Get the Gigabyte 660TI FTW edition, you can overclock it like crazy and get performance like the 670/680.