Going from a GTX 285 to a GTX 680...looking for feedback.

[PieEater 10]

I kind of find it hard to comprehend why generally nobody seems to mention their monitor real estate when comparing graphics cards. It's not hard to understand why someone running a 19" 1024x768 monitor is not going to find their upgrade to a GTX680 beneficial when compared to someone running a 27" at 2560x1440. I appreciate the comparison is extreme but surely this information is relevent !?!

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

I kind of find it hard to comprehend why generally nobody seems to mention their monitor real estate when comparing graphics cards. It's not hard to understand why someone running a 19" 1024x768 monitor is not going to find their upgrade to a GTX680 beneficial when compared to someone running a 27" at 2560x1440. I appreciate the comparison is extreme but surely this information is relevent !?!

Hi,

 

I'm running a 30 inch at 1920x1200.  It is as smooth as I have ever had in flight simulation.  This was the best money spent, even in looking at every system upgrade since 1997.  The GTX 680 has transformed my flight simulation experience in FS9 and FSX to the virtually 'real'.  Man can I attest to the fact that the race for FSX performance is NOT solely a CPU 80 percent/ GPU 20 percent performance mix. I'd now say that you need the fastest CPU you can afford, AND the fastest, most tech-relevant  GPU you can also afford.  If anybody not so far having owned a GTX Custom 680 card is reading this....if you do not have one in your system, you are badly missing out on flight simulation performance and realism. Badly missing out.....

[Ted Striker 338]

So are you saying that you like the new card Mitch? :lol:   Glad to hear you are happy with your purchase and thanks for the feedback. I expected a little better IQ, but not that dramatic of a difference.  Like you, I thought the only thing that mattered was CPU frequency. I'm still amazed at the improvement I got from going from a 3.5 ghz Q6600 to a 3.5 ghz 3770k.  I'm looking forward to being amazed again with the video card replacement. The only thing holding me back is trying to decide between a 2gb and a 4gb card. I would like the 4 gb card for multi monitor use but some very knowledgable people have said that the VRAM gets mapped to your VAS allocation and a 4 gb video card puts you much closer to OOM errors. Other very knowlegable people are buying 6 gb titans and it doesn't seem to be a factor.  Fortunately the WOW factor from this 3770k is keeping me plenty entertained with my 285GTX until I decide on the VRAM size.

 

Ted

[dskviator 4]

I went from a 560Ti 1GB to the ASUS 680 SC 2GB, and on first run on FSX, I ran it for a total of 10mts and in the NGX parked at FSDT KJFK with all systems off, the VC view barely did anything to the FPS, and actually dropped it. Of course, I am sure once I do some tuning, it will work much better. Then I loaded the default KMFR from the trike in the air view, as I panned around using track IR, there was absolutely no flicker in the textures, it just displayed as one simple 3d world...switched to Real Air Duke and there was some frame hit, but stayed up at 30fps and an extremely smoother world.

 

XPlane was another story, gosh did the world look different and no stutters and the night display was freaking awesome...WOW factor certainly existed. Anyways, I upgraded primarily because I wanted to make the 2GB switch and I am sure I will not regret it, especially if P3D and stuff takes off to 64bit etc.

 

As they say, every one's mileage varies, we will see how mine does in the long run. Maybe it's about time I brought that i7 from it's stock 3.7 to something higher.

 

Cheers!!

[Luis_KMIA 242]

Here is a good guide from the guys who built my system: http://jetlinesystems.com/performance.php

[19dcavscout 39]

I have the GTX 680 Signature 2 from EVGA and I love it. You will be happy with the card!

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Ted Striker, on 27 Mar 2013 - 17:47, said:

So are you saying that you like the new card Mitch? :lol: Glad to hear you are happy with your purchase and thanks for the feedback. I expected a little better IQ, but not that dramatic of a difference. Like you, I thought the only thing that mattered was CPU frequency. I'm still amazed at the improvement I got from going from a 3.5 ghz Q6600 to a 3.5 ghz 3770k. I'm looking forward to being amazed again with the video card replacement. The only thing holding me back is trying to decide between a 2gb and a 4gb card. I would like the 4 gb card for multi monitor use but some very knowledgable people have said that the VRAM gets mapped to your VAS allocation and a 4 gb video card puts you much closer to OOM errors. Other very knowlegable people are buying 6 gb titans and it doesn't seem to be a factor. Fortunately the WOW factor from this 3770k is keeping me plenty entertained with my 285GTX until I decide on the VRAM size.

 

Ted

Hi Ted,

 

I'm just on a pause from a flight out of Las Vegas, headed to Flint, Michigan (KNFT). The scenery below my wing is simply stunningly clear, full and sharp of detail, and the flight animation is smooth as silk. I also decided to purchase a 2 GB card rather than a 4 GB for the same reason of hearing that they saturate. So...I saved 70 bucks in going with the 2 GB version. Trust me, there is no performance hit in eye candy!

 

With my research, I don't believe that I shall go beyond the GTX 680, for it seems to perfectly match my i7-975 cpu and other system components. I finally have smooth animation, and stunning visuals. What more could, or would I need? I don't intend to run more than one monitor...so I am at the apex for what I want now. As you noted, I am so VERY satisfied with this card.

 

Cheers!

 

dskviator, on 27 Mar 2013 - 18:39, said:

I went from a 560Ti 1GB to the ASUS 680 SC 2GB, and on first run on FSX, I ran it for a total of 10mts and in the NGX parked at FSDT KJFK with all systems off, the VC view barely did anything to the FPS, and actually dropped it. Of course, I am sure once I do some tuning, it will work much better. Then I loaded the default KMFR from the trike in the air view, as I panned around using track IR, there was absolutely no flicker in the textures, it just displayed as one simple 3d world...switched to Real Air Duke and there was some frame hit, but stayed up at 30fps and an extremely smoother world.

 

XPlane was another story, gosh did the world look different and no stutters and the night display was freaking awesome...WOW factor certainly existed. Anyways, I upgraded primarily because I wanted to make the 2GB switch and I am sure I will not regret it, especially if P3D and stuff takes off to 64bit etc.

 

As they say, every one's mileage varies, we will see how mine does in the long run. Maybe it's about time I brought that i7 from it's stock 3.7 to something higher.

 

Cheers!!

I have a stable clock on my i7-975 at 4.06 GHz. on my stock air cooler. I have a Dell 730x and love the system. I bought it in '09 and it has been stellar. Now having replaced my original GTX285 with the GTX 680....I don't plan to replace the system in total, any time soon!!! It is now pumping out the FSX joy factor in the big leagues....

 

19dcavscout, on 27 Mar 2013 - 20:06, said:

I have the GTX 680 Signature 2 from EVGA and I love it. You will be happy with the card!

I sure am! The EVGA 3 year warranty sure doesn't hurt either, lol!

 

Cheers!

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Light Bloom....

 

Well, I thought to try what was always a frame rate killer on my GTX285....but now, on the 680, it doesn't seem to impact FPS!

 

I'll keep it on and see if I like what it adds to the environment.

 

 

[kand 205]

I went from a 285 to a 480 and noticed zero difference except the 480 made a lot more noise and cost more to run. I then went from the 480 to a 670Ti and the difference was noticeable, able to run high leveles of AA and gained a few FPS, I run a T2go so have a wide aspect ratio which takes more GPU

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

I went from a 285 to a 480 and noticed zero difference except the 480 made a lot more noise and cost more to run. I then went from the 480 to a 670Ti and the difference was noticeable, able to run high leveles of AA and gained a few FPS, I run a T2go so have a wide aspect ratio which takes more GPU

I'm just settling in with the 680 for the last couple of days, seeing what this 'n that setting will do to the FPS.  I have everything wide open, in FSX, other than clouds rendering at 60 miles. OPUS seems to fill the sky out to the horizon with this setting.  I now also have BLOOM on and no impact on rates. Pretty amazing. With my 285, Bloom was NOT an option....lol.  So, the 680/i7-975/12 GB 1366 RAM combo is giving me a constant (1 or 2 FPS dips on occasion) locked 30 FPS with Adaptive and 1/2 refresh rate set in Inspector.  I couldn't ask for more.  Good stuff!

[dskviator 4]

Sesquashtoo, mind sharing that inspector settings? Or just the ones different from the PMDG pinned thread? Or if you have another reference, that will be gr8 too.

 

Cheers!!

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Sesquashtoo, mind sharing that inspector settings? Or just the ones different from the PMDG pinned thread? Or if you have another reference, that will be gr8 too.

 

Cheers!!

I tried to attach my nVidia Inspector custom import file, but the AVSIM upload said that 'you aren't permitted to upload this kind of file'...

 

if you wish, PM me with your email address, and I will send you directly.

 

The attached file will be Inspector Custom Settings. nip

[SAAB340 28]

What one should remember is that as soon as it's not your CPU or FSX's internal framelock that's holding your FPS back you will loose textureloading. Especially if you use a low FFTF value. A faster GPU will be able to handle higher AA settings without becoming the bottleneck therefore keeping your textures nice and crisp. Another way to keep the textures crisp is to lock the FPS at a lower value within FSX or use lower/no AA settings in inspector. But that will on the other hand introduce shimmering and/or stutters/slideshow. A faster GPU simply lets you use higher AA settings and/or resolution while still being able to keep your frames locked at 30FPS with half rate vSync or when they drop below it'll be because of your CPU, not your GPU. That will give you the best visual experience in FSX.