At least GTX 580 if you are going to use HD textures and REX clouds. I have 560ti which will be replaced soon with 580 or 680. 660 is not so good, 560ti performs better and it's not enough for some fsx situations. You can compare all cards here: http://www.hwcompare.com/13161/geforce-gtx-580-vs-geforce-gtx-660-ti/

I thought a 660ti was faster than GTX580. I was consisting one if I don't go with a 7950.

 

C.

There are people that use ATI for FSX that wont bother speaking up because they just get slammed by people in the FSX community for it.  :ph34r:

 

C.

 

Yep, completely agree with you, not sure why that is, perhaps in the past there were differences, perhaps people still remember the old cards.

 

 

Clouds and weather amd cards are terrible it's well known have to tweak to get around this limitation. On clear day neither card makes a big difference, but weather factored in see big fps drops that render flying unacceptable.

 

Sigh...please show your working.

 

I will admit, Ryan (Tabs) has made a similar point regarding (i think) AA, i very much respect his opinion, but personally i haven't noticed a significant difference.  All i have read (with no evidence) is :

 

When in weather AMD cards are terrible

I fly mostly in the UK, known for clouds and rain, my FPS doesn't drop around EGLL Extreme

 

The Clouds look bad 

I don't even know how to intelligently respond to that.  What does "bad" mean in this context, what is the difference, are they using the same software?

 

AMD doesn't handle AA as well.

Could be correct, having run both types of cards in the past i haven't noticed a visual difference.

 

These statements are never backed up with figures, simply say it and people (nvidia users) will happily nod their heads in collective agreement, the first time an AMD user asks for prove, it always comes down to "well i had an ATI Rage II, it was nowhere near as smooth as my GTX Titan"  (slight exaggeration for effect).

I thought a 660ti was faster than GTX580. I was consisting one if I don't go with a 7950.

 

C.

 

For FSX, go for NVIDIA.

And regarding 660ti vs 580, just look direct comparation in that link, and their price. 660ti is arround 290$ to 330$ and 580 is arround 390$ to 630$ depending on version. There are some reasons for that

For FSX, go for NVIDIA.

And regarding 660ti vs 580, just look direct comparation in that link, and their price. 660ti is arround 290$ to 330$ and 580 is arround 390$ to 630$ depending on version. There are some reasons for that

 

I think you are confused on this one. GTX580 is the old card. The prices never really came down on them to reflect that. The 660ti is actually the newer equivalent or in some cases, more powerful card. At an average price of $300 they are a god deal. The direct competitor is the ICEq 7950 3GB from HIS. They both trade blows equally in games and both are about the same or better than a GTX580 in 90% of the cases.

 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_660_Ti_Direct_Cu_II/24.html

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4869/nvidia_geforce_gtx_660_ti_2gb_reference_video_card_review/index3.html

 

As for ATI versus nVidia in FSX, I think you have missed what I am trying to explain. ATI dollar for dollar is just as good in FSX. I pointed that out here... http://forum.avsim.net/topic/404179-graphics-card-recommendation/#entry2643904

just a few posts up. You might have missed that.

 

Your 560ti is almost as fast as my 6950 (we are both a bit slower than a stock GTX570) can you set yours to Super Sample AA 4X in your driver and compare with me in those shots? REX clouds of some kind. ORBX PNW scenery. Weather = Stormy Conditions and Fogged in Default weather themes around Portland city in ORBX scenery (I have the freeware Portland Skyline from ORBX installed). This was all within 3 NM of KPDX in those shots at about 2000 - 3000 feet. Any HD carenado plane will do the trick. Or The Duke from Real Air. Again my card is a bit less than a GTX570 in performance.

 

You also have a faster CPU than I do. 2700K @ 4.8 and I am a 2600K @4.2 so you have that advantage. I would guess you will have no trouble being well over 25 fps and in fact 30 or better in all of these comparisons. Especially if nVidia is better and you have a 12% faster CPU than I do.

 

Scenery Complexity set to Very Dense and Autogen to Dense and water to Low 2.x and the rest maxed out. Weather TAB set Clouds to high and distance draw of coulds to 80.

 

This should be really neat to compare.

 

Thanks

 

Charles.

Screenshots are next to useless to expose shimmer. Anyway I doubt ATI's 4xSS is going to look better than NVidia's combined modes like 8xS or 8xSQ. Also you can run SGSS on high end nVidia cards with good results, can AMD GPU's do that too?

It's been ages since I last tried an AMD card, so I may well be wrong

I think you are confused on this one. GTX580 is the old card. The prices never really came down on them to reflect that. The 660ti is actually the newer equivalent or in some cases, more powerful card. At an average price of $300 they are a god deal. The direct competitor is the ICEq 7950 3GB from HIS. They both trade blows equally in games and both are about the same or better than a GTX580 in 90% of the cases.

 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_660_Ti_Direct_Cu_II/24.html

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4869/nvidia_geforce_gtx_660_ti_2gb_reference_video_card_review/index3.html

 

As for ATI versus nVidia in FSX, I think you have missed what I am trying to explain. ATI dollar for dollar is just as good in FSX. I pointed that out here... http://forum.avsim.net/topic/404179-graphics-card-recommendation/#entry2643904

just a few posts up. You might have missed that.

 

Your 560ti is almost as fast as my 6950 (we are both a bit slower than a stock GTX570) can you set yours to Super Sample AA 4X in your driver and compare with me in those shots? REX clouds of some kind. ORBX PNW scenery. Weather = Stormy Conditions and Fogged in Default weather themes around Portland city in ORBX scenery (I have the freeware Portland Skyline from ORBX installed). This was all within 3 NM of KPDX in those shots at about 2000 - 3000 feet. Any HD carenado plane will do the trick. Or The Duke from Real Air. Again my card is a bit less than a GTX570 in performance.

 

You also have a faster CPU than I do. 2700K @ 4.8 and I am a 2600K @4.2 so you have that advantage. I would guess you will have no trouble being well over 25 fps and in fact 30 or better in all of these comparisons. Especially if nVidia is better and you have a 12% faster CPU than I do.

 

Scenery Complexity set to Very Dense and Autogen to Dense and water to Low 2.x and the rest maxed out. Weather TAB set Clouds to high and distance draw of coulds to 80.

 

This should be really neat to compare.

 

Thanks

 

Charles.

 

Please, take a look what Nick N. says about that: http://www.simforums.com/forums/fsx-still-not-smooth_topic42477.html

 

quote:

 

"1. It was a MARKETING move by Nvidia to release the LOWER END 600 seriesfirst..   the card that would be considered equal in the GTX'580' class as compared to a GTX 570 or 560 of the past is the NEXT release coming in Q4 of this year. What that number will be we do not know.. it could be a 685 or a 700 series.

 

 

That 680 card on the market should have been numbered a 660, not 680   its a marketing ploy and its obviously working!  

 

 

 

 

2. The 110 is the next release core VERSION and NOT the number of CUDA cores. 

 

 

 

In your case you need a video card, now..   and since you said money was an issue for you either go with 580 and buy again later when the better 110 cores are released and confirmed, or, buy a 680 now and live with it.

 

you are stuck with the performance you have until the video card is replaced

 

 

and no 'dual GPU' card works right in FSX. 2 single cards in SLI is different and still limited and not worth the cost of 2 cards for SLI,...  but the single dual core cards are JUNK for FSX and will not work right."

end of quote!

 

And random customer feedback: 

 

http://www.overclock.net/t/1295358/gtx-660ti-vs-gtx-580-upgrade

 

http://community.futuremark.com/forum/showthread.php?168254-What-are-the-performance-differences-with-the-GTX-580-and-660-Ti

 

It's seems that 660ti is better than 580 just in benchmarks, in games - in some cases are close, in some cases 580 is a way better.

 

I don't know if i have time to play with settings this days, i'll tell you if i do this. Right now, i have AA 8xS with 2x Sparse Grid Supersampling. All scenery sliders are at max, autogen on very high, water on High 2.x or max and cloud draw distance to 90(i'm not sure, must check the last one). 

Anyway, i have 30fps(locked at 30)most of time, in NGX, PMDG MD11 and Maddog, using REX, AS2012, ORBX, UTX etc. I have 30fps on FSDT CYVR and ORBX for example, sometimes in bad weather - it can go down to approx 25-26. And i want to change my 560ti becouse of that - with 580 you don't have this problems with REX clouds

dazz, on 15 Apr 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

Screenshots are next to useless to expose shimmer. Anyway I doubt ATI's 4xSS is going to look better than NVidia's combined modes like 8xS or 8xSQ. Also you can run SGSS on high end nVidia cards with good results, can AMD GPU's do that too?

It's been ages since I last tried an AMD card, so I may well be wrong

Well I guess if I can slip it past my wife, I can test subjectively. I see no difference having stood and watched over a shoulder or two and then flew on mine.

 

My history... From about three years ago on my mid range ATI 4000 series card on some single digit number driver... I remember ATI getting 10 fps in the fogged in weather theme or Stormy Conditions themes. I remember the crawling textures on ATI in FSX in the land and water and expecially the twinkling power line towers. I am telling you as a past FSX+nVidia guy that that was resolved when they released new drivers for the 6000 series and have been resolved ever since.

 

#1. Shimmer is ELIMINATED on ATI in FSX by turning OFF Surface Format Optimization and turning texture quality to HIGH in the driver. No different than cranking up some settings in inspector for nVidia. Same goes for ATI.

 

#2. If you enable AA in FSX menu and fly in clouds its a stuttering mess. ATI does not like FSX's default AA implementation at all. Turn that off and use ATI's driver for that.

 

SOLVED!

 

And yes. I imagine you can have 8X Super Sample AA enabled on the more expensive ATI cards. But I dont know. I did Edge Detect 12X SSAA last night and it was in the high 20's and smooth. But in stormy conditions around KPDX it was not quite as smooth as I like so I went back to 4xSSAA. But honestly man. You want to put AA modes under microscopes and compare pixels? Go to nVnews and Rage3D (two places I lived for years) and fill your boots! I have been a rabid fan on both sides more than I like to admit. As an aviation fan that now spends more time in FSX than i do in PC games in general, I can attest to this. ATI is NOT having problems with FSX anymore if you set it up right just like you have to with nVidia.

 

I fly online regularily with people with GTX570's and 680's in the same weather and the like and we often compare performance and subjective impressions and I cannot detect a performance difference not explainable by cost of the card. My $200 card versus thier $400+ card. Listen. Go fly the pattern at KSEA in overcast weather (ORBX PNW scenery) in a PMDG plane and tell me your getting 30+ fps with high AA modes enabled. Everyone I know personally with faster CPU's and GTX600 series cards are not so far as with those I have checked in with since the 600's arrived. I am ALWAYS looking to improve my sim experience ATI or no ATI.

 

I am open minded. My next card purchase will be one with AMD and one with nVidia and a few days off work with a copy of driver cleaner and my FSX.CFG delete and Shader Cache wipe routine ready to go and will compare for myself. I have NO reason to get AMD for video card sales. I am just dispelling the myth that FSX and ATI are a bad combo. This is Blatently false.

 

 

You want to put AA modes under microscopes and compare pixels?

 

I fully agree on this. Going by your screenshots, it definitely looks good enough. Spending an extra 200 bucks/euros just to reduce shimmer a tad bit is not something most will consider a good investment. I love SGSS and how it cuts down on AG shimmer, but even a GTX680 can only do 2xSGSS without choking miserably.

So I'm sort of bought on ATI being up there with NVidia when it comes to FSX provided that you're not an IQ freak.

 

Have you tried Bojote's shader mod? and what's AG (trees) shimmer like with your AMD card please?

I fully agree on this. Going by your screenshots, it definitely looks good enough. Spending an extra 200 bucks/euros just to reduce shimmer a tad bit is not something most will consider a good investment. I love SGSS and how it cuts down on AG shimmer, but even a GTX680 can only do 2xSGSS without choking miserably.

So I'm sort of bought on ATI being up there with NVidia when it comes to FSX provided that you're not an IQ freak.

 

Have you tried Bojote's shader mod? and what's AG (trees) shimmer like with your AMD card please?

Apparently B247NG above has nVidia AA 8xS with 2x Sparse Grid Supersampling enabled. All scenery sliders are at max, autogen on very high, water on High 2.x or max and cloud draw distance to 90(i'm not sure, must check the last one) and has 30fps(locked at 30)most of time. All in NGX, PMDG MD11 and Maddog, using REX, AS2012, ORBX, UTX etc. And in bad weather flying through a thick layer of cloud over ORBX scenery VANCOUVER BC no less - it only goes down to approx 25-26. And this is on a GTX560! So whats the deal here? I fly with owners of newly minted 680's that dont go over 2xSGSS for the exact reason you state. Flying in heavy cloud and the framerates take a beating. As also evidenced by Word Not Allowed's own benchmarks with the TITAN. Wa wa waaaaaaaa....

 

As for shimmering trees on AMD, provided you turn off AA in the FSX menu. Turn OFF Surface format optimization in ATI's CCC and use at least 4xSSAA (Super Sample) in CCC, The trees look like solid unchanging entities with no shimmer whatsoever. The whole scene is shimmer free from all angles. Water, Trees, Ground. As far as I can make out on a 27" screen as far as I can see into the horizon. All stutter is gone to. But this is partly due to locking FSX internally at 30. Of course like Word Not Allowed and pretty much everyone... Flying an HD plane into KSEA in heavy overcast can drop me into the low twenties and high teens and then panning with TrackIR is a bit jittery. Except for the 560ti. It never drops below 25 fps.

 

And you bet. I have used Bjotes tweak tuner on and off trying to see if theres a difference. But I did not like Small Part reject radius setting. My flying mates would dissapear when I fly online when they got too far out from me. We like to swarm airports on VATSIM. I might try it again though. I have no tweaks beyond himemfix and wideview aspect in my cfg.

 

I swear I am going to try a 660ti to make sure I am not missing something using ATI and will report back some day soon. But that is a but of work cleaning drivers and reprepping FSX. But worth while to pick a card I plan to own for the next few years. Although there is FREE GAMES with ATI 7000 series right now. Bioshock Infinate and Crysis 3. Hard to turn those down even if I sell em on ebay.

 

Charles.

I used to run FSX on a GTX460, which is essentially a GTX560 with slightly lower clocks, and it cannot do any sort of SGSS. It's either not working or there are not enough cloud layers.

Thanks for the info on AG shimmer. I have a friend with a HD6950, I'll see if I can convince him to lend it to me so I can run a few tests

I used to run FSX on a GTX460, which is essentially a GTX560 with slightly lower clocks, and it cannot do any sort of SGSS. It's either not working or there are not enough cloud layers.

Thanks for the info on AG shimmer. I have a friend with a HD6950, I'll see if I can convince him to lend it to me so I can run a few tests

 

That would be Great! Please follow these instructions.

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/404430-optimal-settings-for-ati-users-with-fsx-great-results/

Thanks, wilco

Had one AMD hd 7750 card performance is terrible compared to gtx 650. The clouds is what hits the AMD card hard on the fps particularly that where the big achilles heel is.

 

Just re-read and ya... for sure. The 7750 is definitely not an FSX card. I agree 100%. It's like $90-$100 bucks. No one in their right mind would buy that for FSX. The slightly more expensive (not by much) GTX650 at $120-$140 (depending on if it's the Ti or not and 2GB) would undoubtedly be better. If those were the only two I could choose between I would get the 650. That 7750 would understandably choke and the 650 is the better value. But were discussing more powerful cards here.

 

C.

Just how depend on the GFX card is FSX?  My understanding is that most of the processing is done on the CPU.

Just how depend on the GFX card is FSX?  My understanding is that most of the processing is done on the CPU.

Your right. Heavily dependant on CPU. But clouds, AF and AA are the video card. :-)

 

C.