Sign in to follow this  
theskyisthelimit

My experiences with the EVGA 780Ti 3GB (vs 670FTW) and 5760x1200

Recommended Posts

I previously had an Nvidia 670 GTX FTW from EVGA (2GB)..

 

My system is as follows:

 

CPU: i7 2600k at 4.6 ghz (0.045+ offset)

RAM:  16 GB

OS:  Windows 8.1 x64 Pro 

HDD:  Sata III 64GB cache (for strictly the FSX portion) and a Sata III for the OS

Monitors:  24" Westinghouse L2410NM x 3 at 5760x1200 in nvidia surround mode

 

I used Word Not Allowed's AA Cloud test to compare performance on both the 670 and the 780ti with either 4xSupersampling or 4xSGSS (sparse grid super sampling).  All tests were in DX10 mode with the latest dx10 fixes.

 

Nvidia inspector is 1.9.72

Driver:  327.23 for the 670 tests and 331.65 for the 780Ti (had to install the latest for it to work).

 

For the OS for just the test, I had a clean OS, nothing installed.. just default weather and UTX and bufferpools=0 in both cases.

Frames are locked internally in FSX at 30 for all but one test.

 

Here is the relevant portion of my fsx.cfg for the test:

 

 

[DISPLAY.Device.NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti.0.0]
Mode=5760x1200x32
Anisotropic=1
AntiAlias=1
 
[bUFFERPOOLS]
UsePools=0
 
[GRAPHICS]
AC_SELF_SHADOW=0
AIRCRAFT_REFLECTIONS=1
AIRCRAFT_SHADOWS=1
ALLOW_SHADER_30=1
COCKPIT_HIGH_LOD=1
D3D10=1
EFFECTS_QUALITY=2
ForceWindowedVSync=0
GROUND_SHADOWS=0
HIGHMEMFIX=1 
IMAGE_QUALITY=0
LANDING_LIGHTS=1
 
 
MultiSamplesPerPixel=4
MultiSampleQuality=0
 
NUM_LIGHTS=8
See_Self=1
TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD=2048
TEXTURE_QUALITY=3
SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED_10=1693500672
SHADER_CACHE_PRIMED=1693500672
 
[Display]
BLOOM_EFFECTS=1
SKINNED_ANIMATIONS=1
TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=120
TextureMaxLoad=9
TransitionTime=4.000000
UPPER_FRAMERATE_LIMIT=30
WideViewAspect=True
 
[TERRAIN]
AUTOGEN_DENSITY=3
BATCH_AUTOGEN2=1
DETAIL_TEXTURE=1
LOD_RADIUS=7.500000
MESH_COMPLEXITY=90
MESH_RESOLUTION=24
//SWAP_WAIT_TIMEOUT=2  
//TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=3000     //897
//TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=4500  //1100
TEXTURE_RESOLUTION=29
WATER_EFFECTS=4
 
 
[sCENERY]
//ObjectsToBatchPerFrame=50 //new
DAWN_DUSK_SMOOTHING=1
IMAGE_COMPLEXITY=4
LENSFLARE=1
//MAX_ASYNC_BATCHING_JOBS=3
//SmallPartRejectRadius=1  //4 b4
 
[Main]
DisablePreload=1
FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.15 //0.05  
 
 
 
[TrafficManager]
AIRPORT_SCENERY_DENSITY=1
AirlineDensity=0
FreewayDensity=7
GADensity=0
IFROnly=0
LeisureBoatsDensity=0
ShipsAndFerriesDensity=0
 
[Weather]
CLOUD_COVERAGE_DENSITY=8
CLOUD_DRAW_DISTANCE=3
DETAILED_CLOUDS=1
DisableTurbulence=0
DownloadWindsAloft=0
DynamicWeather=0
THERMAL_VISUALS=0
WindshieldPrecipitationEffects=1
 
 
And here is my nvidia settings in inspector for 4xsupersample (switch to 4xSGSS for the other test)
nvidia_20131114_211656.png
 
With the above settings I got the following results with the AA cloud test by Word Not Allowed (see his wordpress site for the download if you want to try it yourself).. I used fraps set the timer at 60 seconds to test.. again FSX locked at 30 fps
 
670GTX FTW 2GB:
 

8.5 FPS (4xSGSS)

20.8 FPS (4xSupersampling)

 

Then for the big daddy card.. the 780Ti..

11.03 FPS (4xSGSS)

29.26 FPS (4xSupersampling)  (if i unlock frames it goes to 29.6 fps)

 

Now for general use in FSX on my normal install I found the frames to be better overall.. for instance.. the Miami 2012 addon at night was previously coming in around 15 fps with the 780 and 4xsupersample it was clocking in around 22 fps.. meanwhile KSEA with heavy weather in one instance with just a default cessna used to come in around 14 fps.. it now holds 26 fps.. so it is better in this sense.. but at a cost of living with minor flickering with 4xsupersampling.  4xSGSS is still a problem..

 

Conclusion..

 

This is my take at this point, though maybe more tweaking is needed on the driver side..  At a price point of $739 compared to what is now around $300 for the 670 FTW, i'm not sure if its worth the price difference, though as noted with my general FSX use, perhaps, if your willing to accept living with minor flickering and 4xSupersampling..

 

Again I have more testing and tweaking to try, but unless someone has a miracle boost cure here, I dont expect these numbers to climb much higher, though ill update here if i make more progress.

 

Looking backward though and comparing to Kostas result in comparing a 580, 680 and Titan, it still seems like the 780ti should have come in somewhere between the 680 and Titan..

 

He got the following:

 

10 fps on 580

14 fps on 680

20 fps on the Titan.

 

I would have expected values in the range of 16-18, though the test parameters may have been slightly different in his test (dx10 or dx9?)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

And people still say FSX is the future... If a card like this can't handle more than 11FPS, no card ever will!!! This thing is a beast.

 

Let's wait for the other about to come DX11 Simulator, I hope it handles these newer cards better!

 

Edit: Didn't realize you run at absurdly high resolutions!! Maybe that's why it's so low.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And people still say FSX is the future... If a card like this can't handle more than 11FPS, no card ever will!!! This thing is a beast.

 

Let's wait for the other about to come DX11 Simulator, I hope it handles these newer cards better!

 

Edit: Didn't realize you run at absurdly high resolutions!! Maybe that's why it's so low.

 

Yeah my three 24's force a native of 5760x1200.. so its up there.  Even with the 670 2GB if you lower the res to say 3840, it worked much better, but due to native resolution issues, it looks like crap.. alternative, downsize 3 screens and get new ones, go to one screen.. cost for cost, probably about the same differential by just getting this card (for me).

 

That 10 fps is a beast of a test though.  These cards do help a little, but yeah still CPU locked issues drive most of the performance even at 4.6ghz.

 

Actual usage is 22-29 fps (locked at 30) with the 780ti with 7% road traffic and minimum on static airplanes at airports.  I was 14-30 with the 670 2GB at this resolution.

 

So going from say 14 fps worst, to maybe 21 fps worst (night mode) is pretty good, but by no means worth the price hike.

 

This card supports directx 11.2 though.. it will be interesting to see how P3D v2.0 stacks up.

 

I'm going to test a 780 FTW and see how its numbers stack up as well.. statistical fun :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yikes this test result is kinda a bummer for me - we have about the same setup (processor, clock, screens,  etc.)  and I just ordered the 780 non ti.

 

Found a Titan the next day used for the same as I paid for the 780.

 

Maybe a second card (in my future) might help...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yikes this test result is kinda a bummer for me - we have about the same setup (processor, clock, screens,  etc.)  and I just ordered the 780 non ti.

 

Found a Titan the next day used for the same as I paid for the 780.

 

Maybe a second card (in my future) might help...?

 

I've read that say two 670 4GB can be a real benefit..

 

Are you using the titan right now? Would be curious at our high res, what fps you get on the Word Not Allowed AA cloud test with 4xSGSS.  Thats a steal if you managed that.. the 780 FTW is around $540 shipped.. I've seen titans averaging sold, used on ebay for around $750 (average).

 

I will be testing the 780 FTW over the weekend to see how it stacks up.  Eventually i'll put all this into one article on my website with a chart/table with pics to better see how all 3 cards stacked up.

 

The test clouds flight situation is here if anyone wants to give it a shot on their machine (using Fraps and a 60 second benchmark). And if possible try it using my settings in the first post (sliders and nvidia NI).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running 4xSGSS with Word Not Allowed's cloud test is just suicidal anyways. It should melt any card at that resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running 4xSGSS with Word Not Allowed's cloud test is just suicidal anyways. It should melt any card at that resolution.

True. But my average of 22-29 will certainly drop by a large margin with general use and 4xSGSS even on the ti. Hence I stick with 4xsupersample. I'll also try 2xSGSS and see how that performs.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2xSGSS should be ok. How can you stand the the shimmering with 4xSS?

With my system I barely see any significant shimmering at 4ss(for some reason). Part of a building may flicker and static airplanes shimmer way off in distance. Trees are not that bad. For the performance drop in moderate conditions to me it was better to use 4ss. Plus going from 20 to nearly 30 on the AA test at that level is around a 30% jump. Not bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not have the Titan - the guy contacted me back one day after I ordered the 780 Classified. It was on Craigslist (order at your own risk type thing). It is gone now.

 

In all honesty I will probably not go for the leading edge of settings. I will just setup to a point and leave it alone. Last time I was into FSX I tweaked all of the time and it became a habit I really do not want to get back into.

 

I see you have all of the Saitek panels - I have them all too and just made a simple pit for them. I was tired of setting them up and taking them down so made them into a cabinet. When I get set back up (end of next week) I will post some pictures. The whole thing cost less than $100 (not including panels) and is 100 times more fun now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well your lucky, anything less is unacceptable for me. Maybe it's different with multi monitor setups and higher resolutions. I only run one monitor at 1920

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not have the Titan - the guy contacted me back one day after I ordered the 780 Classified. It was on Craigslist (order at your own risk type thing). It is gone now.

 

In all honesty I will probably not go for the leading edge of settings. I will just setup to a point and leave it alone. Last time I was into FSX I tweaked all of the time and it became a habit I really do not want to get back into.

 

I see you have all of the Saitek panels - I have them all too and just made a simple pit for them. I was tired of setting them up and taking them down so made them into a cabinet. When I get set back up (end of next week) I will post some pictures. The whole thing cost less than $100 (not including panels) and is 100 times more fun now.

Ah nice. Yea I'd love to see pics. I love the panels. Mine stay up under my screens 24-7. Btw I use SPAD for the driver and it fixed some issues. On the tweaking I agree. I find myself mostly tweaking and blogging or forum chatting about it. I guess it's a hobby now. However it felt spending more on the TI if I could get past the tweaking is worth it. Time is money thing :).

Well your lucky, anything less is unacceptable for me. Maybe it's different with multi monitor setups and higher resolutions. I only run one monitor at 1920

Yep I bet is it the higher resolution. Saves slightly on the need for higher AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSX just can't take advantage of modern GPUs. You can buy a $700 GPU that shows amazing performance in any other game yet just a 5-10 FPS improvement in FSX. That's why I think buying high-end GPUs for FSX is useless. The cost just doesn't justify the performance advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSX just can't take advantage of modern GPUs. You can buy a $700 GPU that shows amazing performance in any other game yet just a 5-10 FPS improvement in FSX. That's why I think buying high-end GPUs for FSX is useless. The cost just doesn't justify the performance advantage.

 

I couldn't agree more. I would never select hardware of any sort for just FSX. I choose for many other software reasons. FSX maybe gets 5-10% in the consideration process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't agree more. I would never select hardware of any sort for just FSX. I choose for many other software reasons. FSX maybe gets 5-10% in the consideration process.

 

FSX has a very finicky taste for hardware. I'm sure Aces built it with 8GHz single-core CPUs in mind, but instead dual-cores happened. SP1 adds some multithreading, but the load on the first thread is extremely heavy.

 

I'm placing high hopes on Prepar3D 2.0. With proper multithreading and GPU usage, the performance might be as high as Microsoft Flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this