for the lucky ones already flying V2 : graphic card ?

[Alec 370]

I'm surprised GPU's like the 780 Ti and titan are even mentioned on a forum like Avsim.

These cards are the absolute top of the range and given the graphical presentation of P3D these cards SHOULD be absolute overkill.

Heck, a 780 ti runs battlefield 4 maxed out at 2560x1440 no problems.

For comparison, a normal 780 runs War Thunder at 200-300fps !! and it looks WAY better than P3D 2.0 even with mods.

http://cdn.overclock.net/8/8b/8b8c92f0_warthunder2.jpeg

http://warthunder.com/upload/image/1000x700/shot%202013_05_09%2007_11_54.jpg

 

When War Thunder starts modeling the entire Earth in it's simulation, we can consider it to be more demanding than Flight Simulators, until then, there's just no comparison.

[Squishy 0]

When War Thunder starts modeling the entire Earth in it's simulation, we can consider it to be more demanding than Flight Simulators, until then, there's just no comparison.

You're kidding right? You think FSX is modelling the entire Earth in real time?

It only simulates the region you fly in and generates the next part as you're flying.

I guess the need to generate the next part will give cost some computing power..but even if that would cut FPS in half it would still run better.

Btw it's not like there's no physics either. War thunder has flight dynamics perhaps even more sophisticated than FSX (I'm not sure) not to mention the damage model which doens't even exist in FSX.

[MarkSC 122]

Those of you seeing more than 2GB usage, I assume you are using multi monitors at high resolutions and/or with high LOD setting? I'm not home to test it, but I'd be surprised if P3D uses more than 2GB with one monitor at 1080p, as no game on the market does that (I know, I know, it's not a game). Could someone post their memory usage at 1080p and medium LOD and 4x MSAA and reasonable shadow settings? I think a lot of those shopping for a GPU this weekend could benefit from that.

[wiler 394]

  I have a 770GTX 2GB card and 4770k @ 4.7GHz. VAS is 1780MB, FTX global installed and flying the Aerosoft Airbus Extreme over the east coast with one 24 inch monitor. The card never went over 85% usage, and the cpu was around 60-70%. I had it set to vsynch 44 frames, the strange thing is, if I pushed it up further it wouldn't remain constant @50, but the hardware wouldn't throttle either and there was plenty of room for the hardware to keep pushing! P3DV2 is a huge step forward but its still not ready for the mainstream at this release version. Maybe @ 2.1  LM will address the black screen bugs ,click spot issues, and hardware utilization. SLI support would be interesting to see but why do we need SLI if a single GPU isnt maxed out!   

[TurboTomato 90]

I have a mid-range system (3770K, no overclock, GTX580) with a single monitor and my initial impression last night was that it runs pretty well, though I don't have any add ons installed yet - however some will no longer be needed!

[B777ER 2,486]

Absolutely. All the addons are ready to go, but right now my enemy is time. Work, a running Beta, systems review for an upcoming project, getting P3D V2 to work with the Leonardo Maddog and other aircraft.

 

But I'll probably get to running ActiveSky 2012, REX Essentials Plus OD and everything else. Sadly there is no way to run GSX and FSINN at the same time. Saw that coming, but still a REAL bummer. Hopefully we'll see a patch from the FSINN developer.

 

I will say this... the P3D default clouds are flaming excellent. I'm going to try ActiveSky 2012 without addon textures to see if I even need to run REX Ess.

FSINN development is no more. I believe SB4 us the only client that will work and IMO that is a no go. We can only hope Ross Carlson and his new vatsim pilot client comes out soon.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

 

 

Reporting aboard after a couple of days of testing - with an EVGA GTX 680 Classified Hydro Copper (4 GB Vram), I'm mostly doing very well with P3D v2. In a test last night over Manhattan, with most sliders maxxed (scenery complexity and autogen density at Very Dense, shadows on "cast" but "receive" set only for user aircraft, AI traffic at 20 percent airline and GA, 8 percent road, 30 percent water), fair weather theme and flying the Carenado A36, I got a steady, smooth 25 FPS with frames locked at 40.

 

The card still struggles a bit in heavy overcast with shadows set on. This is similar to the results I got in FSX DX10 - I could never solve the cloud issues there. So there may be some similarities between DX10 and DX11 in P3D when it comes to cloud rendering.

 

I'm probably going to do an upgrade soon - trying to decide between a 780 ti and a Titan. Has anyone done a side-by-side in P3D v2? Am wondering if I'm better off with the 780 ti (faster) or the Titan (more Vram). If you have any insight into this, please feel free to chime in. Thanks in advance!

Find it odd that you say a 680GTX 4GB card is struggling. Thought it would do better...

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

 

 

This thread will need to start all over again in the day PMDG release the NGX and 777 for P3D. Any overhead you see now with your card I think will be gone. Then I think that having 4GB of Vram will be better over anything else.

 

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

 

 

[Arwen 289]

I asked this before, without recieving an answer:

 

I have an EGVA GTX 780 3GB SC and I would be willing to monitor and post how much of its VRAM is being used, but I don't know how to get this information.

[Guest]

In another topic someone posted he went from a GTX580 (which I also have) to a GTX780Ti and the difference was huge. It felt as if that card is twice as fast in P3D. All settings could be set high. The GTX580 struggled but the GTX780 was fine. 

 

P3D really benefits from the GPU, that's for sure! 

 

I am going to wait until someone gives P3D a serious try with an R9 290X (someone I know will probably do this the coming weekend) but I already read posts that just like FSX, P3D also seems to prefer nVidia… So I think for me it will be a GTX780 or GTX780Ti. 

 

 

 

I'm surprised GPU's like the 780 Ti and titan are even mentioned on a forum like Avsim.
These cards are the absolute top of the range and given the graphical presentation of P3D these cards SHOULD be absolute overkill.
Heck, a 780 ti runs battlefield 4 maxed out at 2560x1440 no problems.

 

Just like you can't compare FSX with other games, you also can't compare P3D with other games. P3D CLEARLT and OBVIOUSLY benefits from a GTX780Ti or Titan: this has been reported numerous times already, so… why the unbelief? Yes, the cards SHOULD be overkill, you are right about that, but they clearly are not.

[Aamir 2,907]

 

 

I asked this before, without recieving an answer:

 

Sorry I didn't reply before, may not have seen your question.

 

Use this: http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/

 

Over on the sensors page, you should have everything you need.

[Arwen 289]

Thanks, Aamir

[DocBird 79]

Some information from a user of a GTX 460 1GB!!!

 

I can run it and see that the 1GB is the limiting factor most of the time. RAM is always used to the max and you can see the loading time. I am, however, impressed on how well P3D 2.0 runs even on this old GPU! I have all scenery sliders at the right and most shadows engaged and receive at least 10 fps in seattle, most of the time around 20 fps. Pritty good for an oldtimer!

 

Biggest fps-killer is the shadow quality for me. Water settings seem to have (almost) no impact.

 

I would like to upgrade: Does anyone use an AMD R9 so far?

[Alan_A 1,650]

Find it odd that you say a 680GTX 4GB card is struggling. Thought it would do better...

 

It's selective.  There seem to be some issues with clouds and rain, especially when generated by third-party add-ons.  See this thread for more.  While it's possible to install some compatible add-ons, it's not clear that they're optimized yet.  

 

And yes, shadows are also an issue.  So far, I have to strike a balance between clouds and autogen.  Shadows I've mostly turned off for now.

[Mickeyj 35]

Hi guys,

 

this is an intersting thread i read nearly completly as im planning to upgrade my GPU too. In my system im running a 660ti 2GB. I made a video to demo some P3D2 features.

 

 

The stutters came from Fraps as shadow play is not working in P3D2. Regarding NI the only setting i have within NI i 4SGSSAA and 4MSAA within P3D2 and it is confirmed working. I read this article http://www.overclock.net/t/1250100/nvidia-sparse-grid-supersampling

about SGSSAA and it was said that  you have to match SGSS to MSAA. Just to mention it.

 

I have FTXG FSgenesis UT2 FlyTampa Tampa, T2G KMCO, Jim Dhaenes KNPA (beautiful place to test aircraft but lights) and Flightbeam KPHX installed. KPHX is the killer scenery as i have autogen trees and buildings @ very high. Turning them down seem to have no effect on FPS in Phoenix -unfortunately cause it is one of my fave places to fly.

 

Besides the other addons ran just fine with nearly maxed out settings and shadows. Water is set to ultra. Opus is for the weather but i learned today that there are some issues with OpusWX.

 

Greetz

 

MJ

[MickH 3]

Just traded out my old Radeon 6970 for a well-overclocked GTX 780 and the performance difference in P3D is night and day. Several of the graphical anomalies I reported earlier with the Radeon are also gone. Mid to high-end nVidia is a no-brainer if you intend to fly this sim.

Whilst I've got an Nvidia myself, due to having used FSX, it's not exactly a 'fair fight' as the 780 is miles ahead in performance against the 6970 so you're not exactly making a true comparison. Maybe you should compare a 780 and a 290x?

[DAL1850 51]

 

 

Find it odd that you say a 680GTX 4GB card is struggling. Thought it would do better...

Autogen+shadows can be really brutal on frames - even on the beefiest cards. I can really make my 780 GTX struggle by dialing up autogen over an urban area and turning on building shadows. No surprise the 680 can be made to struggle too.