The compression makes little difference with my GTX 770 4GB, but turning off "Scattering" (not at home now, so I may have used the wrong term) makes about 10 FPS difference in my renderings without any apparent difference in visual effects - in fact, it seems to improve things like rivet renderings on the wings.

 

John

Oh yeah.. I haven't seen anyone else mention it, so if they have, I apologize, but NVidia has released some new beta drivers 324.xxx and they seem not to improve FRs but seem to steady them.  May be my imagination, but the images seem sharper and the colors more vibrant.

 

John

Yeah I tried and went back to un-compressed....

 

What is this 'scattering' setting?

Yeah I tried and went back to un-compressed....

 

What is this 'scattering' setting?

 

 

Atmospheric Light Scattering.  Works only when HDR is selected.   

I always run with HDR on. What will I lose if I turn it off?

I always run with HDR on. What will I lose if I turn it off?

 

 

The visual effects.  Try it . deselect Atmospheric light scattering. 

I was a fsx flyer and since a couple of months x-plane.

I have a question regarding GPU with x-plane flying.

I have a gtx 680 nvidia 2 gb card and within rendering settings I see the use of vram around 1 gb

If I fly and look to the hardware monitor figures I see a 93% uses of the card.

Does someone know what the relation is between the two figures?

To chime in a little late, I would definitely go with the 4GB 770 given the choice.

 

I just upgraded to this card (a factory-overclocked EVGA version) from a Radeon 6970.  After some options tweaking, I'm now running with extreme res textures, uncompressed, the full set of HDR options, overpopulated trees, mega-tons of objects, tons (or default... can't recall) of roads, extreme LOD, 16x anisotropic filtering, and some reasonable level of AA (4x I think it was).   With SkyMAXX options set to maximum detail and depth, and medium level resolution for cirrus and overcast quality, I'm managing to maintain a very usable 15 or so FPS flying with the HD mesh in extremely populated areas (KSEA, KORD with add-on scenery), and 30-40 in middle of nowhere Alaska, and it's gorgeous.

 

My VRAM usage is around 95% most of the time, and EVGA's GPU monitor shows between 20 and 60% of compute utilization.   The number-crunching of a 770 seems to be more than adequate for these settings, but the VRAM is a lot tighter.  At this point, actually, I think I'm reaching the limit of the bus.  Not much to do about that...  there's always a weakest point!

 

(This is on an i7-3770k overclocked to 4.2GHz, 16GB of RAM, running Windows 7 64 bit)

 

 

After some options tweaking,

 

Sounds good. Would you mind to share your tweaks? I*ve bought the 770 today. I thought its  better to have 4Gb as a few % more power...

To chime in a little late, I would definitely go with the 4GB 770 given the choice.

 

I just upgraded to this card (a factory-overclocked EVGA version) from a Radeon 6970. After some options tweaking, I'm now running with extreme res textures, uncompressed, the full set of HDR options, overpopulated trees, mega-tons of objects, tons (or default... can't recall) of roads, extreme LOD, 16x anisotropic filtering, and some reasonable level of AA (4x I think it was). With SkyMAXX options set to maximum detail and depth, and medium level resolution for cirrus and overcast quality, I'm managing to maintain a very usable 15 or so FPS flying with the HD mesh in extremely populated areas (KSEA, KORD with add-on scenery), and 30-40 in middle of nowhere Alaska, and it's gorgeous.

 

My VRAM usage is around 95% most of the time, and EVGA's GPU monitor shows between 20 and 60% of compute utilization. The number-crunching of a 770 seems to be more than adequate for these settings, but the VRAM is a lot tighter. At this point, actually, I think I'm reaching the limit of the bus. Not much to do about that... there's always a weakest point!

 

(This is on an i7-3770k overclocked to 4.2GHz, 16GB of RAM, running Windows 7 64 bit)

Wow, my system is almost identical, and I can't run sky maxx past low settings nor can I go above 2xfsaa!

 

Care to share your a screenshot of settings so I can try them? And what display are you on?

 

Cheers

Ian!

Here you go, guys.  Trees are filled-in, not over-populated.  The shadows from overpopulated hit me a little much flying low over the Alaskan bush.  I usually run full screen, but for some reason Greenshot doesn't like capturing full screen with my new card, and I've not been able to sort that yet; so I dumped it into 1920x1080 windowed mode for these.

 

 

Here's me flying into PANC using the lovely scenery on the .org, with some cloud cover to slow things down:

 

 

And here's KSEA, with even more clouds.

 

 

I found with SkyMAXX that choosing the highest level of detail for overcast quality gives a HUGE hit in framerates, as does water reflections.  I leave those off. (Although water isn't so bad with the new card.)

Edited February 25, 201412 yr by kaosfere