Current system is

 

i5 4670k@4ghz

16GB RAM

GTX 770 4GB

27" monitor.

 

I am planning on upgrading when the gtx 980 8GB is released, and my question is, what CPU should I get to go with it? Will my current CPU limit the GTX 980 8gb?

 

Thanks

 

Ian

Your CPU should be fine with the 980 Ian, it's relatively recent and overclocked too.

As long as your 16Gb RAM is fast and your BIOS memory timings are set correctly all will be well.

I just built a new system and went with the Devils Canyon i7 4790K.  That is a "native" 4.0GHz chip but 4.4GHz in turbo mode.  I've never seen mine run 4.0, it's always 4.4GHz with no load except the software loaded to view the clock speed.  I've since o/c'd it to a cool, stable 5.0GHz.  Details below in my signature.  The Asus Maximus VII Hero mobo is all SATA3 6.0GHz to the hybrid Seagate 4TB drives (64GB cache) and I run only the OS from the Samsung 850 Pro SSHD.  I do get a very slight "glitch" every once in a while during scenery update over dense cloud loads above big cities, but it's barely noticable, and framerates are all over the map depending on what's happening, but never below 40 fps.

 

If you are only running one monitor, 8GB on the VRAM is overkill, and I'm not sure you'll gain much going above the 770, if anything.  I'm running XP10.31r3 with the HD mesh v2, SkyMaxx Pro, UrbanMaxx and sliders pushed hard and seldom see over 2GB on the VRAM.  CPU speed is where it's at...

really? I checked GPUZ and my VRAM usage is at 3.8GB?

Photoscenery is what kills the VRAM, use ZL17 or ZL18 tiles and you will get over 4 gigs easly and 6gb with not too much trying

I don't use photo scenery.....

I'm not a photo-scenery user, either.  While it works OK around big airports and in small, expensive patches, it isn't available for world scenery, and it's darn expensive to collect all the areas you might wish to fly.  When I'm flying big iron, I'm too busy in the cockpit to enjoy the scenery much, and I seldom just fly low 'n slow around one specific area.  It just isn't practical when flying cross country or all over the globe.

 

I'm sure you can load a 4GB VRAM either by using multiple monitors or by using photoscenery.  Depends on how you fly.  I got by for years with my older 9600 GTX card at 1.2GB.

I'm not a photo-scenery user, either.  While it works OK around big airports and in small, expensive patches, it isn't available for world scenery, and it's darn expensive to collect all the areas you might wish to fly.  When I'm flying big iron, I'm too busy in the cockpit to enjoy the scenery much, and I seldom just fly low 'n slow around one specific area.  It just isn't practical when flying cross country or all over the globe.

 

I'm sure you can load a 4GB VRAM either by using multiple monitors or by using photoscenery.  Depends on how you fly.  I got by for years with my older 9600 GTX card at 1.2GB.

 

 

allthough this is slightly offtopic, you can get europe completly for free apart from disk space   with world2xplane it makes a scenery that gives orbx a good run for its money while costing bugger all (allthough you can donate, which you should if you use it )  This works for europe, but like you pointed out not for the whole world yet.

allthough this is slightly offtopic, you can get europe completly for free apart from disk space   with world2xplane it makes a scenery that gives orbx a good run for its money while costing bugger all (allthough you can donate, which you should if you use it )  This works for europe, but like you pointed out not for the whole world yet.

 

How does W2XP look without photo scenery?

I don't use photoscenery as a general rule so have no VRAM problems with my 3Gb card.

How does W2XP look without photo scenery?

I don't use photoscenery as a general rule so have no VRAM problems with my 3Gb card.

Good question i have no idea.  i guess not too bad as you probably use hd mesh v2 so the shape should already match up.

 

you could always go ZL16 scenery they are alot easier on the vram and zl17 is only really needed if you fly alot of vfr in low altidude. in 30.000 feet you wont see the difference either

You might be able to overclock that 4670K a bit more. I've found that X-Plane 10 is still quite CPU-dependent, especially when it comes to autogen and road traffic. However, the difference between 4.0 and e.g. 4.5 GHz or even 5.0 GHz would be pretty small.

 

Honestly I think your system is already pretty much optimal for X-Plane 10, and any upgrade you make will only have a negligible impact.