Hi.  I have a single EVGA 970 FTW (CPU at 4.4GHz.) and I am considering getting a 32-40" 4K monitor.  I was wondering how well  this card will handle 4k.  I will be using it primarily with MS FSX.  Will it perform well or am I dreaming and should go another route on the monitor?

 

Thanks.

Jeff

Jeff, I personally don't think a single 970 will cut it in 4K. You need two of these. This depends obviously on your quality settings in FSX, but no. The only real 4K single cards at this stage is either the Titan X or Radeon Fury X.

I run a 4K Samsung 48inch TV with FSX and a 970 card (also at 4.4Ghz), and frame rates are good (scenery Orbx Global/Pacific NW/EU England). Limited to 30Hz but don't find that a problem, screen isn't changing that rapidly that card can't keep up.

The very knowledgeable Rob Aincough,  said of his 970 card "I was surprised at how well it worked with my 4K ... but obviously you can't max everything out, I can't do that with my Titan X either"

Eugene

 

Eugene and Vlooi123, thanks for your comments here.  Well, I figured it would be like this...1 yay and 1 nay.     Still on the fence.  Eugene, i did post to Rob's thread that you mentioned and I'm waiting to see what comments I get.  Rob's on P3D and I'm on FSX w/usual tweaks and I'm wondering if I would see a lot worse performance with FSX than Rob is seeing with P3D.

 

Jeff

I tried to upload a screenshot using a hosting site, but got this message "You are not allowed to use that image extension on this community"

The image was on short final at Latin VFR  KSNA, using Orbx global, Rex textures, Rex soft clouds, FS Global real weather - Stock C172 2D panel on a second LCD, but with the Reality XP instrument upgrade, and a third 32 inch HD TV for general  use,

The frame rate on the screen shot was lowest 38, average 44, highest 51,

Out and about in Orbx Pacific NW and EU England, I'm generally getting an average of 50fps. But how it would be with PMDG, Active Sky, and a tough payware airport, I'm not sure - what sort of thing do you plan to do with it?

If you PM your email, I'll send you some screen shots with frame rates showing - 4K is stunning...

Eugene 

 

 

 

 

Just to add, this is using an off the shelf  £1000 PC from ebay:

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Z97X-Intel-i7-4790K-240GB-SSD-2TB-16GB-970-GTX-4gb-Windows7-8-Gaming-Pc-Computer-/161090412671

 

I added another SSD so FSX has its own drive, otherwise unmodified.

 

No tweaks to the fsx.cfg other than widescreen=true, and LOD increased to 9 (Increasing the LOD was recommended bu UK2000 VFR airfields which I also have installed).

 

So for those versed in the arts of "Nick Bible", overclocking and suchlike, I'm sure there's more milage to be had.

Eugene

 

I run an Acer XB280HK with twin MSI GTX 970's. Both FSX SE and P3D 2.5 look stunning in 4K. However, from what I have read the real bottleneck in these 32bit sims is the processor. I have the fantastic i7 4790k that I haven't even started overclocking. Just some food for thought.

Eugene, I sent you a PMl a few minutes ago.  Will be interested to see the screenshot.  You've got quite a setup.  I don't plan on running as many add-ons as you, maybe just some scenery. 

 

This whole thing is getting crazy.  I talked to EVGA Tech Supt. and they claimed I would need at least the 980 Ti to comfortably run at 4K on one monitor.  Of course, he may a vested interest in saying that since he is with EVGA.  :  Yet, you seem to be doing it just fine.  I've now been thinking that maybe for future-proofing myself maybe I should just go ahead and get a Titan X and call it a day.  I hate to open the 970FTW package and then find out that for some reason on my system it just doesn't cut it.  At least now I can sell an un-opened package. 

 

Haven't made a decision yet except probably on the monitor.  Looks like I'll be getting an Acer B326HK 32" IPS 4K model.  And then use a 22"  for misc. maps, gauges, etc.  

 

BTW, what model Samsung TV are you using as a monitor?  I'm still somewhat considering that route to get a larger size than 32".

 

Thanks,

Jeff

 

 

This whole thing is getting crazy. I talked to EVGA Tech Supt. and they claimed I would need at least the 980 Ti to comfortably run at 4K on one monitor. Of course, he may a vested interest in saying that since he is with EVGA. : Yet, you seem to be doing it just fine. I've now been thinking that maybe for future-proofing myself maybe I should just go ahead and get a Titan X and call it a day.

 

I think EVGA is correct in the most other games really need a solid vsynced 60FPS

for the best gaming experience. With FSX you can go down to 30FPS and it can still be good.

 

Why would you buy a Titan X when the newer non-reference GTX980Ti cards are scoring better and for a lot less money.

 

In this review of the Gigabyte G1:

 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_980_Ti_G1_Gaming/

 

the 980Ti beats the Titan X in almost every game benchmark.

 

gb.

Gboz, thanks for your remarks and especially for the link to the review.  I read the Gigabyte review and then found the EVGA review they did the next week.  Soooo....tomorrow I will be ordering an EVGA 980Ti Superclocked+  ACX2.0 video card.  I do remember now that the EVGA Tech guy did mention that if I wasn't going to run multiple 4K monitors that my best option would be the 980Ti instead of the Titan X.

 

Thanks to everyone for their comments.  NowI  just have to make a final decision on monitor.  I've pretty much decided on an Acer B326HK 32" IPS 4K.  There's still a possibility I will go with a 4K TV to get a little larger and sacrifice the IPS and response(lag) time advantage of the Acer.  Anyone have a coin I can flip? 

 

Jeff