Sign in to follow this  
HiFlyer

New Computer: Intel 6700K @ 4.6ghz + Nvidia 1080GTX VS X-Plane 10

Recommended Posts

These are not beauty pics, they're strictly functional for showing frame-rates over a large city, (New York) which stayed locked at 30 with Vsync on and between 30 and 45 with it off. Frames tended to dip while taking screenshots.

 

Cutting to the chase, it seems this tech combo does really well with X-plane! Its hard to Imagine wanting much more.........

 

Eclipse_5_zpsh3eclcc9.png

 

Eclipse_4_zpsj5a6yh65.png

 

Eclipse_2_zpso3n18iki.png

 

Eclipse_3_zpsc2kljaol.png

 

Eclipse_7_zpsq6pyghku.png

 

Eclipse_8_zpscmnb3nf0.png

 

Eclipse_7_zpsq6pyghku.png

Share this post


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

Pretty good!  I'll see how mine does tomorrow with a GTX1080 and 34" LG 34UC87C Curved QHD 3440 x 1440, both arrive tomorrow.

 

1920x1080p is a walk in the park for a GTX1080 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which GTX 1080 cards do you guy have?

 

This is mine:  :smile:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have ordered a Palit GTX1080 Gamerock. I will post my results later, at the moment I have a GTX 970 so I am expecting a slight increase in both FPS and the ability to turn up the eye candy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, I just got a new PC with a GTX960 (4 GB) and 32 GB RAM -- compared to the old GT530 it is hard to find the proper words for my excitement. But I see now I'm way behind again.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha ha Mario, yes, welcome to the world of technology. I'm well behind, I still run my sim on a laptop :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about eye candy...

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/491659-what-x-plane-1050-can-do/


These are not beauty pics, they're strictly functional for showing frame-rates over a large city, (New York) which stayed locked at 30 with Vsync on and between 30 and 45 with it off. Frames tended to dip while taking screenshots.

 

Cutting to the chase, it seems this tech combo does really well with X-plane! Its hard to Imagine wanting much more.........

 

 

NYC in X-Plane is completely CPU limited, not a good choice for showcasing the GPU (in good weather that is). You CPU is fast nevertheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about eye candy...

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/491659-what-x-plane-1050-can-do/

 

NYC in X-Plane is completely CPU limited, not a good choice for showcasing the GPU (in good weather that is). You CPU is fast nevertheless.

 

I was aiming for a balanced test with both CPU and GPU getting a workout, since I had maxed the graphical effects as well. I later noticed I had hadn't maxed the water, but when I did, it changed nothing.

 

The only thing I had trouble with was shadows, which dragged me to 22fps. Leave them off. Interestingly, turning down the tree settings by one notch brought me to 40fps even with Vsync enabled.

 

Traffic? Yuck. Turning on the cars sucks frames like Pac Man eating pellets.

 

Interestingly enough, GPU utilization never exceeded 80% so it looks like there might be some things yet to be gained there to take advantage of the extra power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balancing CPU and GPU load is the high art of X-Plane tweaking. It's also tricky because once your GPU is under pressure, CPU load goes up too, giving you wrong numbers. Ben recommended me to test CPU in 1024 with AA off. That way, you really see where the limit of your CPU is. Then you move up resolutions, then take care of the GPU.

 

You are right, forget shadows. Not worth it really. Also water stresses CPU, as the elements that are reflected have to be drawn. I settled for "low" so only the clouds are reflected, it is a good compromise. Since 10.50b, a 4+Ghz i7 fares pretty well in handling X-Plane with loads of objects (extreme objects, very far LOD is now possible, it wasn't before). Oh and it's official that anything than the lowest car setting is crazy.

 

Do your tests with VSYNC off only (turn it on for actually flying).

 

You will bring down any GPU when 8x AA at high resolutions meets certain cloud formations (real weather), don't worry. But in case you have any GPU horses left over in the end, you can use artcontrol datarefs to improve the AA quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You will bring down any GPU when 8x AA at high resolutions meets certain cloud formations (real weather), don't worry. But in case you have any GPU horses left over in the end, you can use artcontrol datarefs to improve the AA quality (and lower your FPS dramatically).

 

I'm using Skymaxx, and clouds don't seem to be nearly as much of an issue as the default ones. For the first time, I maxed them as well, with no apparent impact (so far!)

 

I hardly ever use real weather though. As you mentioned, I previously found it drew lots of resources, and was not all that much more interesting to me than choosing a preset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using Skymaxx, and clouds don't seem to be nearly as much of an issue as the default ones. For the first time, I maxed them as well, with no apparent impact (so far!)

 

I am talking SkyMaxx, too (3.2.1) and you are right, they perform better than default. However, when using real weather (and RWC), that's all relative, as heavy weather will require more power than any of X-Plane's weather profiles. And it's hard to test, as you need to come across this type of weather (heavy cumulus and far visibility) first. 

 

Also don't forget to actually fly to test. Some things only show when moving (instead of panning). Your settings might create microstutters, a flightsimmers worst nightmare. These are tiny little pauses every few seconds and they eat you alive - but they only appear when moving, and don't seem to be related to the framerate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Lol, I just got a new PC with a GTX960 (4 GB) and 32 GB RAM -- compared to the old GT530 it is hard to find the proper words for my excitement. But I see now I'm way behind again

 

Yes, but at least you didn't pay anywhere near £659 for it :shok: :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but at least you didn't pay anywhere near £659 for it :shok: :blink:

 

I actually paid $699 US and thought I was getting a good deal, as the Strix cards are more precious than platinum, they are so hard to find. If you want to see some real horror, look at what the scalpers are selling cards for on Ebay and Amazon! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started out in the GPU card world as a game developer during the Voodoo I series pre-relase/release time period.  It still amazes me how much we have advanced in such a short  time.

 

Right now I'm using the Zotac 1080 Amp! for $629 directly from Zotak through Amazon Prime about 3 weeks back.  It clocks at 1949 Mhz out of the box and runs full load at around 65-70c. I've used all the major mfrs throughout the years and the build quality is on the par with EVGA tier mfrs. It came with a 5 year warranty.  

 

Performance in SIM is on the same level as already posted in this thread and other threads.  This generation of cards seems very close in performance across mfrs and even individual cards more than recent previous generations. 

 

With the 1070 and 1060 cards already in place this is a very interesting time for GPU cards.

  • Upvote 1

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