Thanks for the concise report, Ray.  Having done somewhat the same on my system some time ago (770 -> 970) and not seeing a lot of improvement (like you), I'm nevertheless glad for my upgrade.  The 970 clearly performs better in heavy cloud and other scenery intense draws than my 770, and I hope in time you'll experience the same with your 1080 as you encounter different flight scenarios.  And I'll heavily recommend the DX10 Fixer (and add the Cloud Shadows too!!!).  It truly is a game changer for FSX.

Regards,

Greg

I really am at a crossroads Greg and I'm seriously considering my options. P3D has stabilised and will only get better especially when they go 64-bit.

I could stay with FSX but get no real benefit from the 1080. DX10 Fixer doesn't need a 1080. But the upside is I can continue to use my AES credits. I have a lot of airports but many also include a P3D version so I wouldn't lose much there.

That leaves aircraft. I fly FS Labs' Concorde almost exclusively now. As a former beta tester I also have a licence for P3D so that wouldn't cost me anything. The main outlay would be $65 for P3D and around £150 for a 256Gb SSD for P3D.

Then I get DX11 in full plus a FS engine that can use the power of the 1080. P3D v3 now recommends 4Gb graphics memory whereas FSX seems to chug along quite happily with around half that or even less. And FSX is now 11 years old. Maybe it's time to make the switch.

Your perspectives are well thought out Ray.  It wouldn't cost you much to go to P3D now and then see what a 64 bit version has to offer... none of my licenses include P3D, so I'll be giving the jump much more consideration than you require.

Regarding the 1080, I think it all comes down to what you paid for it.  The card is clearly outstanding, and as well offers "room" for system growth.  It also offers you greater latitude for other sims (not saying you should jump, but at least you'll know the GPU offers strong rendering power).

Following your thread here and knowing that the release of the 1080TI means more used 1080's being available, I've decided to keep my eye out for the latter.  Of course, I don't expect much (if any) of a performance boost but if I can get one at a good price I'll certainly gain flexibility in the short term future.

No Crossroads Ray. Just another lane on the expressway. I have FSX, P3Dv2, and P3dv3 all installed on my computer. FSX for planes I still like to fly that are only offered for FSX. P3dv2 for Orbx and GA planes. P3Dv3 for GEX/UTX, all my non ORBX payware airports, and my airliners. It's working well for me.

When P3dv4 comes out if is going to be awhile before your addons are converted to it and some may not be.

When I get some time I will run the same tests you did on my 3 sims and see if there is any difference. My understanding is as Greg stated that the 1080 should help with heavy/multiple cloud layers and high AA settings. Have your tried increasing SGSS to see how your 1080 handles that?

Ted

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I've installed the Nvidia 1080 8Gb card. Before I did so I setup a test scenario overlooking Aerosoft's Heathrow Xtended from above T5 looking east so the whole airport is in view with London in the distance.

One scenario was clear skies; another with four cloud layers - 3/8 Cumulus, 5/8 Cumulus, 7/8 Stratus and 2/8 Cirrus.

Testing both with my 780 GTX 3Gb card using the Trike had frame rates between 30-34. The same but with the cloud was hardly any different.

You can probably guess what's coming next. The same scenarios with the 1080 8Gb card produce the same results. This is with FSX:SP2 of course. Were I to test with P3D I'm sure the faster card would give me better performance. I intend to switch to P3D but unsure when to jump. Another option is to stay with FSX and invest in DX10Fixer. I've heard good things about it. Reduced VAS usage, cockpit shadows and maybe a few more fps.

So I'm thinking this card is more of a long-term investment than an instant fps boost. FSX is CPU-bound. I knew it of course and this is the proof.

Just as expected, FSX doesn't care much about your graphic card, poor  your GTX 1080.
Anyway, I suggest you give P3D a try now, here is my topic over at FSX forum about my change to P3D

I was hesitated and did not try P3D when I needed to, which cost me some investment (DX10Fixer,Cloud, PMDGs). For my system, using DX10 still gives me poor performance overall.

P3D is refundable, it is a better choice to go for it now and see how it performs on your computer. My computer is in my signature and if your is similar to mine, you should expect very good performance.

AES is also one of the only thing I miss when moving to FSX:SE and now P3D. Lucky that many developers are implementing SODE jetways into their airports now.

Cheers,
Hoang Le

lowslo, I paid £300 less than a new one cost. Good for my mate and for me. I'm a little concerned that fps in P3D may be lower than FSX. How much is unknown. It's all well and good having a great graphics card but my mobo is 3.5 years old as is the CPU - 4770K o/c to 4.4Ghz. Decent enough but not up to today's fastest. But sticking with an 11 year-old sim that will never be updated is not a long-term solution. I made the switch from FS9 to FSX 3.5 years ago and never missed FS9 once I had a PC that made FSX a pleasure.

Ted, unlike you I have no other 3rd party aircraft. No PMDG and just FSL Concorde. So VFR is out. The only thing FSX gives me that P3D can't is a few older airports and AES which has stagnated anyway.

I have FS Global which I think will work with P3D. FTX Global will too I think. UTX Europe, Caribbean and North America I'm not sure about. They may work or maybe I'll need P3D versions. Airports I've covered. Real Environment Xtreme (REX) doesn't appear to be available any more. Is that P3D compatible?

I'd have to buy a AS16 licence but that's not much. If I get P3D there doesn't seem to be much point staying with FSX. I think it would look a little dated once I started using P3D.

I'll try different settings of SGSS and see what results.

1 minute ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

lowslo, I paid £300 less than a new one cost. Good for my mate and for me. I'm a little concerned that fps in P3D may be lower than FSX. How much is unknown. It's all well and good having a great graphics card but my mobo is 3.5 years old as is the CPU - 4770K o/c to 4.4Ghz. Decent enough but not up to today's fastest. But sticking with an 11 year-old sim that will never be updated is not a long-term solution. I made the switch from FS9 to FSX 3.5 years ago and never missed FS9 once I had a PC that made FSX a pleasure.

Ted, unlike you I have no other 3rd party aircraft. No PMDG and just FSL Concorde. So VFR is out. The only thing FSX gives me that P3D can't is a few older airports and AES which has stagnated anyway.

I have FS Global which I think will work with P3D. FTX Global will too I think. UTX Europe, Caribbean and North America I'm not sure about. They may work or maybe I'll need P3D versions. Airports I've covered. Real Environment Xtreme (REX) doesn't appear to be available any more. Is that P3D compatible?

I'd have to buy a AS16 licence but that's not much. If I get P3D there doesn't seem to be much point staying with FSX. I think it would look a little dated once I started using P3D.

Just a head up, it's 40% off for more than 2 weeks so you have plenty of time to test.

Cheers

Thanks Hoang. Interesting read. There's very little difference between our CPUs so I should expect similar performance.

Please ignore. Got out of sequence with posts and just repeated some of the useful info!

Even changing from a 970 to a 1080 gave me a HUGE boost in P3d (I run it in 4K).

 

At the moment I am sitting here with my Intel HD 530 (of whatever) because I sold the 1080 and I am waiting for the 1080 ti which I ordered :-(

So - no flying for me this weekend I guess.

DX9 can't be compared to DX10/DX11 which are quite similar in the way a more powerful GPU can improve matters. Big screen area is always hard on the older GPUs so multi-screen setups and 4k really needs the latest cards irrespective of their ability to accelerate FSX or P3D. SteveFX DX10 fixer and cloud shadows improves the longevity of FSX. Even so I've never really used DX9 since the performance was always poor compared to DX10 preview, I just ignored the flickering runways before Steve's fixer and got on with the flying.

Well gents, the deed is done. Did some more thinking this morning and then checked how much free space I had on the SSD that FSX sits on. 76Gb free and P3D requires 30Gb.

That helped make up my mind and this evening I bought and downloaded P3D Academic licence. I hope that watermark isn't distracting. 

I'll install tomorrow and play around with the settings to see what works and what doesn't. Oh, I'll get the excellent P3D install guide written by Ron Ainsclough too. Indispensable I would imagine.

Exciting times. 

5 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Exciting times. 

I think you're going to like it Ray. Don't forget to have some breakfast!

7 hours ago, SteveW said:

I think you're going to like it Ray. Don't forget to have some breakfast!

Thanks Steve. Breakfast just finished. After I finish my coffee and read my overnight mail I shall make a start.

My P3D folder has 129 GB at the moment :-)

So be careful with the space.