TechguyMaxC

Have you downloaded Radeon Pro? http://www.radeonpro.info

I've seen that data before, very informative. If you'll note though, I didn't say SLI wasn't helpful, what I said was that it's not *always* helpful, and your data demonstrates this. Either your idea of "max details" is different from everyone else's, or you're not as sensitive to dips under 60 fps. All the reviews show the Titan X is just barely enough for 60 fps @ 4k with max details in most games. And you sure as heck don't have 60 in P3D, unless you don't run add-ons or turn down a LOT of settings or both.

I "only" run 4k, so one card is plenty. I specifically waited for the Titan X before upgrading my graphics because it was either that or SLI 1080 and thankfully Titan X is just fast enough for 4k single card. SLI doesn't work in a number of games and it doesn't always help in flight sim either, too many CPU-bound scenarios.

Thanks for sharing your results, though I must point out this is the Titan X thread and the card you have is not a Titan X.

Hey, Jerry isn't annoying :mad: The other guy though... Ok, Barnacules is a little annoying, but he's just playing the "jolly fat nerd" stereotype due to body image issues. If you watch the guy's Youtube channel he's been open about this in the past, he actually is a really smart, very nice person who does make generally interesting and entertaining content.

I agree with those saying this is overkill for ESP-based flight sims (P3D, FSX/SE). That's why my FS rig only has a 1070 in it. My gaming machine gets the Titan X Waterblocks aren't out yet so I just have it on the stock air cooler for now, but it's a perfect match for a 4k screen and I don't have to mess with SLI. Happy days!

Frame Buffer is the term you are looking for, however it is in modern times used interchangeably with VRAM.

Way higher than you'll ever get on air cooling, especially on 14nm. 1.35-1.4 is as high as I would go on air for Skylake, and I wouldn't go that high with previous chips.

If your temps aren't too high and your OC isn't stable then you need, and should use, more VCore (in 99% of cases). Unless you're not comfortable doing so.

There's no meaningful performance difference between these cards except: 1) with very high settings when local frame buffer is overflowed on the 6GB 980 Ti where it would not be on the 1070 2) when running VR I say this having owned both cards and performing extensive performance analysis on the two.

FPS increase values are nice, but without knowing baseline frame rate it isn't informative to an outside party. If your 1080p numbers represent a 30% increase and your 3440x1440 numbers represent a 50% increase, that's nice to know. Especially if it means the higher resolution is now playable when it wasn't before.

No... If you want to talk about workloads other than flight sim, fine, there's little difference between Haswell and Skylake. But since THIS IS A FLIGHT SIM FORUM, let's talk about performance in say... Flight Sim? Read this page of the FSX Mark thread: http://www.avsim.com/topic/329116-fsxmark11/page-50 Skylake is *significantly* faster than Haswell, mostly due to its much improved memory bandwidth (thanks to DDR4) which FSX/P3D absolutely love. FSX/P3D are far more CPU-limited than X-Plane. Unless youi're running extremely high graphics settings in these sims (like SSAA + high resolution) you're unlikely to see any real performance difference in these sims upgrading beyond 980 Ti level performance at this point in time. Perhaps P3D 4.0 or Dovetail FS will change this.

That's marketing speak for "we've done the market research and there's no demand for such a product, but if by some miracle thousands of people contact us and demand we make this product, we'll consider it."

Those of you wondering if your current card is "enough" (i.e. has enough VRAM for a given resolution or is just plain fast enough) can use a tool such as EVGA's Precision X to monitor GPU usage and VRAM usage. See this guide from Anandtech to learn how to use it. The guide is a couple years old now so the interface is a little different, but the basics are all there. What you're looking for are GPU usage values close to 100% (if your GPU is close to this value it means you're GPU-bound) and VRAM usage levels approaching the amount of VRAM your card has. Example: if you have a 2GB card, you're looking for VRAM usage close to 2048 (as VRAM is measured by Precision X in MB rather than GB). If you see VRAM usage staying below this number you've got enough, but if it hits this number you probably need more. If you're thinking of upgrading your video card and monitor at the same time (say you want to move from 1080p to 4k) and you want to know whether or not a video card upgrade is necessary, determining GPU and VRAM usage will help you figure out if you need a new card or not.

It's hard for me to answer that because I'm a very special case. Prior to this card I owned a 980 Ti which was volt-modded and overclocked on water so it was an extremely good performer. The 1070 without its power limits increased via modded VBIOS is just a little bit slower so for me this is technically a downgrade, but only by a few percent. I hope that someone cracks the Pascal VBIOS by the time I water cool this one so I can get a better overclock and then it would actually be even or slightly ahead, and with significantly less power consumption and more VRAM so that's worth it in my book. I'm guessing you're not in the same situation though so from that perspective it's a fantastic card, even with the stock cooler. A bit overpriced right now though given the stock levels @ various retailers. I bought my card early last week @ Micro Center and I needed to stop in yesterday and just happened to see someone picking up the same card. Last week I bought it for $469 and it was overpriced then. Looks like they're scalping even worse now because it's up to $489. Newegg has it at $459 (out of stock) which according to the only place on the net I've been able to locate an allegged MSRP for this card is actually not overpriced https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1070_Gaming_X/ However, I remember this card being priced as low as $429 at one point for pre-order so it's pretty obvious they've been adjusting prices upwards during this high demand/low availability period. On that note, I'm very disappointed by both availability and pricing of cards for this launch, it's the worst I've ever seen and I've been buying video cards since the 90s (hence why I often say video card instead of the more current "graphics card"). We really need AMD to step up and release some competitive offerings at the high end of the market or this trend will become the standard from now on, I'm afraid. Enough of a rant from me, here's a summary in easy to read pro/con format. Pros: -fast (previous generation high-end performance for a good amount less money) -low power consumption -great stock cooling solution Cons: -low availability/overpriced compared to MSRP -doesn't overclock very well since the stock boost is already very high