275 GTX vs 470 GTX vs 480 GTX

[SpiritFlyer 987]

EVGA 275 GTX vs. EVGA 470 GTX vs. EVGA 480 GTXSummer morning over Darrington Washington (480 GTX)

 

Darrington 1

 

The following are comparative screenshots that are carefully reproduced so that they are apples for apples for apples, with identical equipment and settings, except for the graphics cards used. However, there are 2 factors that mitigate the results, as follows:

 

1. The GTX 275 was tested with the CPU at 4.2ghz while the 470 GTX and the 480 GTX were both tested at 4.34ghz. The 480 GTX was tested under similar conditions to the 470 GTX, however Nhancer was not used, as was the case with the other two since the new Nivdia 200 series driver was used which does not recognize the program. Nick Needham,s published suggested adjustments to the 257.15 driver were implemented.

 

2. The sceneries themselves are not exactly the same with having received texture flow changes or near total rebuilding (Melbourne). These factors are not accounted for.

 

Specifications:

 

Spec.1

 

Spec. 2

 

Spec. 3

 

Spec. 4

 

Spec. 5

 

Spec. 6

 

Settings:

 

Set. 1

 

Set. 2

 

Set. 3

 

Set. 4

 

Please bear in mind that the following screenshots do not indicate the total differences between the depicted flight experiences. This 470 GTX renders a seamless and smooth flight in the most complex of sceneries with sliders maxed to the right. The 480 GTX is even smoother, closely matching motion picture screen quality.

 

I have certain common (unnamed) tweaks applied equally in all three tests, but this particular test sequence is not about the tweaks, but about the measurable differences between the past and newer technologies.

 

The GTX 470 and the GTX 480 are extraordinary advances, but the real big news is also how much improved the ORBX sceneries in Australia have been rendered with ORBX's new Texture flow.

 

Jandakot, Western Australia

 

Jandakot i7 930 @4.2 + EVGA 275 GTX @ 721mhz - 46.3 average FPS

 

Screenshot 1

 

Jandakot i7 930 @4.34 + EVGA 470 GTX @ 700mhz - 50.7 average FPS

 

Screenshot 2

 

Jandakot 17 930 @4.34 + EVGA 480 GTX @ 850mhz - 51.9 average FPS

 

Screenshot 3

 

Sydney, New South Wales

 

Sydney i7 930 @4.2 + EVGA 275 GTX @ 721mhz - 25.8 average FPS

 

Screenshot 4

 

Sydney i7 930 @4.34 + EVGA 470 GTX @ 700mhz - 29.4 average FPS

 

Screenshot 5

 

Sydney i7 930 @4.34 + EVGA 480 GTX @ 850mhz - 38.3 average FPS

 

Screenshot 6

 

Tamworth, New South Wales

 

Tamworth i7 930 @4.2 + EVGA 275 GTX @ 721mhz - 39.4 average FPS

 

Screenshot 7

 

Tamworth i7 930 @4.34 + EVGA 470 GTX @ 700mhz - 52.8 average FPS

 

Screenshot 8

 

Tamworth i7 930 @4.34 + EVGA 480 GTX @ 850mhz - 53.9 average FPS

 

Screenshot 9

 

Melbourne, Victoria

 

Melbourne i7 930 @4.2 + EVGA 275 GTX @ 721mhz - 17.7 average FPS

 

Screenshot 10

 

Melbourne i7 930 @4.34 + EVGA 470 GTX @ 700mhz - 24.7 average FPS

 

Screenshot 11

 

Melbourne i7 930 @4.34 + EVGA 480 GTX @ 850mhz - 27.3 average FPS

 

Screenshot 12

 

These additional screenshots with the embedded FPS numbers paint an accurate picture of the technological advance the industry has made to overcome performance challenges in FSX.Melbourne International (470 GTX)

 

Screenshot 13

 

Brisbane, Queensland - fluid smooth and sweet 25.1 FPS (470 GTX)

 

Screenshot 14

 

Over Seattle, PNW with everything maxed to the right 24.8 FPS (470 GTX)

 

Screenshot 15

 

Over Darrington Washington and forests (480 GTX)

 

 

Darrington 2

 

Bottom line:

 

The new Nvidia 400 series cards work very well indeed in our modified FSX world. The 470 GTX does the most heavy lifting from it's predecessors, making the greatest FPS jumps. The 480 GTX not only adds a bit more speed, but an incredible level of smoothness and fluidity that must be experienced to be appreciated.In any case all three video cards, when properly set-up, will plaster a smile on your face.

 

Kind Regards,

[Guest SF22]

Thank you for doing this comparison. I guess it's (as you said) worth to get the 470GTX over the 260 or 275. Really appreciated.

[dazz 69]

Do you own any pmdg airplanes? It would be cool if you could do those benches in the VC of one of them while taxiing in Heathrow (that's my benchmark flight). Just asking :)I will try those flights there.Thanks so much for taking the time to test your cards so accurately and posting such detailed info man

[flying_w 58]

Between the 470 and 480, your biggest leap seems to be at Sydney. Any ideas about what it is that scene that benefited the 480 more significantly than the 470. More AI traffic perhaps?

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Between the 470 and 480, your biggest leap seems to be at Sydney. Any ideas about what it is that scene that benefited the 480 more significantly than the 470. More AI traffic perhaps?

Perhaps it was more traffic, but Melbourne had a lot of that too. I run Traffic X and ORBX's AU Traffic programs, so 50% settings makes it actually 100%+ in Australia. The only other difference is that all the other sceneries except Sydney are ORBX FTX. What other factor that might add to numbers, I don't know. THE 480 GTX is faster and smoother than the 470 GTX, but not by enormous leaps and bounds. Both cards are great, but the 480 is the icing on the cake. Years ago I used to fly tubliners all the time but no longer have my big metal installed. I could reinstall Level D 767 and give that a try at Heathrow, but I am reluctant to do that as I just defragmented my drives. It seems to me that complex aircraft virtual cockpits are more of a drain on the CPU that the GPU anyway, so there might not be a huge difference between any of them. The 275 GTX ran it just fine so I am sure the 400's would as well. I had tried the 470 GTX with Captain Sim's C130, which was faultlessly smooth over Toronto.With fast equipment and the 470 GTX there is not much that is out of range or reach within FSX, while the 480 GTX adds extra headroom and reserve to that capacity. At least that is what it looks like at this point. Once again though, in case I am unclear: The EVGA 480 GTX is a dream come true for me and heat and noise is NOT a problem on stock air, as long as it is in a well vented case, but the 470 GTX is the most FSX video card for the money on planet earth, IMHO. Now since that is settled, I am looking forward to finding out whether or not ram overclocked significantly higher than 1600mhz, with a much lower cas number, would put another booster rocket on things. After all, isn't MSFS about "higher, faster, stronger?" :( I mean, anyone could merely fly and enjoy oneself, right? What fun would that be?Stephen

[flying_w 58]

I just jumped on a GTX 470. Stephen, thanks for all your analysis here, I feel I've been able to make an informed buying decision as a result. While the 480 improvement looks great, the 470 is coming in at the right price and I'm a little tight on thermals in my case anyway. I'll give it a spin with the PMDG MD-11 when it arrives.

[dazz 69]

Years ago I used to fly tubliners all the time but no longer have my big metal installed. I could reinstall Level D 767 and give that a try at Heathrow, but I am reluctant to do that as I just defragmented my drives.

No worries, I totally understand.

[chrissy 0]

Hello!The comparison is really impressive!Could you give me an advice: Actually I use the Core i7 920@3,2 GHz, 6GB RAM and an VaporX 4890.Would the GTX470 bring me a sginificant performance improvement in FSX (I don't play any other game)?Best regards,Christoph

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Hello!The comparison is really impressive!Could you give me an advice: Actually I use the Core i7 920@3,2 GHz, 6GB RAM and an VaporX 4890.Would the GTX470 bring me a sginificant performance improvement in FSX (I don't play any other game)?Best regards,Christoph

Hi Christoph,Certainly, a 470 GTX alone would rock your world! If you overclock that CPU some more it will boost performance as well. The two together would alter your FSX reality and spoil you for anything less.Stephen

[chrissy 0]

Many thanks for your reply, Stephen!So I will go and buy a GTX470.My i7 920 is too hot at the moment so I had to reduce my overclocking settings.Best regards,Christoph

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Here is additional information to go with the above findings. It shows just how much the 480 GTX does not have a heat problem as well as a copy of some of the fsx.cfg file tweaks used.Kind Regards,Stephen

[flying_w 58]

Very timely, thanks!My GTX470 arrived yesterday. I got lucky; I picked the Palit since it was the cheapest available and it arrived with a custom dual fan cooler. Following installation, I cannot hear it either in idle or in game play. Idle power consumption is about the same as the GTX275, which is good because I use the computer for work too. Overclocking is simple with MSI afterburner, hit 725Mhz no problem with no fan nor heat problems. Perhaps a little more with some voltage mods may be possible.Now in FSX things have not gone so well. With the UsePools=0 tweak my 275 is rock solid. The 470 however crashes after a minute or so, either the driver crashes, FSX crashes or the screen corrupts. So far I've not found the silver bullet which is a shame, but the short periods that it works I can see what might be possible. Using buffer pools the experience is not quite so good, at least in terms of slider settings and FPS. Having said that, it is smoother than I've ever seen it. There is still the occasional stutter, but nothing like what it used to be.My FSX is somewhat out of control anyway, so this is a good time to reinstall according to the latest thinking. Maybe that will get me the BP=0 back. See you on the other side!Simon

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Very timely, thanks!My GTX470 arrived yesterday. I got lucky; I picked the Palit since it was the cheapest available and it arrived with a custom dual fan cooler. Following installation, I cannot hear it either in idle or in game play. Idle power consumption is about the same as the GTX275, which is good because I use the computer for work too. Overclocking is simple with MSI afterburner, hit 725Mhz no problem with no fan nor heat problems. Perhaps a little more with some voltage mods may be possible.Now in FSX things have not gone so well. With the UsePools=0 tweak my 275 is rock solid. The 470 however crashes after a minute or so, either the driver crashes, FSX crashes or the screen corrupts. So far I've not found the silver bullet which is a shame, but the short periods that it works I can see what might be possible. Using buffer pools the experience is not quite so good, at least in terms of slider settings and FPS. Having said that, it is smoother than I've ever seen it. There is still the occasional stutter, but nothing like what it used to be.My FSX is somewhat out of control anyway, so this is a good time to reinstall according to the latest thinking. Maybe that will get me the BP=0 back. See you on the other side!Simon

Congrats on the new 470 GTX. Once you get the bugs are out of it you will be proud. Did you try deleting your fsx.cfg file and letting FSX rebuild a new one? Did the driver change to the 200 series go well? Use Driver sweep? A driver problem might make it crash, but I can't think of what else.Stephen

[RobbieHe 0]

Thanks for the hard work SpiritFlyer! This is the kind of information that is sorely lacking in FSX. RH

[Scott434 12]

Simon, Here is the approach I used...1) Start from a known stable hardware base - NO overclock. 2) Get all hardware working rock solid. Finalize the the platform and drivers. Use tools to load test the platform (prime95 etc)3) Get a plain vanilla FSX install running and solid. No overclocking and no addons yet. Develop a fixed flight plan with fixed traffic levels and get a warm feeling that things are stable. 4) Overclock now. Use tools to load test the paltform (prime95 etc). I used FSX as the load test tool since other tools stress the platfom far more than the intended FSX use and this is not necessary. Try to resist the temptation to go that .1ghz "more". It will not make great difference. Stay on the stable side of the fence. Fly the same fixed flight plan and make sure all is good.5) Once you are comfortable that you have solid hardware and fsx is "rock solid", then start adding the fsx.cfg tweaks one by one while testing using the same fixed flight plan.I found that the added video speed (480 and 257.15/21) did add some instability to my platform. Might make sense since video bandwidth increased and travels over the pcie bus which is clocled by the bclk etc etc etc.Good Luck. I think you made the right call on the 470. The 480 is overkill IMHO. EVGA Precision tells me that my 480 is sitting at roughly 25% (peaks to 35%).Once you get everything sorted you will be very happy I'm sure.