480 GTX vs. 580 GTX

[dbw1 444]

Recently upgraded from a 285gtx to a evga580. Interestingly my fps has decreased (mid teens to single digits) for the same fsx settings though I must say even at low fps it is very smooth. I have the beta 270.51 drivers installed. My rig is... I7-920 (@ 2.67), 6 gigs fast ram, Win7-64 etc.Any thoughts would be appreciated. Many thanks,Dave

[Bob Scott 7,716]

Recently upgraded from a 285gtx to a evga580. Interestingly my fps has decreased (mid teens to single digits) for the same fsx settings though I must say even at low fps it is very smooth. I have the beta 270.51 drivers installed. My rig is... I7-920 (@ 2.67), 6 gigs fast ram, Win7-64 etc.Any thoughts would be appreciated. Many thanks,Dave

Dave; I see it's been a few weeks, but I'll throw out my $0.02 anyway: An i7 at 2.67 GHz is a significant mismatch for a 580...the 580 is capable of taking everything an i7 clocked in the mid to high 4GHz range can give--and with just about everything cranked up. Even a mild overclock on your CPU should produce fairly significant improvements, as your CPU is holding everything else back. In fact I doubt that the 920 at stock speed can saturate the 285, much less a 580. A 920 can get into the mid 3 GHz range pretty effortlessly at stock voltages...doing that should have a much more profound effect than adding a top-end video card that's being starved by the CPU feeding it.CheersBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

[Bob Scott 7,716]

Here's a datapoint of a slightly different sort on the 580.I just completed installation of an eVGA GTX580 Hydro Copper 2 into my machine, and added it to the loop downstream of my CPU. After a couple hours of power-off pressurized leak testing/air purge, I fired it up at stock settings (comes factory overclocked to 850/2100), and just couldn't believe the temps I was seeing...idle at 24 deg C, full load OCCT GPU test at 28C! Bumped up VID from stock 1.082 to 1.113 and quickly stepped it up to 950/2200, there it idles at 26C, full load OCCT stress test, 31C. Ran out of time for further overclocking, but 1000 MHz looks within reach with this puppy. And it's blissfully silent.Flew a couple quick test flights...my standard takeoff from FSDT KJFK 13R, left turn over the airport to ImagineSim KLGA in the RealAir Duke. In places where frame rates formerly dropped into the mid teens using my 480 and a 1920x1200 monitor (i.e. looking towards downtown Manhattan) with the water-cooled 580, frames never dropped below the mid 20s despite using a much larger 2560x1600 monitor.It's a keeper.

[idahosurge 2]

I really wish I had not read your post Bob. I spent seven months getting FSX to run on this system without crashing and I do not need a reason to upgrade! I hate to say it, but this week I have been thinking "GTX580". Man I wish I could get to a point that I would just stop messing with my system or wanting to build another PC!

[Bob Scott 7,716]

I really wish I had not read your post Bob. I spent seven months getting FSX to run on this system without crashing and I do not need a reason to upgrade! I hate to say it, but this week I have been thinking "GTX580". Man I wish I could get to a point that I would just stop messing with my system or wanting to build another PC!

Well, it was one of the easiest upgrades I've done in a long time. Drivers and utilities are all the same as the 480 I replaced.BTW, this morning I got the card clocked up to 1020 MHz core, 2200 MHz memory, and ran it for an hour on OCCT that way. I still haven't hit the wall...no blue screens or artifacts on any of the tests. I'm probably close, though...have the voltage up to 1.125v, which is as high as I want to take it. Peak GPU temp at 1020MHz was 36 deg C. I don't think I'll run FSX with it up that high...about 950 MHz seems to be the point of diminishing returns unless I go to very heavy AA modes that I don't normally use.

[dazz 69]

Well, it was one of the easiest upgrades I've done in a long time. Drivers and utilities are all the same as the 480 I replaced.BTW, this morning I got the card clocked up to 1020 MHz core, 2200 MHz memory, and ran it for an hour on OCCT that way. I still haven't hit the wall...no blue screens or artifacts on any of the tests. I'm probably close, though...have the voltage up to 1.125v, which is as high as I want to take it. Peak GPU temp at 1020MHz was 36 deg C. I don't think I'll run FSX with it up that high...about 950 MHz seems to be the point of diminishing returns unless I go to very heavy AA modes that I don't normally use.

Is all that (your test flight results at KLGA in the RealAir Duke) with 8xS and 2xSGSS Bob? And which weather conditions please?

[Bob Scott 7,716]

Is all that (your test flight results at KLGA in the RealAir Duke) with 8xS and 2xSGSS Bob? And which weather conditions please?

Yes...with the default "building storms" weather profile.

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Congratulations Bob. The 580 GTX in any form, but particularily with yours with the water cooling, is a real treat, and one of the better equipment decisions for FSX.Kind regards,

[CanadaOne 36]

So what is the minimum CPU "required" to make a 580GTX worth having?

[Bob Scott 7,716]

So what is the minimum CPU "required" to make a 580GTX worth having?

I think that a quad CPU at ~4 GHz is the threshold where the 580 really starts to sing with FSX.

[CanadaOne 36]

I think that a quad CPU at ~4 GHz is the threshold where the 580 really starts to sing with FSX.

But below that, is there chanting at least? Humming perhaps?Curious because if someone, for right or wrong, thought he had to have a 580 to feel complete as a human being, but had a lesser CPU, would the 580 still pump out the goodness, or just sit there... waiting?

[Bob Scott 7,716]

But below that, is there chanting at least? Humming perhaps?Curious because if someone, for right or wrong, thought he had to have a 580 to feel complete as a human being, but had a lesser CPU, would the 580 still pump out the goodness, or just sit there... waiting?

Well, the 580 could be pushed to very aggressive levels of AA, which would make for very nice image quality without affecting framerate or smoothness, but the frame rate and smoothness wouldn't improve much if at all because it's being limited by the CPU. So if a 3.2GHz CPU gives you 20 fps with drops to 10 in heavy AI/scenery areas, don't expect that to improve much, but you can probably keep that same level of performance and kill just about all of the jaggies and shimmer running something like 16xS AA plus 2XSGSS transparency AA.That said, a 480, or even a 285 would be able to do much the same in terms of IQ--if given a slow enough data rate from the CPU. IOW, I think with an i7, at around the 4 GHz point the 580 starts being able to do things that other cards can't.

[dazz 69]

Wow, you mean your 580 can run 16xS AA plus 2XSGSS, Bob? My OCed 480 can't even do 16xS with no SGSS

[Bob Scott 7,716]

Wow, you mean your 580 can run 16xS AA plus 2XSGSS, Bob? My OCed 480 can't even do 16xS with no SGSS

If I set the frame rate limiter down to 20 fps it will do 16xS with 2XSGSS with some dips to the mid teens. It's a bridge too far if I want to maintain higher frame rates. Honestly, I don't find 16xS to be very much of an improvement over 8xS, especially if transparency AA is in play.

[dazz 69]

If I set the frame rate limiter down to 20 fps it will do 16xS with 2XSGSS with some dips to the mid teens. It's a bridge too far if I want to maintain higher frame rates. Honestly, I don't find 16xS to be very much of an improvement over 8xS, especially if transparency AA is in play.

Yeah, same here. I like SG Transparency AA much better. Here's hoping Kepler can finally do 4xSGSS