309: When can the Simulator Pit be Filled

Fantasized for months to get myself a Nvidia GTX Titan card after reading reports and youtubes about the phenomenal boost in FSX/P3D performance with it.   The past weekend, I finally made to get an over-clocked Titan X seated in my system.

Zotac-Titan-XMy first impression about the card out of the box — of course it gives both FSX/P3D simulators on my computer a boost, but disappointingly, it is still not up to a “wow” level…well…may be a little, to be fair.

Surprisingly, under the original and slightly adjusted settings from the previous GTX 780 card, FSX in general outperforms P3D in terms of performance gain with the Titan card.  The latter is supposed to gain more benefits when more CPU calculations are off-loaded by the graphics hardware side.

Anyway, it’s too early to lay down any conclusion about the gains the new card can bring to both my simulators after using it for just a few days.   Will further experiment on the card with different settings and configurations in order to explore its optimal capability.

One thing for sure, running FSX/P3D on three high-res 2560 x 1440 monitors has never been an easy task for any single card to handle — not even with the GTX Titan X which is already one of the fastest graphics cards available on the consumer market nowadays.

Hm…perhaps a newer motherboard with a faster, latest generation CPU are needed in the next hardware update in order to fill the simulator pit.

Will post my cfg file settings later once a more satisfied result is reached.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “309: When can the Simulator Pit be Filled

  1. As you know, FSX was coded for Nvidia. Unfortunately, Nvidia ignores older cards with good drivers in order to get people to buy newer “faster” [due to new drivers, in part] video cards.

    As you know FSX is very CPU heavy. For example, an Intel i5-3570K at 4.8GHz does a good job. Good luck getting that CPU or newer ones to run that fast safely – for a long period of time, only a very small percentage can to that. And, to run a CPU at a high overclock you need the right motherboard, RAM, and high quality power supply.

    Microsoft does not care about it’s MS-FSX community, neither does Intel, as overclocking their CPUs becomes more difficult with each new generation. Intel is interested in on-die GPU or core count, not high speed.

    I have a reference AMD R9 290 [4GB VRAM], slightly overclocked, and an Intel I5-3570K at a slight overclock of 4.0GHz. I notice a very good speed jump in FSX at 4.6GHz, however, overclocking is the luck of the draw. I use a very good air cooler in a well ventilated case and 4.0GHz provides acceptable performance on a 40 inch 1080p screen, and I want my components to last several years, so, I do not use high overclocks.

    At 4.0GHz 35 to 55 fps on the ground in the worst frame rate portions at KLAX averaging 44 fps. At 1000, buzzing the center airport structures fps drops a little to 35 fps to 45 fps, average is about 41 fps. Average fps over the city at 1000 feet ASL is 50. This is looking partly out of the front and side window and still being able to see the G1000, for worst frame rate example. And, that is at 4.0GHz. At high altitude, not in clouds Frame rates are between 90 to over 120fps, in Carenado twin engine aircraft.

    Aircraft for this test, FSX Beechcraft Baron G1000. FSX settings:

    Resolution 1920x1080x32
    Filtering: Bilinear
    Anti-aliasing: ON
    Airline Traffic Density: 100%
    GA Traffic Density: 80%

    I would like to see a comparison between my video card and an GTX 980 ti.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s