Classic British Flight Sim

FSX is mainly CPU dependant, but a reasonably decent graphics card is still needed. Tony's current 260 card is really below the minimum needed, hence the result with the window size test. One you get above a 460ish card it becomes less important.

Airspeed wrote:

Kevin Farnell wrote:

Tako_Kichi wrote:I ran FSX (Accel and Steam) for years on a GTX 460 with no issues so you should do OK on a GTX 560 TI. I recently upgraded to a GTX960 (OC'd from the factory) and I saw a little improvement in FSX but a big difference in other sims (mostly driving sims and ARMA 2 and 3).

FSX is very heavily CPU dependant, so powerful GPU's are not likely to make much difference. Things like anti-aliasing will improve with a better GPU, but frame rates are unlikely to change.
Lockheed Martin have moved a lot of processing for P3D from the CPU to the GPU, so a greater improvement would be seen here.
Very recent games/sims are heavily GPU dependant and therefore this becomes more important than the CPU.

Regards

Kevin

Hi Kevin,
I'm very ignorant when it comes to these things, but Nev's tip seems to counter what you feel.
Are you going on what you thought, or on solid evidence?
I'm not arguing with you, simply admitting confusion over what's being put forward.
I would certainly like to know the real answer myself, as I've been known to throw money at "improvements" which don't actually help me.

Hi Mike,

My reply is based on articles read in PCPilot and also those on the official LM P3D forum and AVSIM's (unofficial) P3D Forum.
I think that DaveG has hit the nail on the head, with his post -

DaveG wrote:FSX is mainly CPU dependant, but a reasonably decent graphics card is still needed. Tony's current 260 card is really below the minimum needed, hence the result with the window size test. One you get above a 460ish card it becomes less important.

Regards

Kevin

Thanks Kevin,
Now I'm 95% sure that I'm only 50% confused.

GTX 560 ti care of eBay £30 installed and working well

Nice one Tony

ATB
DaveB

I'm a bit late to this thread, but I remember my 650ti, which isn't much more than the 560, ran FSX extremely well. Tony, remember to put in the recommended tweaks into the config file - such as Highmemfix=1 under [GRAPHICS]. There are some others - I'll look them up if like.

Hi Paul, yes please any tips you have gratefully accepted.
Ok I have set this up to run FSX acceleration with Orbx and it looks a lot better than my previous attempts, I still cant give up on FS9 as it has 2D panels... I do like them... and FSNAV which I think is the best add on for FS9. If there was a replacement then I may use FSX full time, but for now just all VFR stuff which is good fun
I have FSTRAMP but it crashes FSX to desk top every time I fire it up

I have now to reset all my settings in nVidia Inspector for FS9 which is a pain

Tony, have a look through this:

https://kostasfsworld.wordpress.com/fsx ... are-guide/

The Highmemfix=1 fix is, I believe, a very important one, but there a some others here, the virtues of which are discussed. One thing I found was that setting the frame rate limiter in-sim was better than setting it in Nvidia Inspector. It led to much smoother performance. Bear with me - all this is in my distant past - but I also seem to remember that turning Vsync on in Nvidia Inspector, and then setting the in-simulator frame rate limiter to 30 ( half your monitor's refresh rate ) was also very beneficial.

Anyway, have a read and test each tweak before proceeding to the next one.

Here's some vids that might also assist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXj90GBPdc8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BVmkjvY_ic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV-by7z_M6Q

You would have probably have come across these yourself in time, but just to emphasise, it is worth finding out about all this because it can make quite a difference. It certainly did with my set up.

Thanks Paul all very welcome