Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GTX 660 for FSX?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 31, 2013 2:42:15 PM

Just wondering if this card will give me smooth performance in Flight Simulator X. It's toward the top of my price range and I really don't want to spend any more than $250. I also prefer Nvidia, because their drivers are more stable in flight sims. I also do some 3d modeling and I've heard CUDA cores help in that department. I'll be pairing it up with an i5-3570k and 8 gigs of RAM.

More about : gtx 660 fsx

January 31, 2013 8:26:58 PM

Also wondering, would a GTX 570 perform any better since it has tons more memory bandwidth? I heard it does a lot more AA at high resolutions easily. I found a 570 for $230 on Newegg, but it's MSI and I prefer EVGA. They have it on their site for $269.99.

ozzman1997 said:
Just wondering if this card will give me smooth performance in Flight Simulator X. It's toward the top of my price range and I really don't want to spend any more than $250. I also prefer Nvidia, because their drivers are more stable in flight sims. I also do some 3d modeling and I've heard CUDA cores help in that department. I'll be pairing it up with an i5-3570k and 8 gigs of RAM.

m
0
l
a c 133 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 8:33:43 PM

I would feel more comfortable recommending the 660 mainly because you get more ram to pull from. The memory bandwidth is larger with a 570 but also comes at the cost of requiring more power. Also, with the future tech behind a 660 I would say for you its a better value.
However, if you are doing 3D modeling the 570 will be the stronger card. Direct computing was stronger with the 500 series cards.
I would say if you can find a 570 on the cheap it should fit the bill. Flight simulator isn't the most demanding game.
m
0
l
Related resources
January 31, 2013 9:02:09 PM

The 570 to me seems more "flexible". Just found out, it's actually 289.99 and since it takes more power, would a 600w do the trick? I'm thinking I wouldn't have enough power left over. Might just have to turn back towards the 660. (for the umpteenth time.) :pt1cable: 
m
0
l
a c 133 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 9:07:54 PM

A 600 watt power supply should do the trick there is a corsair power supply on sale now if you are in the market for a unit. I'm sure the 660 is a capable 3d rendering card I just know from what I've read that the 570 seems to be the stronger card in direct computing applications.

$89.99-$20 MIR-$20 Instant Promo (exp. 2/4/2013)=$49.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
January 31, 2013 9:19:02 PM

Just bought the Corsair CX600 when I built the machine...Probably should have gotten that one. :??:  I'm hoping NOT to have to replace the PSU anytime soon, and adding the $50 to the cost of a new vid card is too much for me. (I'm a cheap, unemployed high school-er.) I mean, the 3d modeling that I do isn't really demanding, I just like to have the ability to render and not have objects randomly turn transparent when orbiting the view around them, then have to restart my computer to fix the issue. I'm using a GT 430 right now so that's PROBABLY the reason why things aren't running as they should. :sarcastic:  And no, never will I waste precious cash on a workstation card.
m
0
l
a c 133 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 9:22:20 PM

Well unless you were doing really hardcore 3d rendering I would say you would be just fine with a geforce card. Sounds like a GTX660 would fit the bill since 3d rendering where it may be something you care about isn't the defining part of your computer experience.
m
0
l
a c 133 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 9:30:16 PM

Probably EVGA's best cooler excluding there water block cards which are water cooled. And no problem. In the end though it sounded like it was the card you wanted anyway if you kept circling around it :p 
m
0
l
January 31, 2013 9:51:49 PM

The GPU may, or may not assist rendering in 3d apps - depends on what software you use. ie for 3ds Max:

Default Scanline renderer - no GPU used
Mental Ray - no GPU used
iRay - CUDA cores can be used (or you can render with CPU only)
m
0
l
a c 592 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 10:03:35 PM

Flight Simulator X is not an Nvidia PhysX game. The GPU will have no effect on the physics in the game, which will be rendered by the CPU.
m
0
l
a c 133 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 10:05:44 PM

No one has brought up Physx. We've only gone into direct computing with 3d rendering and him playing flight simulator x.
m
0
l
a c 592 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 10:10:02 PM

bigshootr8 said:
No one has brought up Physx. We've only gone into direct computing with 3d rendering and him playing flight simulator x.

Except in the title of the thread...
m
0
l
January 31, 2013 10:14:37 PM

Sorry I got off topic. :kaola: 
m
0
l
a c 133 U Graphics card
January 31, 2013 10:28:38 PM

Flight Simulator X is long for FSX. I knew what he was talking about.
m
0
l
!