2560x1440 resolution

[skarden]

yeah I was soo close to gettin an ssd for games, the price was just a touch too much, although it sounds like it could of been worth it, it'd be a hassle for CLOD though as I'd need a whole one just for steam, anything less then 480Gb wouldn't fit all my steam games, that I said I might look at getting one for DCS and arma 3 when it comes out ( how good does that look! ) possibly even FSX which I've heard benefits greatly from a ssd. I'll definitely be doing some research on those over then next few months, like you said I'll be reading a lot about it so I don't get a bum steer, sheesh it never ends with pc's eh, worth it though!

decisions decisions, although I think I will go for the larger res monitor, worse case scenario I can run things in a window if the higher res is giving me grief, it'd be a bit of a waste of screen space but the the games that can handle it will make it worth it no doubt:

[FS~Phat]

It wouldnt worry about running out of space on the SSD for your steam games, its easy to move the less played games to another drive and use junction links to make steam think its still installed in the original location.

I already do that for my games and it works flawlessly.

Take a look at this utility I use that integrates with windows shell (explorer) to make it easy as point and click!

http://schinagl.priv.at/nt/hardlinks...kshellext.html

[foxl]

Hi again.

I have now upgraded with new grapichs card after i started this post and would like to share my findings.

I first got the EVGA 670 superclocked 4gig. I was very disapointed with this card, all the way from the box to the performance. It came with out anti static bag wrapped around it and was inside a big plastic container, and it almost fell to the floor when i finaly got it open. Also the big bright sticker that goes along side the card fell off
In game over london with all settings max i got about 35-40 fps almost no improvement over my old card. I returned the card next day and got my money back.

Then i ordered the Asus 680 2gb DirectCU II. And WOW. I have to clamp vertical sync over london now with same settings, this is just crazy i never thought such perfomance, im at 50-60 fps constant over london max settings 2560x1440 and have not tried overclocking it still.

And for Vram usage as someone says you neeed 4gig to this game its not true, i use around 1500mb of my screen card ram when i monitor over london, next test will be multiplayer with over 50players.

Wall of text here, but wanted to share my findings if others is thinking about about getting a new card.

[Stublerone]

50 - 60 fps over london with no action, right? Because none really gets stable 50-60fps in this game all the time --> With no card and not in that resolution. Sounds to me, that something is missing. Explosions,multiplayer etc. Sorry, but there is something missing.

2gb ram could be enough, but not for future and not with that interface and not for sli with triple screen.
Just test, if you set also everything to highest detail in your driver! Then play sime while and report again.

Never saw any rig doing clod constantly over 50fps with that resolution and with highest settings.

Btw: your card should be already overclocked if i am informed right! So...

[foxl]

Yep just tested online and more quick mission, bomber intercept over london and other missions,no problem 50-60fps constant im getting screen tearings now because this is a 60hz monitor. But there is one thing that takes massive hits to my fps and that is the clouds, even at medium effect settings flying through the clouds gets me down to 40fps and even lower.

I also tested the black death track, sometimes down to 40 but mostly in the 60 range, but remember i have everything set to high i can sacrifice something for even more fps.

And yes it is *factory* clocked to 1201mhz, but this is not a reference model geforce card so i can clock it even further and i will, but have not done so yet, but overall im very impressed with this card.

[Stublerone]

I did not test performance recently, but as far as I know, there is a scene in black death, where it goes down to 20fps for me. And that was awesome. I just want to express.my doubts, but cannot fully go for it. Normally no pc you can buy is able to perform that good in clod. But I am not familiar with the current state that well. Some see the stutters and some not. No matter...do not want to talk about the 680 topic anymore. I have noone in my clan with a 680 and noone entries our clan with this card Had enough to explain to other 680 players, so that they know, why their card sucks.

[foxl]

Ok, i just wanted to share my findings if others want to play this game in 2560x1440 at highest settings. But to say the gtx 680 sucks i find that a little bit of an extreme statement. I play other games as well and its impressive results in all my games, DCS-A10 runs perfect now.

[Stublerone]

It is not the case that you can't play with it. It is the case, that they sell more broken 680 than ati sells his good card this year. It is just so many dumb people not seeing, that nvidia is laughing at all customers with this card, knowing now, that most gamers really buy everything from them.

Even the 580 has a better hardware (except the graphics chip). They sold you a fast produced card without any good features, except the chip. The rest is crap and that is proven.

Just saying that! I had several requests about what to buy and they hear everything and bought a crappy 660. I said to them: Why do you ask for the better card and what to buy, if you do not hear? Do you all hear on nvidia gaming newspapers (nearly every big newspaper is paid by nvidia)?

I don't understand them, but sure they haven't bought a totally bad card. But they bought something, which was not ready for release. We also did so with clod, I must admit!

[foxl]

Well i have not recived a broken 680. And all the reviews and benchmarks i have seen proves you wrong, you say nvidia *pays* off everyone to write good reviews, where do you have this information from.

But im not here to argue witch is better ati or nvidia, because this is a discussion that has been going on for as long as i can remember. Both cards are good and in some games ati have better performance and in other games nvidia have the best performance.

I just wanted to share my findings and improvements as i promised in the first or second page of this thread.

[Stublerone]

No!!! I just argued as you said something about impressive results. Compared to what? Have you seen actual benchmarks with ghz edition vs 680, which is a more suitable comparison than normal edition vs 680, because nvidia clocked their card nearly to the max to compete with ati. Now, with new 12.11 driver the ati proves in nearly all games to be faster, even in games explicitly mentioned as nvidia game.

Just wabted to say, that nvidia lost the battle this time and even the big newspapers reviewed and set ati as the fastest card. And additionally the bad interface and hardware components (especially in the 660 and 660ti), which are even behind their older brothers makes me wonder, why somebody really buy a 6x series. It is just the bad knowledge of that fact. NVidia is laughing behind the scenes as they proved better than ever before, that you can save component money, set up a quick released card and they still sell it to most of the kids!

The cards performance overall is not bad. It is a high end card, so what do you expect? But they sold you this card and that is, what they aimed for. But they will winder themselves and get a smule in the face, that this quickly released card is so successful. If I were NVidia, I would continue selling crappy cards for 2 more years and safe development money for a big bang, if needed.

Just my opinion, which is the opinion of most enthusiasts with knowledge out there.