Todd Knutson 1169549 Posted October 5, 2011 at 10:59 PM Posted October 5, 2011 at 10:59 PM I'm planning on upgrading the graphics card that came with my computer, and my computer knowledge is limited. After doing some research online I've settled on the ASUS GTX550. The Geek Squad employee at BestBuy said I would need a separate power supply to run it and suggested the Corsair GS600. Do I need to upgrade with a power supply? Or can I install it with my current set up. My system.. ASUS CG5275 i5 [email protected] 8.00GB RAM 64-bit As I said, I'm not much of a computer person so opinions from everyone are appreciated. Thanks! Todd Flying is easy. Landing is the trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Gerrish Posted October 5, 2011 at 11:08 PM Posted October 5, 2011 at 11:08 PM whats the wattage on your current power suppy Richard Gerrish Developer, STM Applications Group Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Knutson 1169549 Posted October 6, 2011 at 12:09 AM Author Posted October 6, 2011 at 12:09 AM Hey Richard! Don't know what the wattage is as I'm not sure where to look. I believe the card I'm looking at requires 400W. Flying is easy. Landing is the trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Gerrish Posted October 6, 2011 at 12:45 AM Posted October 6, 2011 at 12:45 AM from memory i believe 400W is correct. there should be a sticker on the Power supply that'll tell you what you've got Richard Gerrish Developer, STM Applications Group Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Knutson 1169549 Posted October 20, 2011 at 01:56 PM Author Posted October 20, 2011 at 01:56 PM Yup, 400 watts. Opened up the case and found it on the PSU like you said. I decided to upgrade to 600 watts before I install a new graphics card. The card requires a 400 watt minimum PSU. One of my coworkers builds computers as a hobby and he's been pretty adamant about upgrading the power. I trust him since he's not trying to sell me somthing Thanks for the help Richard! Todd Flying is easy. Landing is the trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fuller 973577 Posted October 21, 2011 at 01:14 AM Posted October 21, 2011 at 01:14 AM Yep, that should be fine. Curious, what video card do you currently have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Knutson 1169549 Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:49 PM Author Posted October 31, 2011 at 07:49 PM I've been using the card that came with the computer. Just a basic Intel HD. I don't know much else about it. I just installed a Gigabyte HD6850. So far I'm a little disappointed, but I don't know if I can blame the card. My goal has been to increase the FPS. I've been flying the PMDG 737ngx, and it really dropped the frame rates. With my old card my frame rates would be in the teens. With the new card my FPS have only increased by around 5 FPS. I'm in the high teens to mid 20's with the same scenery settings. I ran a 3D Mark Vantage program to test the card and scored 12,500 As an experiment, I tried comparing FPS with different aircraft at the same airport. With the default Beech Baron I could get 70 FPS. Default CRJ 700, 50FPS Feel there ERJ 145, 35FPS PMDG 737ngx, 22FPS I also tried maxing out all of the scenery sliders and graphics global texture in FSX just to see what would happen. FPS dropped by about 50% for all planes. Todd Flying is easy. Landing is the trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Bernard 1026637 Posted November 28, 2011 at 03:52 AM Posted November 28, 2011 at 03:52 AM Well upgrading your graphics card will increase your frames, but not much. FSX relies more heavily on the CPU than GPU. It also depends more on the clock speed than amount of cores since, if I'm correct, it can only use one core. ZOB EC, Mentor Have an event you'd like ZOB staffing for? Email [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Kolin Posted November 28, 2011 at 03:59 AM Posted November 28, 2011 at 03:59 AM FSX relies more heavily on the CPU than GPU. It also depends more on the clock speed than amount of cores since, if I'm correct, it can only use one core. FSX SP1 and above will use multiple cores, but for limited tasks. Cheers! Luke ... I spawn hundreds of children a day. They are daemons because they are easier to kill. The first four remain stubbornly alive despite my (and their) best efforts. ... Normal in my household makes you a member of a visible minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Knutson 1169549 Posted December 18, 2011 at 12:28 PM Author Posted December 18, 2011 at 12:28 PM I returned the 6850 card and bought a 560ti. I havn't noticed much difference graphic wise between the two cards. If anything I like the 6850 more as it was cheaper but the 560 is more user friendly, flight simmers seem to prefer it, and I'm sick of messing with it. After PMDG came out with their update for the 737ngx I saw a big jump in FPS with that plane. 20 fps went to 30 fps. I had been turning the sliders down to 3/4 levels while flying the pmdg plane and turning them to full when flying other planes. The other day I forgot to turn the sliders down before flying the pmdg and didn't notice it. Since then I just crank the sliders and fly. Want to know the key to happiness with graphics cards? Turn off the FPS meter and fly! Todd Flying is easy. Landing is the trick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts