upgrading to NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M with 4GB of GDDR5

[Serban]

so not so much differences

 

[ilankrt]

Overstated

MacsRgr8

It's just that X-Plane 10, with extra highly detailed scenery add-ons installed, uses more VRAM than the 680MX can offer.
This really is true.

One screenshot is the scenery of New York City loaded, the other are my grfx settings including the amount of VRAM consumed (it is now 2587 MB, i.e 2.5 GB) once NYC is loaded.[/QUOTE]


You are doing something wrong. Reduce for example your "texture resolution" and you will get other results!

I reconstructed the situation you published (using B787) and got 778 meg !

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41672436@N07/11796788423/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41672436@N07/11797303906/

 

[Mac32]

The problem with most of the benchmarks from earlier in this thread, is that they are referring to the difference betwen 680MX and 780M at stock speeds, where the 780M wins by a small margin. However, from what I have read on this forum, it seems 680MX has higher overclocking headroom. So when you factor in overclocking the difference between these cards is almost nonexistant. Remember 680MX is 120W vs 780M 100W, which could be a factor when overclocking. More vram is nice of course, but not essential yet considering the GPU limitations of gaming at 1440p with this generation of mobile GPUs.
The next real GPU upgrade should come 2H this year with Maxwell. Then we should see a fairly big upgrade in performance, hopefully.

 

[MacsRgr8]

MacsRgr8

It's just that X-Plane 10, with extra highly detailed scenery add-ons installed, uses more VRAM than the 680MX can offer.
This really is true.

One screenshot is the scenery of New York City loaded, the other are my grfx settings including the amount of VRAM consumed (it is now 2587 MB, i.e 2.5 GB) once NYC is loaded.


You are doing something wrong. Reduce for example your "texture resolution" and you will get other results!

I reconstructed the situation you published (using B787) and got 778 meg !

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41672436@N07/11796788423/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41672436@N07/11797303906/

LOL...

You have no extra scenery installed, and very low settings.
That looks like ****

I assume you understand I like the high-detailed high-resolution stuff, as most do.
Compare your screenshots with mine.

And if you want that, you need 3 GB VRAM.

 

[michaeljuan]

where did you buy the graphics card

where did you buy the graphics card and for how much