Supmua

There’ve been only 2 reports out of tens of thousand cards sold so we’ll have to see if this will turn out to be a freak accident or something that is bound to happen. Don’t think this happened with the 3090Ti which uses the same connector.

I read somewhere that NVIDIA is redirecting their production priorities to their business Hopper AI GPU which sells for nearly 10x more than the 4090, so the supply might be short for awhile. This is why all the 4090s have marked up prices now (demand supply) and the 3090s still retain some value. This is likely to change when AMD cards start getting on the shelves.

Now if I can just get in the beta test it would be great since I’m really itching to run some more numbers. EDIT: got in now under NDA.

Yeah, need another day or two to agonize over which motherboard to use. Already got CPU, cooler is coming in tomorrow.

I have the new Gigabyte UD PG5 1000W. For the 4090, 1000W and up is prob a good idea especially if you plan to overclock.

^^Those MSFS numbers for the 5800X3D seem strangely low compared to every other sources that I’ve seen. https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/amd-5800x3d-performance/510937

In this mission the only thing that kills CPU frametime (and overall framerate) is the carrier that is parked at the upper right corner of that airport. Another setting that can also affect CPU frametime significantly is visibility range, but high is quite acceptable on my current setup never going above 20ms (typically 16-17ms even) unless I fly close to or toward the carrier (went up to 30s). Once you get out of the starting area looking away from the carrier, it's pretty much smooth 45 fps all the way through those WPs especially after locking frame at 45 fps. I don't recall getting smooth flying experience in this mission with the 3090 because the GPU frametime could never stay stable enough to create a steady 45 fps. F-16 Normandy 1944 Free Flight is another good test mission with tons of moving objects and smokes on the ground, again the flying experience is quite smooth at locked 45 fps even when visibility is set at Extreme. Mariana is just about the only map I tested that extreme visibility is a bad idea (don't have the Channel map but it might be up there too), but it's free and it looks good so can't complain.

It looks like the sweet spot for this GPU is around 75% of power limit, according to redditors. With this setting the card draws only 330W while giving out 97-98% of default GPU performance. This is what I might end up doing in the long run.

Panasonic is also releasing some weird add-ons to their VR lineup. Full body tracking, Voice suppression module, Temperature hot/cold VR vest. https://na.panasonic.com/explore/immersive/vr-metaverse#meganex

Might not be a bad idea to wait. Intel 14th gen will use a new socket so if you upgrade now it’s a dead end for the next upgrade (new motherboard, etc.). For Ryzen the Zen3/AM4 platform is also a similar dead end, and for Zen4/AM5 it’s better to wait for the X3D version next year. The only reason to do it now would be pricing advantage from much cheaper components such as motherboard and DDR4 RAM from the older gen platform. The next gen motherboard pricing is really crazy now. For this Ryzen upgrade, it will cost me around $600 (cpu, mobo, cooler). However, had I chose the new Intel route with DDR5 it would’ve costed me around $1500 (CPU, mobo, cooler, RAM) using decent components.

Been messing around since I got it, and my Asus TUF 4090 card so far has been an overclocking monster hitting stable 3000 MHz boost (+230) with temp below 70 not to mention quieter than my CPU AIO fans. The only two games that can benefit from overclocking so far has been DCS and MSFS, everything else just show flattened GPU frametime graphs. In 2D games (especially Unity engine ones) that my 3090 struggled to maintain 60 fps, the 4090 just crushed through with brute force.

No idea about 13600K, it doesn’t beat 5800X3D in MSFS but dunno about DCS. But that CPU will create a huge chunk of market share for Intel for sure, a gaming powerhouse that is very affordable.

I'll have the exact numbers after the upgrade, can also pop the 3090 back in to check.

I'm very skeptical about significant *GPU* performance jump by just upgrading CPU, it's more likely to be related to the final fps but this has to do with both GPU and CPU frametime numbers. I'm upgrading my CPU from 9900K to 5800X3D soon and I would be shocked if there is that much improvement in GPU performance. Already have all the 9900K/3090 and 9900K/4090 frametime numbers from various missions waiting to crosscheck.

Did they say what the actual problem is? It looks like spatial reprojection issue but can’t be since it happens at >90 fps also. Or is it latency related to DSC use?

I thought it only happened with the Aero. I’ll test my Index today. It’s completely stutter free on my Vive Pro, and SteamVR’s latest motion smoothing algorithm is superb even with the Apache rotors (now I regret selling the Vive Pro 2, my friend who bought it had a fantastic experience with the 4090 running it at highest res). Edit: just tested the Valve Index. Completely stutter free at 80 Hz mode, SteamSS 220%. Performance is really good since I only need 12.5ms of CPU and GPU frametimes to hit 80 fps. Apache hot start Caucasus the CPU hit is a little rough on the airport, but once you're up in the air it's 80 fps completely smooth and a crazy good VR experience with zero reprojection...prior to the 4090 I wouldn't have thought the Apache would be possible at 80 fps. Also Valve Index is more taxing on the CPU frametime by as much as 2ms compared to the Vive Pro or Aero at similar settings in DCS. This behavior is also seen in MSFS. I'm actually surprised about this because Index is from Valve, who creates SteamVR. Anyway, the CPU frametime performance is not great with the Index compared to Vive Pro or Varjo Aero.

Something was up with those intermittent red spikes in CPU frametimes in that video though, also occurred with the 5800X3D.

F-16 Syria free flight, Vive Pro at Steam SS 220% (around 3K horizontal and vertical pixels), VR preset but increased texture to high and visibility and water to med, and decreased shadow to low, MSAAx2. Avg GPU FT 9-10 ms zero spikes. Avg CPU FT 9-10 but due to intermittent spikes probably from 1% percentile low I'm unable to hit 90 fps, and because of motion smoothing it drops to 45 fps tier. With stronger CPU than 9900K I might get constant 90 fps. F-16 Caucasus night free flight, same setting, smooth 90 fps.

Megane X Hands On. Expected release date this Dec. I might bite.

Love it!

I’ve been rocking my Vive Pro. The color is great since it’s OLED but coming straight from the Aero it’s like flying with cataracts. The motion smoothing is near perfect though, feels really great and we really need this option for the Aero.

Tested the other flightsim and you know what, the GPU is the bottleneck. Even in downtown Manhattan which is as congested as any other maps out there, my CPU frametime stayed around 15ms whereas GPU frametime went up to 18-19 (DLSS Quality). It seems this sim does a really good job in terms of CPU management especially when DLSS is on. Makes me wonder why I'm even upgrading my CPU because the GPU is the limiting factor here, and I barely play MP.

What I'd like to see would be the 4K fps numbers, none of us here plays at 1080p really. In VR we use even higher pixels than 4K.

I’m not sure what I prefer as I have had good experiences with both but might just go with the Noctua this round for simplicity’s sake.

It looks like I’m going to dig up my Vive Pro for weekend flying as the Aero is pretty much no good. Now I regret letting go of the Pro 2, lol.