LucShep

There's only one way to find out... Try one or the other (or both combined) and see what gives best results.

Honestly? If the reason is being afraid that your RTX4090 goes kaput right after the warranty expires, then I'd keep the money. The only thing that I would strongly recommend is (if you haven't done it already) to undervolt your RTX4090, and A.S.A.P. Every single GPU, whatever segment and model, ALWAYS comes overvolted from factory. The silicon lotery, time constraints for QC, materials and customer assistance costs, these all play a role. And so the bean-counters at each manufacturer decided long time ago that GPUs better get some hefty extra (i.e, excessive) voltage in them, so that a LOT more of them work at the announced clocks once out of the production chain to testing, then onto the retailers/shops. They're enforcing GPUs stability with factory announced clocks that way, lifespan of the product be damned (society of consumerism, there you have it). By doing a balanced undervolting on your RTX4090 you'll get at very least a 20% reduction in power consumption, and only a ~2% reduction in performance (great trade-off). This will put less stress on the whole circuit, make it run cooler, which also helps stability (less stuttering) and especially - which is what you're looking for - prolongue its lifespan. Most times tremendously improved, in such ways, over "stock". And there are no downsides to it. Everyone should undervolt their GPU, because that's how it should have been from the start, but alas. Various undervolt tutorials specific to the RTX4090 in youtube. Among plenty others, this one here is a very good example: Direct link to this video

On the GPU, definitely pick the RTX5070Ti 16GB over the RTX5070 12GB, if you can afford it. The performance difference and longer-term usage with DCS is worth it, and especially if playing in Multiplayer (DCS there is a VRAM guzzler!). Also, you never know if in the future you fancy a better display monitor (1440P or 4K) or even VR, and then you'll be left with less capable material.... "buy nice or buy twice". On the RAM, I'll start by agreeing with others above - 64GB of RAM is still plentiful today, and should be for a number of years. However, if this is a brand new higher-end system for the longer term then I'd strongly suggest a 96GB DDR5 kit (2x 48GB) with recommended speed/timings profile for your CPU and motherboard (either "AMD Expo" or "Intel XMP"). Personally, I'd recommend 96GB kits from GSKILL. Just make sure that either the manufacturer lists your motherboard in the RAM kit QVL list, or that the specific RAM kit is listed in your motherboard's QVL list. This is a guarantee that the specific RAM kit has been tested with the specific motherboard for stability. Lastly, about 128GB of RAM, either in the new 128GB DDR5 kits (2x 64GB) or in a "pair of 64GB DDR5 kit" (4x 32GB). It's generally aimed at the "prosumer" market, with more relaxed speeds and timings (=slower) or for HEDT systems using professional applications, not for gaming systems. Currently, it's problematic on most consumer motherboards and not recommended, usually untested and unstable at the desired higher speeds/timings (i.e., get ready to "FAFO").

OK, so what things, what aspects, to look for in a monitor, for your case with a $500 budget and an RTX 4070 graphics-card? First the monitor resolution and its size (the two can relate somehow).... You have an RTX 4070 graphics-card. That one is not really recommended for 4K (3840x2160) resolution gaming. While doable, you'll definitely be forced to cut down graphical settings in games (sometimes severely) and/or be completely dependent on DLSS upscaling (which may not be available to other games you may spend time on). And then there's the issue of the 12GB VRAM limit on the RTX 4070, which makes a it a no-no for 4K resolution in DCS. So, unfortunately, that puts a 4K monitor out of the picture for you, in my opinion. The next best thing then is a 1440P (2560x1440) resolution monitor, and what you should look for - your RTX 4070 will drive that very well, without issues. And there are some very good examples out there now that are very reasonably priced, well below your budget (I'll leave this for last). The thing is, 1440P monitors stop making sense at sizes beyond 32 inches, because the pixel density (and PPI) from there on is too low. If you really want a screen that is bigger than 32'' size, then you'll have to look for a 4K monitor or TV, but the prices and the performance (+VRAM) hit will be higher. Next, the refresh-rate of the monitor.... You'll notice 144Hz, 165Hz, 180Hz and 240Hz will be the most common these days for gaming monitors, anything higher than 120Hz is great in this aspect. But, regardless, noone sees benefits of maxxing such high refresh-rates with flight-sims, as 1) it's unnecessary for this genre of game and becomes increasingly harder to run. And 2) because the framerate (the FPS) can flutuate immensily, as will the frametime, which can induce a feeling of "stuttering / micro-freezing" in the image. In this case of modern high refresh-rate gaming monitors, for DCS, what you should do then is to enable VRR, aka Adaptive-Sync (G-Sync, on Nvidia) and lock the max framerate in game to something like 120FPS (or 100FPS, or 90FPS, or 80FPS, etc, whatever you end up prefering), then let the monitor panel do the rest. This benefits a more stable framerate and especially frametime, which results in a higher visual stability at most times, motion wise. And then the panel type on a monitor..... The different types are TN, VA, IPS and OLED (also subdivided into WOLED and QDOLED). TN is more focused on fast image on very high refresh panels, fast response times and motion handling, not so much image quality, so it's not a good choice for flight-sims. (not recommended) VA is more focused on high contrast and vibrant colors, but at cost of motion handling (blur, ghosting) and poor view angles, which you may notice and dislike with flight-sims. (not recommended) IPS is more focused on color accuracy, motion handling, response times and better view angles, at a cost of lower contrast, but generally a great choice for flight-sims. (recommended) OLED are the best for image quality (true blacks, no backlight bleeding, no glowing or blooming) and instantaneous response times, but very expensive and risk of burn-in. (recommended, with that caveat) Finally.... You mention budget is somewhat of a concern ($500 or less). All things considered -previous points included- I think you'll be best served with a good monitor that is 32'' 1440P 144Hz+ fast IPS panel and G-Sync compatible. There's so much stuff always coming out, at any time, that it's hard to trace what is "the best" or not. But, having tried all of these myself, I'd definitely recommend them (all are good and they're not too expensive, well under your budget): Asus TUF Gaming VG32AQL1A --- 32'' 1440P (2560x1440) 165Hz / OC 170Hz - IPS https://www.asus.com/displays-desktops/monitors/tuf-gaming/tuf-gaming-vg32aql1a/ Asus ROG Swift PG329Q --- 32'' 1440P (2560x1440) 165Hz / OC 175Hz - IPS https://rog.asus.com/monitors/32-to-34-inches/rog-swift-pg329q-model/ LG 32GS75Q-B --- 32'' 1440P (2560x1440) 180Hz - IPS https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-32gs75q-b-gaming-monitor LG 32GP850-B --- 32'' 1440P (2560x1440) 165Hz / OC 180Hz - IPS https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-32gp850-b-gaming-monitor LG 32GP750-B --- 32'' 1440P (2560x1440) 165Hz - IPS https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-32gp750-b-gaming-monitor Gigabyte GS32Q --- 32'' 1440P (2560x1440) 165Hz / OC 170Hz - IPS https://www.gigabyte.com/Monitor/GS32Q#kf Gigabyte M32Q --- 32'' 1440P (2560x1440) 165Hz / OC 170Hz - IPS https://www.gigabyte.com/Monitor/M32Q#kf I'd say, you can't really go wrong with any of these.

Really? hmmmm ok..... RTX6090 ! unless....

No one should tell you how to spend your own money. That said, I honestly can't see any point in paying the absolutely ridiculous prices of any RTX 5090, especially if already owning a fully funcional RTX 4090... In such case, to upgrade from 4090 to 5090, and for what is gaming/simming "leisure use", the perf.advantage versus purchase cost is really, really bad. So bad that the only reasonable conclusion seems to be to wait for the 60 series (6090, 6080), which will be on a whole new architecture (50 Series really wasn't) based on TSMC's 3nm process (50 series still uses 5nm process like 40 series did) and, supposedly, also faster GDDR7X memory, which should (speculated) provide the jump in performance that all of the 50 series failed to provide. And that's ignoring the melting power connectors and cables design issues discussion, already worrisome on the 4090 before, has been turned up to eleven on the 5090...

source TechPowerup: According to one of the most reliable AMD leakers, Kepler_L2, AMD's upcoming UDNA (or RDNA 5) GPU generation will reintroduce higher-end GPU configurations with up to 96 Compute Units (CUs) in the top-end Navi 5X SKU, paired with a 384-bit bus for memory. When it comes to the middle of the stack, AMD plans a GPU with 64 CUs and a 256-bit memory bus, along with various variations of CUs and memory capacities around that. For the entry-level models, AMD could deliver a 32 CU configuration paired with a 128-bit memory bus. So far, memory capacities are unknown and may be subject to change as AMD finalizes its GPU lineup. We still don't know what type of memory AMD will ultimately use, but an early assumption could be that GDDR7 is on the table. After the RDNA 4 generation, which left AMD without a top-end contender, fighting for the middle-end market share, a UDNA / RDNA 5 will be a welcome addition. We are looking forward to seeing what UDNA design is capable of and what microarchitectural changes AMD has designed. Mass production of these GPUs is expected in Q2 2026, so availability is anticipated in the second half of 2026. A clearer picture of the exact memory capacity and type will emerge as we approach launch.

Very cool. A nicely ilustrated tour you got there with some very iconic aircraft. And I hope you continue at it (we want moooar!). Many thanks for sharing!

Initial tests and comparisons suggest that Loseless Scaling still does the same job better than Nvidia's Smooth Motion. Granted, it's a payware app (7$ on Steam) but it works with any GPU and any driver, and on any game... ....plus, it's lightweight - doesn't suffer from the extra weight of Nvidia's bloatware app.

In my brief experience with an RX 7900XTX, it runs DCS pretty darn well at 4K resolution, on a 2D screen (monitor or TV). But it was not all that great for DCS VR (go figure, my older RTX 3090 performed better than it, IIRC). The 7900XT that you have is identical to the 7900XTX, albeit a little less powerful (~15% difference). If VR is your aim, and you're planning for a new GPU then I'd strongly suggest aiming for an Nvidia GPU, either RTX 5070Ti or, if budget allows, an RTX 5080. Nvidia still performs much better than AMD in VR. For DCS VR, I'd say a "decent minimum" for latest versions of DCS is an RTX 4070Ti Super 16GB and, on a better time, I'd say to get one from the second-hand market.... ....the problem is, even there all Nvidia GPUs are overpriced! If you can wait, the upcoming RTX 50 series "SUPER" refresh with considerably higher VRAM (18GB and 24GB) should be announced some months from now. Something like an RTX 5070Ti Super should be a considerable upgrade for VR then, and even more so the RTX 5080 Super (but at higher prices, of course...).

DCS VR is extremely demanding (increasingly so with continuous updates bringing higher and higher detailed content), even on the most performant systems. What graphics card in use? It looks like you're severely GPU limited, and the new faster CPU+RAM combo is not making noticeable difference because it's being restricted by that. Even if just for a test, try to reduce settings that are GPU demanding (ones that increase GPU usage - avoid having it completely exhausted at or near 100%). Once the GPU usage is decreased, then you should see some difference for sure.

YAAY he's back!! and GFY!

https://forum.dcs.world/forum/57-pc-hardware-and-related-software/

F-100D Dev Log: FSExpo 2025 An inside look at the 2025 FSExpo Event, testing DCS VR with the F-100D Super Sabre by Grinelli Designs. More videos and info Grinelli Designs website: https://grinnellidesigns.com/ Grinelli Designs Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@grinnellidesigns

You definitely have the system for 4K resolution, do it! If you end up getting a high refresh 4K monitor (or TV, there are 120Hz and 144Hz VRR variants), the one thing that I'd recommend is to lock your framerate irregardless. Locking the framerate to a max of 100 FPS (like you already do) is the sweet spot. But 90 FPS or even 80 FPS lock may be a better idea for demanding scenarios, to maintain frame pacing consistency as it'll decrease both CPU and GPU % usage. I see that you're reluctant to use DLSS, but to use it is actually a very good idea, irregardless of potent hardware, because the newest DLSS version, aka "Transformer", is much better (and it can be further adjusted). Start by getting the recently released DLSS 310.3.0 DLL - drop the .DLL file in same folder location where the game executable is, to update DLSS upscaler in use there. This new version, along with the improved image quality/clarity that the recent Transformer preset "K" brought, now also has lower VRAM consumption. Then, in the game, set DLSS at a desired setting (the "Upscaling" seting). On a 3840x2160 resolution screen panel, if set at "Quality" setting (=66% upscaling), you're basically running the game at 2560x1440 with AI upscaling. You may find that (re)adjusting the "Sharpening" setting may also be needed, as the image may look a little too soft (personal taste, but from 0.3 upto 0.7 should be good). For reference, 4K (3840x2160) has same GPU usage demand as 1440P (2560x1440) x 1.33. As to say, a third higher total pixel count and respective impact. I'd suggest to try DSR set at 1.20x and also 1.50x (a shame but there is no 1.33x). It should give you a (very) rough estimation of the possible increased hit in rasterization performance (i.e, with no DLSS upscaling - which you can combine with if desired). This is done through Nvidia control panel. For example: (NOTE: ignore the resolutions numbers in the screenshot, I'm on a 4K screen so of course those numbers are higher than those you'll see in your 1440P screen) After applying it, you'll then see that, in the game options for the screen resolution, there are new selectable resolutions (higher than those that your monitor natively supports) that can be used in game, which are respective to DSR settings you've chosen.