Not planning to buy a RTX3080Ti anymore

[Wali763]

So I was sure about getting the topcard of the next-gen vga-cards, a RTX3080Ti or a RX6900, if they're going to be called that way. But my experiences this year has stopped this intention for now.

 

Right now Im on monitor, but have owned three HMDs in the last year. Rift S, Index and Reverb.

 

Usually I have in easy places (high on NTTR) up to 144fps and in difficult places (lots of units) down to 40fps. Not counting the bad 2.5.6 effects (had even 5fps one time)... All that with rather high settings, but no SSAA or DLSS.

 

In VR I had usually 40/45fps with moderate settings, with lows of about ~27/30 fps.

 

With such a new vgs-card Id probably get higher max fps, like 200fps monitor or 90fps VR. Or I could increase graphic settings. But with the settings on monitor already very high, I presumably would get very little increase in visual fidelity. In VR I could increase SS (which I set quite low with the mentioned HMDs, like 130%SS with the Index) so I could get a kind of half decent increase.

 

Problem is, my low fps would pretty much stay the same, since they are all CPU-related. And those low fps (especially in VR) are far more annoying to me than everything else.

 

So, unless ED dont finally bring the coresystem up to date and offer CPU- multicore-support, I dont see a valid reason to upgrade my vga-card. Im for sure not gonna pay 1200e+ to still crawl around at 30fps in VR. But since current headsets didnt make me happy, Im on a hold with VR anyway... And for monitor I for sure dont need it, even if I upgrade to 4k.

 

Dear AMD or Nvidia, if you want to sell a expensive card to me, send someone over to ED to help resolve their problems!

 

:lol:

 

Any other opinions?

Edited May 11, 2020 by Wali763

[currenthill]

Well... I play other games on my computer as well. That's a reason good enough for me to upgrade to a 3080Ti.

[Svsmokey]

I am committed to flying in vr , and i do plan on getting a next-gen top-tier card . I further am happy with the state of headset development at this time , although i do look forward to further iterations (Oculus reverb-level resolution ! )

 

However , i do take your point regarding DCS , and fully agree . My problem is that i enjoy flying on the deck , where the performance demands are the greatest , and that is not much fun as it might be in DCS . The Huey free-flight mission in Tblisi , for example , reveals what an incredible effort ED put into the map's realisation , and artwork down to bark on trees . But the constant shimmering , warping buildings , aliasing and flickering shadows completely ruin the experience .

It is certainly no better in the Hornet at 300 feet and 300 kts than in the Huey at 50 and 50 .

 

I am building a system to take advantage of Vulkan and multi-threading implementations for the long-term , but i am not sure if even that will be enough , and even if it is , it will be at least a year before we see the results of the former , and likely multi-years for the latter . I fear that ED's focus on being both a study-level flight simulator , and a mega-Arma development path simultaneously will overtax any forseeable hardware-at least in VR . The only thing that might make all that possible (at some point) would be some form of 1-gpu-per-eye , or a more efficient aa in the rendering pipeline , or both , which goes back to your other suggestion .

 

In the meantime , as much as i love DCS , i am looking at other sims .

Edited May 11, 2020 by Svsmokey

[Wali763]

Well... I play other games on my computer as well. That's a reason good enough for me to upgrade to a 3080Ti.

 

Thats of course a valid reason. But Id consider (also for DCS) upgrading your CPU first. That would not just in DCS seriously bottleneck your new GPU.

 

I am committed to flying in vr , and i do plan on getting a next-gen top-tier card . I further am happy with the state of headset development at this time , although i do look forward to further iterations (Oculus reverb-level resolution ! )

Im also looking forward to newer VR-offerings like the Reverb G2. But three months ago, when I tested the Index, that was actually rather nice, I resold it again, since I did not (even with low settings) get the fps I wanted and did not expect them to be much better using a RTX2080Ti, that I was seriously considering to buy. A friend is using a 2080Ti with the Index and is often unhappy with the low fps his getting, especially in MP.

 

But that is, what I was trying to say in the first place: no matter, what potent GPU you throw at DCS right now, it will not change the (low fps-) experience of DCS very much. Unless ED finally do something about it....

 

Right now, Im more into considering a QHD+ monitor with 37inches, that cost the same as a 2080Ti right now. But for that I might really need a RTX3080 then!

[derneuemann]

Is your 9600k overclocked?

 

 

May be you need an CPU cooled by Chiller or compressor

 

 

And than may be, you can clock to 5,5GHz.

[Svsmokey]

Thats of course a valid reason. But Id consider (also for DCS) upgrading your CPU first. That would not just in DCS seriously bottleneck your new GPU.

 

 

Im also looking forward to newer VR-offerings like the Reverb G2. But three months ago, when I tested the Index, that was actually rather nice, I resold it again, since I did not (even with low settings) get the fps I wanted and did not expect them to be much better using a RTX2080Ti, that I was seriously considering to buy. A friend is using a 2080Ti with the Index and is often unhappy with the low fps his getting, especially in MP.

 

But that is, what I was trying to say in the first place: no matter, what potent GPU you throw at DCS right now, it will not change the (low fps-) experience of DCS very much. Unless ED finally do something about it....

 

Right now, Im more into considering a QHD+ monitor with 37inches, that cost the same as a 2080Ti right now. But for that I might really need a RTX3080 then!

 

A big factor in my choice to go with a top-tier next-gen gpu is preparing for the DCS implementation of Vulkan , with its further demands on Vram .

[Fri13]

I updated from 1080Ti to 2080S after testing 2080Ti and I couldn't get better performance from Ti model than Super, so it was easy to save a 500€ for selecting Super.

 

The 3k series must be a lot better, at least 70-100% so that it is worth to upgrade. For that I would be ready to drop 2600€ extra.

 

But if it is only 50% or so compared to 2080Ti, there is no sense at all to buy it.

 

I am waiting Vulcan with interest to see what we could gain from it. I don't expect graphics performance increase but more like having far more ground units and much, a LOT improved ground units AI and functions.

I will gladly exchange 90 FPS to 45 FPS if we get a semi-realistic and far more complex ground to fight against from the air.

[nrosko]

Well isn't this on their to-do list? I mean it's not like they are not going to try & improve things.

 

I will be getting a new GPU & CPU when they are out hopefully this year, but i play other games so its going to be justified.

If recent rumours are true raster performance gain is going to be 40-70% of 20 series, i can't see how that is not going to help DCS in some way. So with a new CPU & vulkan eventually arriving That could see DCS being more playable in VR WITH LESS SHIMMER & much better frame rates.

 

I don't think DLSS will be possible in DCS. DLSS 3.0 is rumoured to be easy to implement but you need TXAA which i believe is not an option for DCS correct me if im wrong.

[Svsmokey]

Moore's Law is Dead has a new vid on YT that seems to provide the best estimation yet of performance gains to be expected with Ampere . Very interesting . Bottom line : 50%

[Dudikoff]

Moore's Law is Dead has a new vid on YT that seems to provide the best estimation yet of performance gains to be expected with Ampere . Very interesting . Bottom line : 50%

 

IIRC, some recent article claims that the IPC gain will be 10-20%. I presume some clock increase will be present, as well.

 

Much bigger gains will only be on the ray-tracing side with the tensor cores where gains might be 2-4x higher supposedly.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Dudikoff

[currenthill]

Thats of course a valid reason. But Id consider (also for DCS) upgrading your CPU first. That would not just in DCS seriously bottleneck your new GPU.

 

Yep, that's my intention. Waiting for the Ryzen 4000/Zen 3 to hit the shelves. I usually skip a generation or two. But the time has come... this is the year for a spanking new GPU and CPU. :thumbup:

[Svsmokey]

IIRC, some recent article claims that the IPC gain will be 10-20%. I presume some clock increase will be present, as well.

 

Much bigger gains will only be on the ray-tracing side with the tensor cores where gains might be 2-4x higher supposedly.

 

I understand clock speeds are to be 2ghz+ . 50 % claim is for rasterization . Some interesting usages of the tensor cores in that vid as well .

Edited May 12, 2020 by Svsmokey

[Motomouse]

I drive 400% supersampling & 0.8 PD with the 1080Ti, a 3600X and the reverb (4408x4320x2 Pixels)

 

40 to 50 FPS singleplayer, 30 FPS multiplayer, I played at 15 FPS microprose F1 simulator when i was younger ;-)

I want a clear look on my cockpit displays when I am using the weapons systems.

 

When I fly aerobatics or just for fun I lower the supersampling and get 60 FPS in singleplayer.

 

The 400% supersampling are the perfect balance for my CPU in multiplayer. With a 3080Ti I could push the supersampling even further. For an increase of the low FPS in multiplayer I would need a MUCH stronger CPU (not available in the near future) or the DCS engine needs to use better multicore CPUs. Perhaps Vulcan will help with the CPU issue.

[Hoirtel]

So I was sure about getting the topcard of the next-gen vga-cards, a RTX3080Ti or a RX6900, if they're going to be called that way. But my experiences this year has stopped this intention for now.

 

Right now Im on monitor, but have owned three HMDs in the last year. Rift S, Index and Reverb.

 

Usually I have in easy places (high on NTTR) up to 144fps and in difficult places (lots of units) down to 40fps. Not counting the bad 2.5.6 effects (had even 5fps one time)... All that with rather high settings, but no SSAA or DLSS.

 

In VR I had usually 40/45fps with moderate settings, with lows of about ~27/30 fps.

 

With such a new vgs-card Id probably get higher max fps, like 200fps monitor or 90fps VR. Or I could increase graphic settings. But with the settings on monitor already very high, I presumably would get very little increase in visual fidelity. In VR I could increase SS (which I set quite low with the mentioned HMDs, like 130%SS with the Index) so I could get a kind of half decent increase.

 

Problem is, my low fps would pretty much stay the same, since they are all CPU-related. And those low fps (especially in VR) are far more annoying to me than everything else.

 

So, unless ED dont finally bring the coresystem up to date and offer CPU- multicore-support, I dont see a valid reason to upgrade my vga-card. Im for sure not gonna pay 1200e+ to still crawl around at 30fps in VR. But since current headsets didnt make me happy, Im on a hold with VR anyway... And for monitor I for sure dont need it, even if I upgrade to 4k.

 

Dear AMD or Nvidia, if you want to sell a expensive card to me, send someone over to ED to help resolve their problems!

 

:lol:

 

Any other opinions?

 

I would think a GPU upgrade will allow you to improve visuals more AA, etc for the same FPS. But squeezing more Mhz out of your CPU would also improve things.

 

I will be upgrading to 3080ti, I have recently built my system with a view to getting this (skipping the 2080ti given the expected release this year) with a 1080ti my cpu is running very high already so I expect some increase in frames but also allow increase in GPU affected settings.

 

For anyone with any Xplane experience the new Vulkan beta definitely improves frame rates, but vastly improves smoothness. However, it is a graphics API and does not make much difference to how your CPU is used in terms of cores. There are many xplane related videos on how it works that you should look into.

 

I found DCS much better with hyperthreading off to get the best out of the core it uses.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Hoirtel

[dis80786]

With DCS there are a million small things one can do to improve FPS. It's annoying AF that we have to do all that and it isn't automatically done by ED (it should be optimised out of the box FFS!), but there it is. New shaders, hyperthreading disabled, etc etc etc, just search these forums and find what works for your system, but significant gains can be had by tinkering.

 

In VR at least, I am sure that the frame rate cap has a large effect on the performance of DCS (it's easy to find, just search for the DCS autoexec posts on this forum) due to super-sampling vs the FPS trigger for upgrading/downgrading the dynamic resolution, and so on.

 

All I will say is, that one can be too quick to blame one's hardware. An overclocked 2600K with a 2080Ti is all one really needs to get decent performance out of DCS, since DCS does not take full advantage of extra cores and single core frequency is king. Implement the settings which need to be implemented, disable those which drain your performance for no real gain (looking at you, wake vortices) and you may be able to eek another year or two out of your current hardware whilst you wait for Intel's 10nm to go HEDT. And in the meantime, spend what you would have spent on a new system on beer.

Edited May 13, 2020 by dis80786
Typos, duh me.

[Hoirtel]

With DCS there are a million small things one can do to improve FPS. It's annoying AF that we have to do all that and it isn't automatically done by ED (it should be optimised out of the box FFS!), but there it is. New shaders, hyperthreading disabled, etc etc etc, just search these forums and find what works for your system, but significant gains can be had by tinkering.

 

In VR at least, I am sure that the frame rate cap has a large effect on the performance of DCS (it's easy to find, just search for the DCS autoexec posts on this forum) due to super-sampling vs the FPS trigger for upgrading/downgrading the dynamic resolution, and so on.

 

All I will say is, that one can be too quick to blame one's hardware. An overclocked 2600K with a 2080Ti is all one really needs to get decent performance out of DCS, since DCS does not take full advantage of extra cores and single core frequency is king. Implement the settings which need to be implemented, disable those which drain your performance for no real gain (looking at you, wake vortices) and you may be able to eek another year or two out of your current hardware whilst you wait for Intel's 10nm to go HEDT. And in the meantime, spend what you would have spent on a new system on beer.

 

PC's aren't designed for one thing they have so much flexibility that to get he best out of your system you are going to need to optimise it. It will work out of the box, but more can be had by tweaking. That's PCs for you. Not everyone likes it. Hence the large console gaming market. All optimised to a specific standard.

 

Disagree with your "all you need". A 2600k is now very old and new CPU with larger caches and faster bus speeds make a difference. Core clock speed is important and have several cores helps the rest of your system and whatever else is running in the background work better. Hyperthreading is great for many PC processing tasks, but for flight sims that really want single core performance it isn't helpful. A 2080ti is a top end card so yes this will great but would probably bottle neck a 2600k. You would get better results with a newer CPU and lower level graphics card.