2080Ti vs RTX 3090 for VR

[dburne]

Why run a 9900K at 4,7Ghz? Doesnt make sense.

For running DCS that mainly run on ome core you should go as high as possible in clock.

At least make those two cores run at 5Ghz all the time during gaming.

 

Best to make all cores run the same I would think.

I have my 8 cores all running at 5.2 GHz.

So whatever thread DCS would be using would be at 5.2 right?

[Taz1004]

Why do I reply to these things :doh: I have no personal interest in what y'all do... go ahead and buy a 3080 and then start your own thread like this one: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=286339&highlight=3090 and cry to the community it didn't really help...

 

If you are okay with current visual quality and increase FPS, yes, you probably need CPU upgrade.

If you want to increase visual quality... ie... SS, PD, and MSAA, without hurting fps, GPU upgrade will definitely help.

 

If you're getting 60fps in 4K display with maxed out graphic settings, that's different story. But since this is VR section and probably no one is currently maxing out visual quality in VR, latter applies here.

 

And this has been repeated over and over.

[javelina1]

Best to make all cores run the same I would think.

I have my 8 cores all running at 5.2 GHz.

So whatever thread DCS would be using would be at 5.2 right?

It's what I do Don. I have all 8 cores running at 4.9ghz. So whatever 1 or 2 DCS lands on, it's the same...

[speed-of-heat]

Yep same for me 5.1 ghz all core clock

[imacken]

Somebody please tell me I'm CPU bound in DCS.

[Gunnars Driver]

Best to make all cores run the same I would think.

I have my 8 cores all running at 5.2 GHz.

So whatever thread DCS would be using would be at 5.2 right?

 

Absolutely!

 

Didn’t wanna insult someone not wanting to do any type of OC, so I tried a soft approach.

 

I have never had cores running at different speeds, so that was one of my questions: -Do we know for sure that the DCS thread will be run on the highest clocked core?

 

I also do 5.2 on all cores(9900KS).

[speed-of-heat]

Somebody please tell me I'm CPU bound in DCS.

But the man said... :music_whistling:

:megalol:

[Sn8ke_iis]

Rather than giving you the answer you guys should ask yourself why would overclocking all cores benefit a game that runs on three cores and is limited by single core speed? Curious what the rationale for that would be.

 

Anyways pretty easy to test this yourself guys. Intel XTU can do per core overclocks.

 

I'm not sure why someone would run a 9900K with 2 cores at 4.7 when the stock turboboost pushes 3 to 5.0 GHz by default.

[speed-of-heat]

Mainly cause it switches between cores as they heat and other loading factors, keeping a constant clock means they don’t have to spin up to speed..

 

Also it’s easy to do, and doesn’t cost me anything I’m not prepared to use

[imacken]

But the man said... :music_whistling:

:megalol:

 

:thumbup:

[Gunnars Driver]

Rather than giving you the answer you guys should ask yourself why would overclocking all cores benefit a game that runs on three cores and is limited by single core speed? Curious what the rationale for that would be.

 

1. Once an overclocker, always an.... :-)

 

2. There is also other applications: videorendering, CAD/CAM, 3d scanner rendering and maybe also another game...

 

For me both 1) and 2) alone would do it.

[Sn8ke_iis]

Mainly cause it switches between cores as they heat and other loading factors, keeping a constant clock means they don’t have to spin up to speed..

 

Also it’s easy to do, and doesn’t cost me anything I’m not prepared to use

 

It already does that though. If the application is only using 2-3 cores those cores will hit 5.0 GHz stock or whatever you have your overclock set for. One of the main reasons it switches around like that is to keep hot spots from forming on the chip. As long as you aren't hitting thermal limits the cores will do 5+ GHz. The main limiting factor for most people will be their cooling solution not some arbitrary GHz limit.

 

All core overclocks will get you higher scores in Cinebench and Timespy Physics score but don't actually benefit in games that I've seen.

 

For DCS you want to push 1 core overclock as far as it will go. You could actually even shut down cores in BIOS. I saw do difference going from 3 cores to 4+ cores.

 

Single core and <8 core overclocks draw less voltage and heat and are more stable at higher speeds. Turning hyperthreading off gives a little more headroom too.

 

As I understand it as long as you are on the proper power plan there will be no delay in "spinning up".

 

Not to derail the thread, thought most of you guys knew this already. When I have a new card in hand I'll post some benchmarks and before and after data. As far as I can tell, no one who knows how to properly benchmark DCS has their hands on one yet. No telling when that will be though...

[Gunnars Driver]

I dont think I ever saw the main thread switch core ?

[dburne]

I dont think I ever saw the main thread switch core ?

 

Yeah it does.

[wormeaten]

Somebody please tell me I'm CPU bound in DCS.

 

Acording to this picture you send your problem is GPU.

 

It is run on 94%, almost full potential and it is hot, 81C so could be thermal throttling as well on GPU.

You are full in red so your level of details is also too much for your GPU but this is more problem of DCS engine than any of your hardware.

 

First of all try to do test with Steam SS on 100%. Don't take this 100% literally. Real 100% is resolution nearest to your HMD native resolution so this could be in SteamVR SS 88% or 120% what ever but read resolution not percentage.

Also in game PD should be always 1.0 without any change.

 

Start from there and compare it with previous results. If it is still in red than start to reducing level of details in game graphic settings.

If I make it to be playable on 980Ti than you should too. Just need to tweak as need to your hardware.

 

DCS engine is completely screwed and it is major bottleneck here not the hardware. I'm afraid even new ampere will not make much difference as it doing in other games. From some first benchmarks 3080 make difference only on monitor in 2D graphics but not much in VR.

ED finally need to fix this mess because this is not hardware issue in DCS at all.

[wormeaten]

Rather than giving you the answer you guys should ask yourself why would overclocking all cores benefit a game that runs on three cores and is limited by single core speed? Curious what the rationale for that would be.

 

Anyways pretty easy to test this yourself guys. Intel XTU can do per core overclocks.

 

I'm not sure why someone would run a 9900K with 2 cores at 4.7 when the stock turboboost pushes 3 to 5.0 GHz by default.

 

 

Also I don't understand why people insist on Top Hi End CPU like i9 9900K or i9 10900K when i510600K will do the work same good as i9 in DCS?

[Waxer]

Also I don't understand why people insist on Top Hi End CPU like i9 9900K or i9 10900K when i510600K will do the work same good as i9 in DCS?

 

The i5 10600K is a very interesting chip. And for a gamer, good value.

[imacken]

Acording to this picture you send your problem is GPU.

 

It is run on 94%, almost full potential and it is hot, 81C so could be thermal throttling as well on GPU.

You are full in red so your level of details is also too much for your GPU but this is more problem of DCS engine than any of your hardware.

 

First of all try to do test with Steam SS on 100%. Don't take this 100% literally. Real 100% is resolution nearest to your HMD native resolution so this could be in SteamVR SS 88% or 120% what ever but read resolution not percentage.

Also in game PD should be always 1.0 without any change.

 

Start from there and compare it with previous results. If it is still in red than start to reducing level of details in game graphic settings.

If I make it to be playable on 980Ti than you should too. Just need to tweak as need to your hardware.

 

DCS engine is completely screwed and it is major bottleneck here not the hardware. I'm afraid even new ampere will not make much difference as it doing in other games. From some first benchmarks 3080 make difference only on monitor in 2D graphics but not much in VR.

ED finally need to fix this mess because this is not hardware issue in DCS at all.

 

Thanks but you missed my point. I was being ironic in the face of all those ‘DCS IS CPU BOUND’ posters who keep posting here giving no consideration to hardware and settings.

[Vanguard]

Also I don't understand why people insist on Top Hi End CPU like i9 9900K or i9 10900K when i510600K will do the work same good as i9 in DCS?

 

I didn't get an i9-9900k for DCS, I bought it for other things that I do and I happen to run DCS on the same rig. You're correct it's not the ultimate choice if you're just buying a "DCS rig."

Edited September 27, 2020 by Vanguard

[Baldrick33]

Thanks but you missed my point. I was being ironic in the face of all those ‘DCS IS CPU BOUND’ posters who keep posting here giving no consideration to hardware and settings.

I think the biggest issue I have is it depends on what I am doing in DCS. Free flight I am GPU bound to 45 FPS, furball on the channel map I am CPU bound below 45, dogfight on the Chanel map a bit of both with drops below 45, the same on the super carrier.

 

So a 3090 should help some of those circumstances but I will still probably be struggling to maintain 45 in others and there is no CPU option to resolve that.

[Waxer]

I am done with this thread. Too many narrow minded "people with limited understanding" diverting the thread into CPU issues - without reading context of the thread.

Edited September 27, 2020 by Milou
Decided to be less blunt.

[Gunnars Driver]

I didn't get an i9-9900k for DCS, I bought it for other things that I do and I happen to run DCS on the same rig. You're correct it's not the ultimate choice if you're just buying a "DCS rig."

 

Same here. We shouldnt really need to defendingly explain why we did get the best CPU’s there is.

Ridicilous.

 

The thread is taking a new dead end track, just as the *CPU bound* track.

The statement *not the best choice for DCS* should be changed to *not the most economical choise* for DCS. Big difference.

 

Just about any CPU with at least two or three cores on 5Ghz+ is a good choise, today.

Any CPU only running 5Ghz on a few cores might be not good in the future.

Either buy cheaper CPU’s more often or more expensive less often.

There is no wrong with getting a cheaper CPU getting the same DCS performance as with the overall best CPU. Its also not wrong getting the best CPU.

 

The thread is about 2080ti vs 3090, and I guess that settles sort of the frames.

You have a 2080ti (hi end) and and thinking about getting a 3090(hi end).

But how many of us in description above have sneaked out on the CPU choise?

 

Im waiting for my 3090 and I sure hope it delivers good enough to make my CPU the limit, so next step will be a better performing CPU in the future.

[speed-of-heat]

its been really useful in populating my ignore list...

 

its also been useful for finding people who, actually think, though to be fair i had already spotted them,

 

 

that said my 3090 is on order so we will see

[Vanguard]

I think the reason these threads keep going full circle is because people who have a grasp of what they are talking about offer advice and people simply don't want to belive what they are hearing so they go and open a new thread with like minded people to feel comfortable in their echo chamber and then someone outside that circle finds the thread and you folks respond with here we go again.

 

The only "here we go again" I really see going on is the yet another comfort group. At what point to you stop and ponder why everyone keeps saying the same thing, and maybe asking yourself, maybe its me...

 

Why I'm puzzled: There are peeps out there with the best rig money can buy and still can't run max settings in VR. So if you have less than that, you need to reduce settings until you're happy, and no amount of hardware or money thrown at the problem within practical limits is going to solve your problem. Post after post of where am I bound and what should I buy. Well, you're GPU bound at your current settings so buy a better GPU. Ok, one week later, guys now I'm CPU bound. Yep, now go buy a better CPU... you can keep going full circle until you've got the best of both, and... you'll still be unhappy because the game needs optimizations on both ends, multithreaded and vulkan together to address the issue. It's like FS9 threads 10 years ago, and new MSFS threads today, same same.

 

If you're on budget and looking for advice to squeeze more juice out of what you got or a limited budget, these threads make sense. If you're looking.for a pill to solve you're problem, it doesn't exist yet for under $3000.

[Gunnars Driver]

that said my 3090 is on order so we will see

 

Same here.

 

Aurelius test (+41%) give some indication on what to expect, Im sure there will be a lot of openings to either get 90fps more often, or to use the extra power to increase settings that increase the overall gaming experience.

 

As Im looking to get a Pimax 8KX, I think I can justify a 3090 only because of that.

Reverb at 150% SS as I use now means 18% more pixels to produce with 100%SS /PD1.0.