RTX 4080 & 7900 XTX/XT benchmarks DCS

[petsild]

On 12/16/2022 at 4:57 PM, Th3ChosenOn3 said:

Wasn't sure which resolution you wanted me to use, so I used my native 3440x1440 resolution with the High Preset. I also didn't really know what to do, so I flew around for a bit. Hope it helps with your comparison.

You'll have to setup Benchmark key binds, and then press Begin Recording to have them show up.

Try the latest beta which is ready for fresh graphics.

https://download-eu2.guru3d.com/afterburner/[Guru3D.com]-MSIAfterburnerSetup465Beta4Build16358.rar

[Thinder]

27 minutes ago, petsild said:

Try the latest beta which is ready for fresh graphics.

https://download-eu2.guru3d.com/afterburner/[Guru3D.com]-MSIAfterburnerSetup465Beta4Build16358.rar

Very useful, I'll use it even with an AMD card...

Edited January 2, 2023 by Thinder

[Oellness]

Hi, a VR comparison between 4080 and 7900XT(X) would be fine.

[VpR81]

4 hours ago, Thinder said:

You're all drawing conclusions on cards which for most part aren't even available yet...

No, i´m drawing conclusions on all GPU generations NVIDIA and AMD came up with since VR became a thing in DCS. Can you name a single AMD card that has ever been better for DCS VR than it´s NVIDIA counterpart? I guess not. Every 2 years, when a new GPU genreation hits the market, we hear the same wishfull thinkings about "AMD will now finally beat NVIDIA" or "the new AMD cards will wipe the floor with NVIDIA". Now... how often did this turned out to be true, especially for VR? Not a single time. 

[RaTzo]

2 hours ago, VpR81 said:

No, i´m drawing conclusions on all GPU generations NVIDIA and AMD came up with since VR became a thing in DCS. Can you name a single AMD card that has ever been better for DCS VR than it´s NVIDIA counterpart? I guess not. Every 2 years, when a new GPU genreation hits the market, we hear the same wishfull thinkings about "AMD will now finally beat NVIDIA" or "the new AMD cards will wipe the floor with NVIDIA". Now... how often did this turned out to be true, especially for VR? Not a single time. 

It must simply be silly to want to see the numbers then. Obviously we should all just be Team Nv!! 

Yeah I'm not a team buyer. I don't care who is better... turns out "better" is a fairly complicated and situationally dependent thing. I for one will decide based on the factors which determine which is "better" for me and not the color fo the box. 

So any head to head DCS 4080 vs 7900XTX tests in VR? DCS is a nasty beast to accurately benchmark but more information is always better. 

[Thinder]

3 hours ago, VpR81 said:

No, i´m drawing conclusions on all GPU generations NVIDIA and AMD came up with since VR became a thing in DCS. Can you name a single AMD card that has ever been better for DCS VR than it´s NVIDIA counterpart? I guess not. Every 2 years, when a new GPU genreation hits the market, we hear the same wishfull thinkings about "AMD will now finally beat NVIDIA" or "the new AMD cards will wipe the floor with NVIDIA". Now... how often did this turned out to be true, especially for VR? Not a single time. 

And every two years your bunch is gonna come up with the same AMD bashing up, tons of chest banging about your NVIDIA card with yet no serious data about how reliable the AMD card is, same for the CPUs, we see it like noses in the middle of faces.

AT EVERY SINGLE OPPORTUNITY.

You guys makes me laugh, I chosed my motherboarsd not because it is the fastest but because it has tons of USB 3.0 + hubs and runs cooler than most.

The card I chose will not run at the same FPS but who cares 20 fps more when it will run at temps as low as 72°C and I don't give a toss your pathologic habbits of going into every single AMD topics to display this cognitive behavior, you wanna show off? Open your damned own topic and give us a break with the B.S or get help, ho, btw how many of those marvels did catch fire lately?

Did you see AMD users rot the Nvidia topics? So just get a bleeming life. Cheers.

[Thinder]

1 hour ago, RaTzo said:

It must simply be silly to want to see the numbers then. Obviously we should all just be Team Nv!! 

Yeah I'm not a team buyer. I don't care who is better... turns out "better" is a fairly complicated and situationally dependent thing. I for one will decide based on the factors which determine which is "better" for me and not the color fo the box. 

So any head to head DCS 4080 vs 7900XTX tests in VR? DCS is a nasty beast to accurately benchmark but more information is always better. 

I don't expect the AMD card to trounce the Nvidia one, we knew for month it won't, but like you, I chose what I need according to my own requirements, but I'm tired of this childish B.S one vs the other just doesn't cut it for me.

I want my system to run at 4K 2 X MSAA with high settings at reasonable frame rates, not the "fastest" card around and what matters to me most is that it will be able to do it at low power settings and low temperatures, just imagine the B.S I read about it compared to the tests I watched, it's pitiful.

Players should be free to chose without having to go through this sort of things and it's not the first time I see and AMD topic spammed with B.S, makes me feel even more like buying all-AMD.

[Thinder]

Here is another point:

AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX Graphics Cards

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090

When you compare the price for one of the costliest AMD card (Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 XTX Nitro+ Vapor-X) and the cheapest 4090, you can see the difference between what AMD users and Nvidia "elite" really is.

Some might really think that we believed that a card costing anything from £450 to a £1000 less is going to beat the 4090?

Two things, one; those guys doesn't understand AMD players, second one must feel really insecure to come up with all the arguments against the RX 7900 XTX we saw in this topic, from my PoV, the comparison is also pointless, I didn't swallow AMD commercials when some were suggesting its target was the 4090, but I certainly don't take any B.S either.

We had a similar situation about AMD CPUs last year, guys couldn't understand why players would buy the 5600X, even so it ran nearly as fast, ran cooler, and was much cheaper than the equivalent Intel solution.

Again, comparing the two is pointless, people don't buy an AMD for the same reason than those who buy an Intel and it's the same for GPUs.

So when I get my Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 XTX Nitro+ Vapor-X 24GB, the first thing I'm gonna do is not to try to compete with a 4090, but to give it the best environment as possible: Reduce frame time, reduce ping, reduce voltage and thermals, I have looked for the informations to achieve that, not to try to beat Nvidia 4090, I couldn't care less.

I'll be running 3DMark benchmarks for each setting, this is what I did for my RAM and it works, optimization of my system is more important to me than beating DCS benchmarks records, I didn't build my PC for that.

So if some Nvidia players are frustrated because some moron published a youtube video  braging about how AMD beats Nvidia, get this: For the price, it does beat a RTX 3080 Ti hands up, even the RX 7900 XT manage it in most games and considering the price range it is what the RX 7900 XT/XTX should be compared to.

[VpR81]

1 hour ago, Thinder said:

And every two years your bunch is gonna come up with the same AMD bashing up, tons of chest banging about your NVIDIA card with yet no serious data about how reliable the AMD card is, same for the CPUs, we see it like noses in the middle of faces.

I was talking about recent GPU generations and that i don´t think that this will change. But you obviously seem to feel offended by it.

 

1 hour ago, Thinder said:

I don't give a toss your pathologic habbits of going into every single AMD topics to display this cognitive behavior

1. I haven´t posted anything on the forum for months. 2. The topic says "RTX 4080 & 7900 XTX/XT benchmarks DCS", so how is this a pure AMD topic? 3. That´s coming from you? The one who is going into every RAM topic to spam his latency opinions? So work a bit on your manners and try not to be insulting just because you are overstressed with the question. That was a very long text just to admit you cannot name a single AMD card having better performance in DCS VR than NVIDIA. If you don´t like different opüinions and cannot deal with the truth, then better stay off public forums. YOU are definately not the one deciding who is allowed to post in what kind of topic.

2 hours ago, RaTzo said:

It must simply be silly to want to see the numbers then. Obviously we should all just be Team Nv!!

That is not what i was saying. If AMD turns out to have better VR performance in DCS, i´m happy to buy AMD instantly. I was referring to a user saying "Right now NVIDIA seems to be better for DCS VR" and i just asked if this has ever been different. It seems more like, that some people get hurt by the truth. Or have i been wrong with the VR performance comparison of recent GPU generations? Anyways, that is absolutely no reason to behave as toxic as Thinder got. But i´ve read his "behavior" on a lot of other posts, especially about RAM where he loves to spam... and tells others to get a bleeming life. I was not surprised tbh...

[RaTzo]

59 minutes ago, VpR81 said:

If AMD turns out to have better VR performance in DCS, i´m happy to buy AMD instantly. I was referring to a user saying "Right now NVIDIA seems to be better for DCS VR" and i just asked if this has ever been different. It seems more like, that some people get hurt by the truth. 

Read these two sentences from you. Do you not see the glaring contradiction? If I, the user you are talking about, says "right now nv seems to be better" you ask "when has this ever been different?" RIGHT AFTER you say you'd be " If AMD turns out to have better VR performance in DCS, I'm happy to buy AMD instantly." 

lol.... you've had enough internent arguing for one day. 

Right now, Nv seems to be better but that may well change with the next driver update. I actually expect it to be so because the 7900XTX is already better at 4k flat screen than the 4080 is.  

Not at war with you Friend. 

[Thinder]

1 hour ago, VpR81 said:

I was talking about recent GPU generations and that i don´t think that this will change. But you obviously seem to feel offended by it.

Wrong choice of word, I'm not offended but fade up to read the same reactions to frustration by the same bunch, you included, Intel/Nvidia users, there have been several topics where those issues were raised and I have been endlessly trying to say the same thing: We don't buy AMD for the same reasons than we buy Intel/Nvidia.

Quote

1. I haven´t posted anything on the forum for months. 2. The topic says "RTX 4080 & 7900 XTX/XT benchmarks DCS", so how is this a pure AMD topic? 3. That´s coming from you? The one who is going into every RAM topic to spam his latency opinions? S

1) If this was a RTX 4080 why post about the 4090 then?

2) Typical, those comments are NOT my opinions, if you knew anything about it, you would know that those infos came directly from AMD and Gskill support technicians, I have posted their infos in the form of images, replies to my requests by emails to give a serious insight of what is going on with RAM and the Ryzen 3/3D, but obviously considering that you only consider those as MY opinons, it shows that you missed a LOT of it.

Quote

That is not what i was saying. If AMD turns out to have better VR performance in DCS, i´m happy to buy AMD instantly. I was referring to a user saying "Right now NVIDIA seems to be better for DCS VR" and i just asked if this has ever been different.

Again you accuse people of doing exactly that you do, most AMD new gen cards aren't even available right now, people run AMD CPUs and GPUs with the wrong set of RAM even the so called specialists in Youtube who can't read AMD own CPU RAM limits and fit Cl36 because they think the frequency is better with those Ryzen.

Exactly the opposite of what the techies are saying but eh, what do they know?

So I will see once my system is fully optimized what the results are in DCS, what I am sure about is that I do not have a CPU/RAM bottleneck, buying a £2,499.95 GPU, O.Cing it while losing the manufaturer warranty, fitting ultra-high frequency to CPUs limited to 3200MHz is certainly not going to help results in this game, makes me wonder what the technical supports are for if no one feels the need to ask them questions and keep looking in topics such as this one instead.

In short, if one wants proper info, one should reach for the proper source, not DCS forums.

So before concluding that AMD GPU are inferior in this game, ask players what their RAM/CPU bounding is, how optimized their system is, because it's not enough to fit a popular RAM kit, that's one of the first thing I look in their signature and one of the reasons why their results might not be as high as they could be.

I posted two links to Overclocker's website, AMD and Nvidia GPU, if you had taken a look you'd figure that most of those cards are not yet available, this plus lack of care for optimizing their systems, according to my tests can lead to a difference of 18.91% in Graphic score, 14.09% in Physics score and 32.34% in combined score at 4K 2 X MSAA with an 5800X 3D, that's the effect of a Cl14 Ram kit for you.

How much of this will translate to DCS remains to be seen but it is certainly not a small patato and if I manage to get the most of it to this game I am sure the 7900XTX is not going to give anything to a 4080, that's how Ryzen CPU works and spreading words about those infos being "opinions" is not helping AMD users.

 

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by Thinder

[Thinder]

5 minutes ago, RaTzo said:

Right now, Nv seems to be better but that may well change with the next driver update. I actually expect it to be so because the 7900XTX is already better at 4k flat screen than the 4080 is. 

Quiet logically, but my insistance into trying to get AMD users to understand what might be holding their system performance is certainly not for no reason...

Here we have a culture of "faster is better" which doesn't work when you understand what your Ryzen CPU is doing, what its limits are and how to improve performances or rather recover the loss due to mediocre RAM/CPU bounding.

I lost the basic knowledge of the Intel CPUs but I know for a fact that they are much more suited to higher frequencies despite the fact that many of them are also limited to 3200MHz, it would take a test with Cl14 to understand precisely where their limits are. For the time being here is a clue. Intel: How to Overclock RAM.

[RaTzo]

4 minutes ago, Thinder said:

Quiet logically, but my insistance into trying to get AMD users to understand what might be holding their system performance is certainly not for no reason...

Here we have a culture of "faster is better" which doesn't work when you understand what your Ryzen CPU is doing, what its limits are and how to improve performances or rather recover the loss due to mediocre RAM/CPU bounding.

I lost the basic knowledge of the Intel CPUs but I know for a fact that they are much more suited to higher frequencies despite the fact that many of them are also limited to 3200MHz, it would take a test with Cl14 to understand precisely where their limits are. For the time being here is a clue. Intel: How to Overclock RAM.

I just changed from an i9900k which was comfortable at 4.9 and fine up to 5.2 in cooler weather. I now have a new system, Ryzen 9 7900x with the same 6800xt I had before. Have not installed DCS yet as I'm waiting on a new powersupply. Hoping it is going to help with the FPS and frame times in MP. I've been overclocking intel CPUs since the 90s... only had a first gen Athlon back in the day so this is my first real go around with a modern AMD chip. Got the 6800xt for retail off of the shelf randomly back in 2020 so grabbed it without a lot of thought. It's been OK if not inspiring. 

[Thinder]

2 minutes ago, RaTzo said:

I just changed from an i9900k which was comfortable at 4.9 and fine up to 5.2 in cooler weather. I now have a new system, Ryzen 9 7900x with the same 6800xt I had before. Have not installed DCS yet as I'm waiting on a new powersupply. Hoping it is going to help with the FPS and frame times in MP. I've been overclocking intel CPUs since the 90s... only had a first gen Athlon back in the day so this is my first real go around with a modern AMD chip. Got the 6800xt for retail off of the shelf randomly back in 2020 so grabbed it without a lot of thought. It's been OK if not inspiring. 

I understand. A couple of years ago when I started to investigate the RAM issue, I visited the MSI forum and asked questions about both Intel and AMD CPU users, turned out that the reason for using Cl14 RAM kits were the same, they all needed to be able to O.C their RAM.

It all changed with the Ryzen 3 and even more so with the 3D, they worked on the low latency rather than possibility to use higher frequencies even with the Cl14, my kit is limited to its stock frequency of 3600MHz because of the controller limits but overall, with the cache, the gains are rather significant.

Obviously I do not know yet what it will do in DCS I do not have my card yet, but I also chose carefuly based on the other point I've been working at, thermals.

I'm not concerned about beating Nvidia CPUs, what my goal is, is to optimize my system and have it run cool and as fast as possible, the rest is irrelevant to me.

[VpR81]

9 minutes ago, Thinder said:

Wrong choice of word, I'm not offended but fade up to read the same reactions to frustration by the same bunch, you included, Intel/Nvidia users, there have been several topics where those issues were raised and I have been endlessly trying to say the same thing: We don't buy AMD for the same reasons than we buy Intel/Nvidia.

I never posted anything about this topic in any thread about AMD - NV comparison before. My intention was not to bash AMD, so there was no reason to become toxic.

 

16 minutes ago, Thinder said:

1) If this was a RTX 4080 why post about the 4090 then?

Who posted anything about the 4090? I didn´t...

 

17 minutes ago, Thinder said:

2) Typical, those comments are NOT my opinions, if you knew anything about it, you would know that those infos came directly from AMD and Gskill support technicians, I have posted their infos in the form of images, replies to my requests by emails to give a serious insight of what is going on with RAM and the Ryzen 3/3D, but obviously considering that you only consider those as MY opinons, it shows that you missed a LOT of it

Your opinion, info from AMD / GSkill technichians... doesn´t realy matter. Point was that you complained about other people coming to (AMD) threads in order to spam NVIDIA glorifications while you are someone spamming a lot of stuff in almost every RAM post. Again if these posts are your opinion or infos from other sources isn´t realy topic. Spam is spam.

 

21 minutes ago, Thinder said:

Again you accuse people of doing exactly that you do, most AMD new gen cards aren't even available right now, people run AMD CPUs and GPUs with the wrong set of RAM even the so called specialists in Youtube who can't read AMD own CPU RAM limits and fit Cl36 because they think the frequency is better with those Ryzen.

Exactly the opposite of what the techies are saying but eh, what do they know?

So I will see once my system is fully optimized what the results are in DCS, what I am sure about is that I do not have a CPU/RAM bottleneck, buying a £2,499.95 GPU, O.Cing it while losing the manufaturer warranty, fitting ultra-high frequency to CPUs limited to 3200MHz is certainly not going to help results in this game, makes me wonder what the technical supports are for if no one feels the need to ask them questions and keep looking in topics such as this one instead.

In short, if one wants proper info, one should reach for the proper source, not DCS forums.

So before concluding that AMD GPU are inferior in this game, ask players what their RAM/CPU bounding is, how optimized their system is, because it's not enough to fit a popular RAM kit, that's one of the first thing I look in their signature and one of the reasons why their results might not be as high as they could be.

I posted two links to Overclocker's website, AMD and Nvidia GPU, if you had taken a look you'd figure that most of those cards are not yet available, this plus lack of care for optimizing their systems, according to my tests can lead to a difference of 18.91% in Graphic score, 14.09% in Physics score and 32.34% in combined score at 4K with an 5800X 3D, that's the effect of a Cl14 Ram kit for you

Seriously?

26 minutes ago, RaTzo said:

Read these two sentences from you. Do you not see the glaring contradiction? If I, the user you are talking about, says "right now nv seems to be better" you ask "when has this ever been different?" RIGHT AFTER you say you'd be " If AMD turns out to have better VR performance in DCS, I'm happy to buy AMD instantly." 

Oh, i´m sorry. I (obviously) didn´t realize that it was you. My fault. I honestly don´t see any contradiction in this. I doubt this will change, but if it turns out i´m wrong with that assumption, i´m happy to buy AMD. What´s wrong with this statement? Trust me, i realy don´t care about who manufactured my hardware and what color is printed on the package.

39 minutes ago, RaTzo said:

Not at war with you Friend.

Me neither.

[BIGNEWY]

To all 

stay on topic, treat each other with respect, if you can not dont post. 

Thanks

[Krippz]

On 12/30/2022 at 12:24 PM, Andrei said:

Conclusion

Overall, the results were pretty much according to my expectations. Huge improvement with same settings and still better performance with better visuals. Also, it was interesting to see better CPU utilization with 4080.

This upgrade was due a loooong time ago. I skipped 2020 due to availability, I skipped 2021 because of miners. At the end of the day I paid same price for 4080 what it would effectively cost me to buy a 3080 a year ago. Is it worth it? For me - I think so.

Nice well thought out and detailed review. Cheers.

[kiss4luna]

Tried an engineer sample 7950X with RTX 4090, 3840x1440 resolution, 4x MSAA and 1.5x SSAA, mirror on, everything else Ultra or High. Caucasus map with TP-51 default free flight mission, always above 60fps.

Edited January 4, 2023 by kiss4luna
adding pictures

[Andrei]

Definitely NOT asking how you got your hands on 7950 ES

[kiss4luna]

8 hours ago, Andrei said:

Definitely NOT asking how you got your hands on 7950 ES

Well I understand but that's all I have and this config is higher end than 7900 + 4080 so I think the performance may represent something useful.

[SkateZilla]

 

 

Some RTX4080 12GB Reviews, OOops I mean 4070ti

Edited January 4, 2023 by SkateZilla

[BitMaster]

Seriously,

this is all getting pretty hilarious.

If that was the car company sector, heads would roll, but here, no signs of guilt or regret anywhere. How low can it go ?

[SkateZilla]

said it before and I'll say it again,

Looking at chips and components, sizes, cost per wafer, yields per wafer.
the size of the AD104 Chip, the memory etc, being 295mm^2, vs 608mm^2, you automatically get 400% the yields per wafer over AD102, then you add in a lower defect margin due to smaller chips, and since the wafers are circular, you add in the additional yields for the stamps in the areas that are normally considered wafer waste for the 608mm^2 4090 Chips.

4070ti could be sold for $599 and still post positive returns, If nVidia would've ate the Increased TSMC Cost they incurred by terminating their contract early with RTX30.

The Higher Price is because nVidia is refusing to eat the increased wafer cost caused by their pre-mature termination of their TSMC Contract, thought they'd do better on Samsung, realized it wasnt all the chicken and waffles Samsung promised, and came back to TSMC for RTX 40, TSMC hit them with an increased price to offset what they lost when nVidia terminated their contract without cause. Instead of nVidia Eating this cost like they should have, they passed it onto the consumer or the AIB Partners.

I feel sorry for AIB Partners, they are getting the brunt of the pricing backlash
Ask yourselves what coulda have possibly drove eVGA a company that's been the mainstay in the AIB Department for decades to leave, 

The Per Chip Cost -> AIBs, 
eVGA would have to sell Custom RTX4090s at 1.8-> 2K+, and 1.4 to 1.6K+ for a RTX4080, to make any type of positive revenue.

That's not even getting into AD103 Costs, which RTX4080 could be sold for $799/899 and still post positive returns.

[EightyDuce]

4070Ti....What they wanted 4080 12Gb to be and what the 4060Ti should have been. All at typical XX80 pricing. 

Current Nvidia Lovelace product stack:

XX90 — 4090

XX80 — NONE

XX70 — 4080 16Gb

XX60 — 4070Ti

[SkateZilla]

I made a little image for those unfamiliar with TSMC's production,
12 Inch (300mm) wafers,
with AD102, AD103, AD104 Chips laid out over the wafer, and this was being generous with spacing.
AD102 you Get 96
AD103 you get 245
AD104 you get 394

Assuming a few defects, lets say you get 385 working samples, $45 Each

If The AD104 Chip Costs ~ $45 Per Chip, 
The Micron GDDR6X is Roughly ~$28 Per Chip (2GB Chips), x 6 for 12GB = ~ 168 for VRAM

So ~$213, 
Now Add PCB Board, Components (VRM, Various Capacitors, HDMI and DisplayPORT Connectors etc)
~ $75 (and that's being generous with some components, w/ retail cost, I assume they have a contract to get the VRM Mosfets, and Connectors at bulk prices).
Add another $100 for the Cooling Solution.

~$375-$390 Manufacturing cost
 

Edited January 4, 2023 by SkateZilla