RTX 3070 with 8GB VRAM any good for DCS @60 FPS? (1440p single screen)

[Aluminum Donkey]

Greetings everyone,

My 1080 Ti (11GB) packed it in on me a while back, and I'm wondering if anyone has luck with the RTX 3070 (8GB).

I like to run DCS at 60 FPS constant, and have all the graphics detail maxed out. The 1080 Ti was barely capable, but did the trick. The 3070 looks much more capable (5888 CUDA cores!), but has 3GB less memory. The memory is fast though, it's GDDR6 with almost the same bandwidth as the 1080 Ti.

I'm running a single screen at 2560 x 1440. I don't want to have issues with stuttering due to insufficient VRAM. Does 8GB seem like enough? I guess I could just buy it and try, but I'd still like to hear from other people using these rather powerful cards with 8GB.

Thanks!

AD

[Art-J]

Regular 3070 from Gigabyte and 60Hz 1440p monitor here, paired with good old i7-9700k CPU.

I also always aim at V-synced minimum 60 fps, but I prefer to have a hefty framerate margin (x2 if possible) to be spent on heavier missions. As such I admit I use medium-high settings, with no AA (only SMAA via Reshade), reduced shadows and no bull$hit gimmicks like SSLR, SSAO / whatnot. The card performs excellent like that, but I doubt it would always maintain 60 fps If I went full retard with all settings. Especially on poorly optimized maps like Marianas. Honestly, I find it hard to believe that your 1080Ti managed to do that either ;). It's pity that it went belly up, 'cause If you wanted, I would do some testing with exactly the same settings as yours, so that you could have a better comparison data.

But If you remember more or less what framerate you were getting in some specific mission with some specific settings, I can try to play the same mission and report back (If only I own the same modules as you).

Edited January 1, 2023 by Art-J

[LucShep]

16 hours ago, Aluminum Donkey said:

Greetings everyone,

My 1080 Ti (11GB) packed it in on me a while back, and I'm wondering if anyone has luck with the RTX 3070 (8GB).

I like to run DCS at 60 FPS constant, and have all the graphics detail maxed out. The 1080 Ti was barely capable, but did the trick. The 3070 looks much more capable (5888 CUDA cores!), but has 3GB less memory. The memory is fast though, it's GDDR6 with almost the same bandwidth as the 1080 Ti.

I'm running a single screen at 2560 x 1440. I don't want to have issues with stuttering due to insufficient VRAM. Does 8GB seem like enough? I guess I could just buy it and try, but I'd still like to hear from other people using these rather powerful cards with 8GB.

Thanks!

AD

I've used an RTX3060Ti 8GB for some 10 months, which is basically a slightly lower spec'ed RTX3070 8GB. Once undervolting + Memory OC is done on it, it's the same performance as a stock RTX3070 8GB. So, I feel qualified to comment.

You will definitely be bottlenecked by the 8GB VRAM at some point (stutters ensue then), especially with the more detailed textured modules (F-14, F-16, more so if on Syria, for example), but performance will generally be "OK" for ~60FPS at 2560x1440.
The RTX3070 8GB is about 20% to 25% faster than a GTX1080Ti 11GB but, while you can notice it, it's too little of an improvement to make it feel like a true upgrade over that one.

So, perhaps your interest in getting an RTX3070 8GB in brand new condition is due to budget constraints. If that's the case, I'd really consider instead a used (2nd hand) RTX3080 10GB, which should be fine with that 750W PSU that you list in your specs. It'll surely feel like an upgrade over the GTX1080Ti 11GB (it's ~50% faster!).
The RTX 3080 10GB has a LOT more "oomph" than the RTX3070 8GB, it's higher framerate guaranteed, and will definitely not bottleneck as soon - not only it's more of it, it's better and faster VRAM too (GDDR6X).

Don't let the "ooh it's used!! ....oooh it may have been used in mining!!!"  thoughts get into you because, while there may exhist some bad apples, there are some really good deals happening all the time (on Ebay and etc). There's lots of people upgrading to the (horribly overpriced!) newest and recently launched higher-end models, and selling theirs to balance the financial hit on that novelty upgrade. Take advantage of it while you can.
The RTX 3080, and also the 3080Ti and RTX 3090, will be still be great GPUs for a long, long time, but I don't think paying stupid prices for a brand new one is worth it, when you can get 2nd hand ones in mint condition for a lot less. Hence my sugestion.

Lastly, and as side note, if you're using an NVIDIA graphics-card, and you use a PC monitor (or TV) without any VRR features (so, without FreeSync or G-Sync), please do not feel forced to use V-Sync "ON" just because you too can't stand screen tearing. 
Instead, perhaps have a go with Scanline-Sync (tutorial in HERE).  With it, one uses V-Sync OFF in game options, and Vertical Sync at "OFF" or at "Fast-Sync" (depends on game, DCS prefers the latter for Scanline-Sync) in NVIDIA Control Panel. No tearing, runs smooth - and DCS runs better comparatively.  

Edited January 1, 2023 by LucShep
spelling(?)

[Aluminum Donkey]

Ok, I know there are faster used cards out there but I got a 3070 today. So far it's a screamer in just about everything compared to the 1080 Ti, although reviews and such claim otherwise. It's really nice!

Unfortunately I can't log in to DCS! I updated to 2.8, and it won't let me log in.

Error, cannot find saved login (500) or something like that. Looks like it's gonna take some muffing around. Oh well...

AD

[Art-J]

2 hours ago, Aluminum Donkey said:

Unfortunately I can't log in to DCS! I updated to 2.8, and it won't let me log in.

Error, cannot find saved login (500) or something like that. Looks like it's gonna take some muffing around. Oh well...

AD

I recall 500 error is triggered by your PC time not being set correctly. Maybe it got messed up this night? Check if both BIOS and Windows time match each other.

Edited January 1, 2023 by Art-J

[Aluminum Donkey]

5 hours ago, Art-J said:

I recall 500 error is triggered by your PC time not being set correctly. Maybe it got messed up this night? Check if both BIOS and Windows time match each other.

 

Woohoo! I poked around with changing the time zone and now it works again!

Oh man, 2.8 Open Beta is just too gorgeous with my new RTX 3070. Runs nice and fast with ALL details cranked up! No stutters, no BS. Sheer badassery!

I have yet to try a heavier mission with a lot going on, but I bet it will rock

AD

[LucShep]

Nice, congrats! 

[Nazgûl]

On 1/1/2023 at 12:44 PM, Aluminum Donkey said:

Woohoo! I poked around with changing the time zone and now it works again!

Oh man, 2.8 Open Beta is just too gorgeous with my new RTX 3070. Runs nice and fast with ALL details cranked up! No stutters, no BS. Sheer badassery!

I have yet to try a heavier mission with a lot going on, but I bet it will rock

AD

Hey dude

I'm in a situation where I think you can help me.

I'm building a new PC:

 

-i7 12700k

-Gigab B660M Aorus Pro

-64Gb 3200, DDR4, CL16 Kingst Fury Beast

-2TB Kingston Renegade m.2 7300/7000

-VGA 4070 Asus OC

...with the intention of playing at 2560x1440p, 32".

 

However, the opportunity arose to buy a used PC in the following configuration:

 

-i7 11700

-Asus TUF Gaming z590

-32Gb DDR4, 3200, D60, XPG

-512Gb Adata XPG Spectrix m.2 3500/2400

........and VGA Asus TUF Gaming 3070 V2 OC.

 

This used PC (5 months of use) will be 26% cheaper than the new PC I mentioned.

What is your suggestion?

Can I play 60fps+ at 32" 2560*1440p in multiplayer with the PC used (RTX 3070) or will I have to downgrade to FullHD 1920*1080p?

I'm reviving this post and asking you  because I'd like to save 26% kkkkk, and it's been several months since you bought the 3070. Now you should have an even more solid opinion.

 

Hugs man. Thanks

Edited October 20, 2023 by Nazgûl

[LucShep]

My opinion only but, the savings with the cheaper one are not worth it.
The more expensive build is worth the premium, for sure - considerably faster CPU and GPU, double the memory, and 4x storage on NVME.
You'll notice that difference in 2560x1440.

[kksnowbear]

Broadly and generally, I'd agree with LucShep...however, that said, you've made things a little quirky by specifying the cost difference in percentage vs currency.

For example:

Used system costs 50000 BRL; new system therefore is 67,500 BRL: Both these are too expensive; look elsewhere   (Yes, I realize this is absurd, I'm trying to make a point)

Other extreme:  Used system 1000 BRL, thus new = 1351.  Buy the new one (this is also intentionally ridiculous to illustrate a point).

Zeroing in a bit:  Used system 6500BRL, new = 8785.  Starts to get very tricky to see a "clear winner".  That might be a good value (1750USD) for the new system, but what if it's simply beyond what you can spend?  1300USD is also a good price for the used machine (assuming good condition, whether there's any warranty, whether it's a seller you know and trust etc).

TBH it would yield a more meaningful and accurate response if you specified cost (even if in BRL) than to just say one is x% more/less than the other.

Once again, these are only examples I've concocted specifically to illustrate the point.  It is often very difficult to judge things like this in other countries, because although the currency conversion is straightforward, the local economy is another matter.  Often, specific things (like computers) can be grossly out of proportion in cost even compared to other things in the same country.   A loaf of bread may be roughly comparable in cost to the USA (with currency conversion), but computers could be many times as much, and that difference must be considered.

Is there some particular reason you use % difference as opposed to actual costs?  It's your prerogative, of course - but that does make it harder to give a "good" answer.

 

Edited October 20, 2023 by kksnowbear

[Nazgûl]

2 hours ago, kksnowbear said:

Broadly and generally, I'd agree with LucShep...however, that said, you've made things a little quirky by specifying the cost difference in percentage vs currency.

For example:

Used system costs 50000 BRL; new system therefore is 67,500 BRL: Both these are too expensive; look elsewhere   (Yes, I realize this is absurd, I'm trying to make a point)

Other extreme:  Used system 1000 BRL, thus new = 1351.  Buy the new one (this is also intentionally ridiculous to illustrate a point).

Zeroing in a bit:  Used system 6500BRL, new = 8785.  Starts to get very tricky to see a "clear winner".  That might be a good value (1750USD) for the new system, but what if it's simply beyond what you can spend?  1300USD is also a good price for the used machine (assuming good condition, whether there's any warranty, whether it's a seller you know and trust etc).

TBH it would yield a more meaningful and accurate response if you specified cost (even if in BRL) than to just say one is x% more/less than the other.

Once again, these are only examples I've concocted specifically to illustrate the point.  It is often very difficult to judge things like this in other countries, because although the currency conversion is straightforward, the local economy is another matter.  Often, specific things (like computers) can be grossly out of proportion in cost even compared to other things in the same country.   A loaf of bread may be roughly comparable in cost to the USA (with currency conversion), but computers could be many times as much, and that difference must be considered.

Is there some particular reason you use % difference as opposed to actual costs?  It's your prerogative, of course - but that does make it harder to give a "good" answer.

 

 

Whats up man

I used percentage because % gives a better idea of size. However, as you exemplified, the percentage sometimes does not represent the situation well, because, for example, a 100% increase on nothing is still nothing, but 1% of a lot can be a lot.

The values I am quoting are:
BRL 7,500.00 (used PC)
BRL 10,200.00 (new)

Thanks

[kksnowbear]

So ~1500 USD for the used machine vs ~2000 for the new one. (sorry, I convert so that I am more familiar with amounts/values)

I'd say it's probably a better deal overall to go with the new unit - I am assuming it's within your budget.  If you can afford the difference in cost, the new machine is (as LucShep said) a good deal more capable in terms of CPU, GPU, RAM and storage...

...And it's new, which I assume means full warranty and at least some support.

BTW I am also assuming there's no room at all for negotiating either cost.  Since it's sort of a 'close race', that could make a difference.  If, for example, the used system's seller was willing to go down to 1300 (BRL 6500) then it would make the decision all the more difficult.

But, at the prices you give, I'd go for the new one.

HTH - best of luck to you.

 

[BitMaster]

Paying some money for anything that doesn’t fulfill the desired cause is always a loss, sometimes a total loss if you can’t fix it afterwards.

Contrary, paying some 25ish% more money but get what you need is the better deal.

Regardless of country and currency, this is globally true.

Edited October 20, 2023 by BitMaster

[kksnowbear]

10 minutes ago, BitMaster said:

Paying some money for anything that doesn’t fulfill the desired cause is always a loss, sometimes a total loss if you can’t fix it afterwards.

Contrary, paying some 25ish% more money but get what you need is the better deal.

Regardless of country and currency, this is globally true.

 

Fair enough - but let's not automatically equate buying used equipment with "always a loss".

I sell a lot of used stuff, and everything is warranted.  After 40+ years, the unsatisfied claims count is still 0.  None.  Nada. Zip. Zilch...

If you buy from the right seller, it will fulfill the "desired cause" or you'll get 100% of your money back - you lose nothing.

You do not automatically have to pay more to get value.  In fact, I pride myself on exactly the opposite: Saving clients money while delivering comparable performance.

Edited October 20, 2023 by kksnowbear

[BitMaster]

No no, I did not refer to new or used, my POV is independent from this. 

If you buy something too small for your needs just to save some 20-30% you might end up buying something that doesn't work for the intended purpose.

 

Sometimes you can fix it like selling the "wrong" GPU and get a "right" one but if the CPU is too old, you may end up buying a new CPU that also needs a new mobo, which may force you to buy new RAM as well, ..then it quickly becomes a bad deal to have paid less and get the cheaper option that won't deliver.

It's not a new wisdom, I bet we all have made that mistake a few times in our lives with this or that purchase, ending up buying again.

 

It pays to invest in research before you open the wallet.

Edited October 20, 2023 by BitMaster

[kksnowbear]

I do genuinely appreciate your making the distinction    I hope you can see that, in the context of the choice between new/used as stated, it seemed you favored the more expensive option as a means to avoid being dissatisfied.

My perspective is that being satisfied doesn't necessarily require spending more, and spending more doesn't necessarily guarantee being satisfied

[Nazgûl]

Today I feel inclined to buy a new PC.

Reading, researching more and seeing your suggestions, I think it will be the best option for my goal, which is to play on a 31.5" monitor at 2560*1440p.

Furthermore, you are helping me a lot. Thanks