Any "old CPU+new GPU" users that can share their MT experience?

[sirrah]

I'm really curious if the new MT allows us to use older CPU's in combination with a high end GPU.

I mean, of course it's possible, but for sure MT pushed away CPU bottlenecking (is 'bottlenecking' even a word? ).

To reflect ro my own system: i7-8700k | gtx 1080ti

Would it make sense to only upgrade my gpu to a, let's say, rtx 4070ti?

 

Anyone out there with such a pc, that can share his/her experience with DCS MT?

[kksnowbear]

At the risk of being lazy, please review my comments pasted in from a different thread on this very sub-forum (below).

I think your situation is very similar - but you don't mention what resolution you run.  It matters, a lot.  The 1080Ti is more than enough for 1080p and is reasonable (if slightly overmatched) to the 8700k.  Obviously pairing a 4070Ti with that same CPU is going to create a more 'imbalanced' system than you already have, being that the 4070Ti is far more capable than a 1080Ti.

Of course it will still work, and of course you will get better performance than with the 1080ti.  However a 4070Ti is going to be overmatched to a 8700k, and will thus not perform at it's best in such a pairing.  This is all the more true if you also run at 1080p, and is particularly true of a sim like DCS which seems to have issues with CPU utilization to begin (though the latter appears to be somewhat improved upon with the recent "MT Patch").

That said, I think even with the MT patch, a 4070Ti is going to be mismatched to a 8700k.  It seems to me people are grossly overestimating exactly how much this MT patch is actually capable of.

Essentially what you'd be doing is paying a lot more than the performance increase you're going to see will be worth.

For some reason - as below, perhaps misguided - people seem to think that you can just continually add more and more powerful GPUs and the performance increase (usually described as "more FPS") will be in direct proportion to cost.  This simply isn't true...the more mismatched the CPU and GPU are, the more one of the two is going to limit the other.

Kindly keep in mind the foregoing, in its entirety, is strictly IMO (even though it's based on over four decades of professional experience, years of formal training, and first-hand day-to-day commissioned work with 15-20 gaming systems every year for many years now - including many for people here and on the other major flight sim forums, in addition to those done for friends and family).

4 hours ago, kksnowbear said:

Have to know more to be certain, but I'd be willing to bet your GPU is so underutilized because it's being 'starved' to death by the CPU.

The 3060Ti, while not 'top-of-the-line', is a very capable card.  In a (perhaps misguided) effort to get "more FPS" people often upgrade GPUs way beyond what a CPU is capable of keeping up with.  It's not as simple as putting in a better GPU to increase FPS...the CPU/GPU act as a pair, and need to be 'matched'.  I believe it's likely that a 7700 is fairly 'overmatched' by a 3060Ti.

The CPU is probably working his rear end off, and still far from able to 'feed' data fast enough to the GPU...so the 3060Ti is sitting there bored.

It sounds like what a lot of people refer to as CPU "bottlenecked" (though I really dislike that term because it implies other things that also aren't really accurate).  I prefer 'mismatched' because I think it more accurately describes what's really taking place.

Mind you, that's a guess and it really could be way off, as it depends a lot on what else is going on with the system as a whole...but, assuming everything else is in reasonable order, I'd say your CPU and GPU are pretty horribly mismatched

On the original question:  IMHO once you get up into the higher-end 30 series GPUs or beyond, the gain in performance at 1080p starts to diminish.  Reviews at the time of the 30-series debut almost universally noted this...and concluded that newer GPUs really perform their best at higher resolutions.

So that would all suggest you'd be better going 1440p.

[sirrah]

Thank you for the extended answer!

I didn't mention it indeed, but I'm flying in VR (HP Reverb G1). Full specs in my signature.

Although I admit I'm a layman, I'm very much under the impression that my pc is GPU limited at the moment. The fact that I didn't notice any difference with MT, amplified that impression.

So, considering the above, what do you think?

 

 

With a busy life currently, and not enough time at hand for DCS to justify the expenses of a full pc upgrade, I'm considering a second hand GPU, to make DCS more enjoyable again.

Question is though, what GPU will still "match" with my 8700k?

I'm at the point now where I seem to have to lower PD (I have pretty much all other settings already at low now). Lowering PD is kinda a limit for me, as it will directly influence cockpit readability.

(Once life eases up on me, I can start and think about a full pc upgrade)

 

Edit:

Oh and going pancake is not an option for me. In that case I'll probably take a DCS break until I can properly upgrade

 

Edited March 12, 2023 by sirrah

[kksnowbear]

Ah...well that does make a difference then...

With (very) limited knowledge of VR and zero experience lol I do understand it is effectively a huge jump in resolution.  So that's definitely a factor.  The more your resolution goes up, the more is demanded of the GPU, and after a certain point the GPU becomes a limiting factor.  This may well be the case with VR and a 1080Ti, but (as with most things computer) 'it depends'.  Different VR headsets have different resolutions, and (I think) settings with VR become a lot more crucial.  A 1080Ti will do OK up to even 4k, but VR is a different ball 'o beans, as I'm sure you already know.  I'm thinking this accounts for the "GPU limited" observation with the 1080Ti.

So I suppose one could argue that a 4070Ti isn't a bad idea for that kind of demand.  But that GPU is still overmatched (in a general sense) to the 8700k CPU, IMHO.  Meaning: Add the 4070Ti to keep up with VR requirements, but I'd be concerned that even with the MT patch, the 8700 might leave a bit to be desired. 

In your case, the best advice would seem to be get a GPU as good as you can afford (since you'll need it anyhow, based on your expressed commitment to VR).  If it's mismatched with the 8700k, so be it - again, given your commitment to VR, it could be that you'd need a better CPU anyway, in which case you can (and likely will) upgrade that later.  I don't think it will be "unplayable" in the meantime, though that's often subjective itself.

The 8700k isn't slouchy by any means (my son uses an 8086k, very similar)...just that, as circumstances demand more, well...everything's got to increase in performance to keep up.  And, of course, when you add a much more powerful component at one point, then the 'weakest link' moves/becomes apparent somewhere else.

Best of luck

[TheFreshPrince]

You can put your specs in here to see what graphics card is optimal for your setup: https://pc-builds.com/bottleneck-calculator

[kksnowbear]

On 3/13/2023 at 7:21 AM, TheFreshPrince said:

You can put your specs in here to see what graphics card is optimal for your setup: https://pc-builds.com/bottleneck-calculator

Yeah, that's something I've looked at/used myself - but I often hesitate to give blanket recommendations for sites like that, for various reasons.  One big reason is that some people just blindly accept what the site says without actually thinking about other factors that are part of the question.

I've seen instances where these sites return results that are absolutely wrong, and someone who just wants a "TL/DR" answer isn't going to know that it's wrong, or put any effort into understanding why.

Specifically, that site has you choose the type workload (which is a good thing) but only gives you a very limited set of choices: CPU heavy, GPU heavy, or "General".  While it's good to have some range of choice, it's not going to take details into account which matter, such as the exact game (it varies, a lot) and VR (it accounts for higher resolution but not for other differences related to VR).  It also appears the list of resolutions is limited.

As with all these online tools, it requires a huge grain of salt approach.  I know that, and I use that approach - but while anyone can follow a link, a three-field automated 'tool' (like that bottleneck website) just cannot replace experience, training, and good old-fashioned study 'legwork'.

Another example is the numerous power supply calculators that are online.  They work (to an extent) but they're pretty much doing some basic math to arrive at a conclusion, which doesn't consider a number of other factors that a trained and experienced professional will take into account.  They can be downright wrong, and in many cases are driven by marketing (i.e. what a company wants to sell) instead of prudent expertise and advice.  People buy 1200W power supplies without having any idea what they're doing; they spend way too much for something that isn't really necessary and/or fail to take into account some things that *are* a good idea.

Anyhow, just be careful - and remember the best thing is *always* to consult an actual trained and experienced professional with demonstrated, verifiable credentials.

Edited March 14, 2023 by kksnowbear

[TheFreshPrince]

I absolutely agree, some of the results from that calculator are strange. Like if you put in a really high resolution, you will need an extremely good graphics card (4070ti+) for something like the 8700k to not have a bottleneck. But I don't think the 8700k would be good enough for a 4070ti+. So yes, take it with a grain of salt. But it's a start at least. For example, you can take the 4K resolution to see what would be the absolutely minimum of a graphics card for this processor. VR then needs something better than that so you know where to start looking.

[howard]

Didn't do a lot of testing. For me I noticed 20 to 30 fps more with an old 6600K with a 3070ti at 2560x1400...approx. 85 to 115-125 fps. hth

[_Hoss]

Can we download a stress test video anywhere to test MT and Non-MT.exe?  I've got both on the desktop and wanted to see if it did make a difference with the i7-8700k and 3800ti. DCS runs exceptionally well on this setup, and IL2 as well.

 

Cheers

[72westy]

I'll wait until it moves from beta then report my findings on my set up (see signature for specs).