Opinion wanted - Upgrade CPU or GPU for better VR performance?

[AlpineGTA]

I fly exclusively in VR, currently using a Reverb G2 at 60 Hz with an i5-11600K and AMD 6900XT. I'm running DCS Open Beta MT, set so that I can achieve a steady 60fps without using motion reprojection.

I would like to upgrade my PC so that I can maintain 60fps but be able to turn up some DCS settings, or perhaps, maintain my current settings but run at 90fps.

So my question is: Keep my 6900XT and change my CPU to a Ryzen 7 5800X3D, or keep the i5-11600K and switch the 6900XT for an RTX 4080?

Which would give the biggest performance gain? The 5800X3D or the RTX 4080?

The 5800X3D would obviously be the least expensive option, even taking into account that a new motherboard would be required. I'm leaning towards the CPU option because I'm thinking that would be the most cost effective and I'm loath to spend that much on a GPU, but I'm curious what kind of gains, if any it would give.

Thanks in advance for any opinion.

[LucShep]

Absolutely, without any doubts, go for the GPU upgrade. 
Nvidia RTX4080 over AMD RX6900XT will be indefinitely more powerful of an upgrade, than the 5800X3D would ever be over your i5 11600K.

The simple fact that you're jumping onto an Nvidia GPU driver based system alone (versus AMD) will make a noticeable difference (for the better) specifically with DCS and VR.
The fact that the RTX4080 is much, much faster than the RX6900XT will make that even more (much more!) noticeable.

Unless you have money to burn, and at this point, I would not invest in a dead platform, like the 5800X3D (AM4 socket) is. Perhaps not even the new 7800X3D (AM5 socket), considering that you have an overclockable 11th gen "K" processor.

That i5 11600K of yours is no slouch, at all. It's still a great CPU. If you haven't already, make use of it as the product that it is - it's overclockable!  IT'S FREE!

Presuming that you have a Z590 motherboard and any decent cooler(?), overclocking that i5 11600K to an "all-core overclock" (so with Turbo disabled) to make all cores work at once to a determined clock (say, 4.9 GHz at 1.3v), close to what the single/double thread Turbo clock would do, can be a more effective way of extracting performance from it, regardless of use case. At no cost. With temps and voltages in check. Plenty tutorials on the internet if in doubt.

On a side note, and pardon the rant, I've lost count of posts in these last three or four years, where I see people buy "K" Intel CPUs, only to see them doing a costly upgrade to a newer platform all over again just two years later (Intel or AMD), without even having tried an overclock in that CPU they already had in the first place(?!?)...  
I find it puzzling, to say the least!

Will it run hotter and consume more power? Yes, but not much more than before if you don't go extreme.
Will it break or degrade it after a few months? No, not even over a decade after, if you don't go extreme.
It's totally worth it IMHO.
Overclocking an Intel "K" processor can be something that may allow an even more satisfying and prolongued use of it, untill its user finally decides to upgrade to a newer platform - maybe not even to the current new CPUs, but the following ones in the future (as of today, unreleased Intel "K" 14th gen and AM5 CPUs, etc).

Edited April 18, 2023 by LucShep

[Kageseigi]

1 hour ago, LucShep said:

The simple fact that you're jumping onto an Nvidia GPU driver based system alone (versus AMD) will make a noticeable difference (for the better) specifically with DCS and VR.

Interesting. I'm trying to learn what technology DCS likes the most. What does it like about Nvidia over AMD?

[peanuts0441]

Use a tool like MSI afterburner + RivaTuner Statistics server to monitor your GPU and CPU usage in game, whichever component is the bottleneck, upgrade that

For VR, GPU matters most of the time, and GPU VRAM

But if you upgrade to a 4080 the i5-11600K will become a bottleneck

If you upgrade your CPU your current GPU will hinder the CPU and the performance gain wont be that much in DCS

Honestly speaking you'd have to upgrade both to see a reasonable difference

Also DCS has no GPU preference, just get the one with better specs

[Sr.]

7 hours ago, AlpineGTA said:

I fly exclusively in VR, currently using a Reverb G2 at 60 Hz with an i5-11600K and AMD 6900XT. I'm running DCS Open Beta MT, set so that I can achieve a steady 60fps without using motion reprojection.

I would like to upgrade my PC so that I can maintain 60fps but be able to turn up some DCS settings, or perhaps, maintain my current settings but run at 90fps.

So my question is: Keep my 6900XT and change my CPU to a Ryzen 7 5800X3D, or keep the i5-11600K and switch the 6900XT for an RTX 4080?

Which would give the biggest performance gain? The 5800X3D or the RTX 4080?

The 5800X3D would obviously be the least expensive option, even taking into account that a new motherboard would be required. I'm leaning towards the CPU option because I'm thinking that would be the most cost effective and I'm loath to spend that much on a GPU, but I'm curious what kind of gains, if any it would give.

Thanks in advance for any opinion.

I recently switched from the RX6900XT to the RTX 4080 (also threw in the 5800X3D since I was already running an AM4 board and the 5600X).

As much as I liked the 6900XT, the RTX 4080 was a great improvement. Prior to, I could run at 80-85% in OpenXR Tools for WMR, CAS in OXR toolkit, mostly high in DCS options (no MSAA), terrain shadows usually off, clouds standard while running the G2 at 60Hz. 0 stutter.

Now I run 100%, still CAS, same settings in DCS options except now I can pull off 2xMSAA, terrain shadows ON and high clouds with 0 stutter... again at 60Hz. With the added benefit of now being able to use fixed foveated rendering. 

 

Also worth mentioning: The particular RTX 4080 I have runs VERY cool, even with a slight OC. My previous ASRock 6900XT would easily hit close to 90* unless I removed the case side panel. It's also slightly smaller than most of the 4080 variants, and none of the RGB BS.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Sr.

[AlpineGTA]

All good solid answers. It seems the GPU would be the better option to upgrade first. I've been happy with my 6900XT, I've always thought the AMD GPUs better value, but I've read a lot of reports that the 7900XTX GPUs aren't performing very well in VR relative to the 4080, so that's why I'm considering the switch to Nvidia. I'm still loath to spend $1200 on a GPU though. I shall have to go and ponder it. Thanks for all the replies.

[LucShep]

On 4/18/2023 at 4:23 AM, AlpineGTA said:

It seems the GPU would be the better option to upgrade first. I've been happy with my 6900XT, I've always thought the AMD GPUs better value, but I've read a lot of reports that the 7900XTX GPUs aren't performing very well in VR relative to the 4080, so that's why I'm considering the switch to Nvidia. I'm still loath to spend $1200 on a GPU though. I shall have to go and ponder it. Thanks for all the replies.

Yes, the GPU prices are still crazy. I'd also be unsure about spending my hard earned (I decided on a used GPU and got lucky).
RX7900XTX and VR....  I'd say going through all the pages on this topic at AMD forums, conclusions seem pretty biased towards a "NOPE": 
https://community.amd.com/t5/graphics/7900xtx-low-performance-in-steamvr-and-vr-in-general/m-p/567391/

 

On 4/18/2023 at 2:12 AM, Kageseigi said:

Interesting. I'm trying to learn what technology DCS likes the most. What does it like about Nvidia over AMD?

When it comes to graphics-cards, this game is incredibly biased towards Nvidia.
Going by my own experience, and across the forums from other users experiences, that much is certain.

For DCS, given a "AMD vs Nvidia" with two direct competitors of same segment (similar general performance), AMD is always a bit slower and more problematic at higher resolutions (VR and 4K). Seen it with RX5700XT versus RTX2070, with the RX6800XT vs RTX3080, with the RX6900XT vs RTX3090, and lately with the RX7900XTX vs RTX4080.

I'd blame AMD drivers, but it could be simple as DCS devs mostly using Nvidia (maybe both things!).
Regardless, Nvidia is always the better solution here.
Yes prices are outrageous, and the Nvidia tax is stupid. But peace of mind and satisfaction have its cost, it seems.

Edited April 19, 2023 by LucShep