NVIDIA 5 Series cards - Get your wallets ready boys and girls....

[LucShep]

2 hours ago, Lange_666 said:

Current local retail prices for a 4090 here are between 2249 € and 2799 € (depending on the brand and card with a bit of an OC and tad better cooling), a lot higher than the initial MSRP for a 4090 (they moved up from 1899 € to 2300 € two weeks prior to Black Friday and haven't come down since).
So if prices are 20-30% up from those this means 2700 - 2930 € to 3360 - 3640 € for a 5090 in the shop if I take the current local 4090 prices into consideration.

Another thing I have a bit of problem with is the gap between the 5090 and 5080 where the 5080 only has 16GB VRAM and a 960 GB/sec bandwidth where the 5090 has 32GB VRAM and a 1792 GB/sec bandwidth. The 12GB VRAM on my 3080Ti easily gets filled up on more demanding maps so 16GB leaves again no headroom makes me not really interested in anything lower than a 5090. But then the price...

Yes prices will reflect that again.
Do not expect the RTX5090 in coming months selling for same price that the RTX4090 models are now.
I wouldn't be suprised seeing the regular RTX5090 prices being 3000,00€ and over.

Among other things, 32GB of GDDR7 on a faster RTX5090 would never be made to same price of the 24GB GDDR6X (50% increase of capacity, and faster VRAM).

I think same story that happened with the RTX3090 over two years ago (when the 4000 series gone out) will happen again with the RTX 4090.
Second hand and refurbished RTX4090 models will still be highly sought and won't see prices decreasing any time soon.

It's a shame that ED and 3rd parties are so stubborn on keeping with such overkill (ludicrous, really) sizes and formats on textures of every module.
Noone should ever need more than 16GB of VRAM today, but alas.  Otherwise, an RTX5080 should be all that anyone needs for DCS, even in VR.
 

Edited January 7 by LucShep

[Aapje]

@scommander2

Nvidia pretends that bigger number = faster, but the reality is that with frame generation, the extra FPS doesn't improve the input lag, like what happens with non-generated FPS increases.

And you get artifacts.

So in reality, 90 FPS without frame generation is better than 90 FPS with frame generation. But Nvidia likes to pretend that these downsides don't exist, so they can lie to you that a 5070 is as fast as a 4090 (it's not at all).

@Lange_666

That's not really a good comparison, since the 4090's were going out of stock at the end, so the remaining stock was very much overpriced. You can expect MSRP + VAT as the lowest price once supply matches up to demand, or if you are able to get the Nvidia model.

2000 dollar to euros plus 20% VAT is 2313 euro. Of course, VAT differs per country.

The top model is also in demand by AI people, though, so we may not see supply catch up to demand for a while.

You can also wait for the 5080 Ti, as I predict that we'll see a 24 GB 5080 Ti for $1500.

[scommander2]

A fun video about RTX, enjoy!!

 

[Panzerlang]

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

I’m normally skeptical about features like this. But I find Frame Generation to work extremely well in some games. The older version wasn’t so great and introduced artifacts. Maybe it’s an improvement to the games themselves or an update to DLSS, but whatever the reason it seems to work very nicely now. So much so that I don’t feel the need for a 5090

Frame Generation is available for 40-series GPUs?

Ok, DLSS 4.0. So DCS will have to be updated I guess.

NVIDIA DLSS 4 Introduces Multi Frame Generation & Enhancements For All DLSS Technologies | GeForce News | NVIDIA

[Panzerlang]

DLSS 3.0 Frame Generation is not supported in DCS.

[SharpeXB]

10 minutes ago, Panzerlang said:

Frame Generation is available for 40-series GPUs?

Yes

1 minute ago, Panzerlang said:

DLSS 3.0 Frame Generation is not supported in DCS.

Correct. From the FAQ

“Because DCS 2.9 is a DirectX 11 title and DLSS 3.0 Frame Generation requires DirectX 12, it is not possible at this time.”

[Panzerlang]

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yes

Correct. From the FAQ

“Because DCS 2.9 is a DirectX 11 title and DLSS 3.0 Frame Generation requires DirectX 12, it is not possible at this time.”

Do we have any explanation why DCS isn't DX12?

Is potentially better performance being left on the table?

Ok.

"Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) currently utilizes DirectX 11 as its graphics API. Instead of transitioning to DirectX 12, Eagle Dynamics, the developer of DCS, has chosen to implement the Vulkan API.

Reasons for Choosing Vulkan over DirectX 12:

1. Cross-Platform Compatibility: Vulkan is a cross-platform API, enabling potential support beyond Windows, whereas DirectX 12 is exclusive to Windows.

2. Performance Enhancements: Vulkan offers low-level access to the GPU, similar to DirectX 12, allowing for improved performance and better utilization of modern hardware.

3. Development Flexibility: Implementing Vulkan can provide developers with more control over rendering processes, facilitating optimizations tailored to DCS's specific needs.

Eagle Dynamics has been actively working on integrating Vulkan into DCS. In their "2023 & Beyond" newsletter, they mentioned that the introduction of their render graph would improve DCS's efficiency and deliver optimal performance with modern graphics APIs such as Vulkan."

Puh. CPU on its knees, sucking up the micro-stutter. Lol.

However, something tells me DX12 would be no better. But I guess we won't be getting multi-frame generation then. So, 5090 with maybe an extra 20% grunt over the 4090, for what, $3000 after all the rip-offs go into effect? I think I might pass.

Edited January 7 by Panzerlang

[LucShep]

5 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

Frame Generation is available for 40-series GPUs?

Ok, DLSS 4.0. So DCS will have to be updated I guess.

NVIDIA DLSS 4 Introduces Multi Frame Generation & Enhancements For All DLSS Technologies | GeForce News | NVIDIA

5 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

Do we have any explanation why DCS isn't DX12?

Is potentially better performance being left on the table?

Ok.

Puh. CPU on its knees, sucking up the micro-stutter. Lol.

However, something tells me DX12 would be no better. But I guess we won't be getting multi-frame generation then. So, 5090 with maybe an extra 20% grunt over the 4090, for what, $3000 after all the rip-offs go into effect? I think I might pass.

Yep, it's more about being "careful with what you wish". The pretty numbers in the corner of the screen get higher, sure, but the user experience does not.
Frame Generation adds input latency, as well as artifacts being introduced by the fake frames. And if in conjunction with DLSS Upscalling, then it all gets a whole lot(!) worse.
Especially for VR users these AI techniques are meaningless and are -in my experience- horrible when used there.

There's a growing sense of disillusionment with these new announced GPUs, people are now starting to get the problem with"where we are going" with these AI solutions.

But then, as soon as the first RTX gen of Nvidia GPUs was announced in 2018 (RTX2000 series), we knew it'd come down to this at some point, exactly how we feared back then.
We've seen ludicrous price increases on every new gen of GPUs since then, which now slowly become less and less developed for raw performance (Rasterization). Instead, focus now goes onto these Upscalling and Interpolation AI technics, and each new iteration gets blocked on previous gen GPUs, to generate sales of the newest models.

The problem is, FG and DLSS aren't a proper solution for most cases, raw power and proper optimization of games is.
But game devs now became lazy and use this AI tech as a crutch.  So here we go on a new vicious loop, which became another business exploitation by corpos...
 

Edited January 8 by LucShep

[Panzerlang]

1 hour ago, LucShep said:

Yep, it's more about being "careful with what you wish". The pretty numbers in the corner of the screen get higher, sure, but the user experience does not.
Frame Generation adds a lot of latency, as well as artifacts being introduced by the fake frames. And if in conjunction with DLSS Upscalling, then it all gets a whole lot(!) worse.
Especially for VR users these AI techniques are meaningless and are -in my experience- horrible when used there.

There's a growing sense of disillusionment with these new announced GPUs, people are now starting to get the problem with"where we are going" with these AI solutions.

But then, as soon as the first RTX gen of Nvidia GPUs was announced in 2018 (RTX2000 series), we knew it'd come down to this at some point, exactly how we feared back then.
We've seen ludicrous price increases on every new gen of GPUs since then, which now slowly become less and less developed for raw performance (Rasterization). Instead, focus now goes onto these Upscalling and Interpolation AI technics, and each new iteration gets blocked on previous gen GPUs, to generate sales of the newest models.

The problem is, FG and DLSS aren't a proper solution for most cases, raw power and proper optimization of games is.
But game devs now became lazy and use this AI tech as a crutch.  So here we go on a new vicious loop, which became another business exploitation by corpos...
 

Yeah. I'm guessing/assuming all those extra fake frames still have to go through the CPU in some way. 

Absolutely no point at all in getting a 5090 for VR DCS as far as I can see. For the Super? No, same condition applies. I'm getting it for the 135-degree FOV (and will then return it if/when that turns out to be yet another lie). I'll downscale it to suit my GPU and CPU.

[LucShep]

1 hour ago, Panzerlang said:

Yeah. I'm guessing/assuming all those extra fake frames still have to go through the CPU in some way. 

Actually, it really doesn't create troubles there.
Both the Upscalling and Frame Generation tech of Nvidia does work very good resources wise, it's been a total success in that regard. 

The problem is in the execution, because it's all about the AI working on the background predicting what it doesn't know - hence all the artifacts that can only be mitigated so far.
Doesn't matter how good the tech will ever be, the AI can not predict the future, like where the user is moving and what he/she is doing, so the tech is all about "best guess estimation" magic trick work.

The "Fake Frames" of Frame Generation are exactly that.
It interpolates the image just like the "soap opera" effect that you can turn on in your TV, or that some broadcasting channels use. It's really just that in a more elaborate AI complex way.
So, let's say that this new Multi-Frame Generation of RTX5000 is 4x the performance.... you'll get an image motion "soap-opera effect" that is actually working four times slower in the background, because three of the four frames are "guess estimated", not real frames (just one is).
As in, imagine the game at 120FPS, but the main player object in game (aircraft / car / persona, etc) always feels like 30FPS (this is why it always feels strange, what you see and what you feel differs). And that's what they meant in the presentation with "RTX5070 as fast as RTX4090" (LOL) when in reality it isn't, at all.

Same thing can be said for DLSS, it lowers the resolution and then re-upscales it (a-la DLDSR) through AI algorithm.
And hence the very soft look in its final result, for which you always need to add a bit of sharpness (which then tends to add a bit of shimmering and aliasing, as side-effect). Some users resort to the DLSS-Tweaks tool, in an atempt to counter its issues.
This one is actually good for very high resolutions, and it'll surely have a place once 4K 240FPS and 8K 120FPS become the norm (we'll get there in coming years), but then we're talking 2D monitors, not VR where DLSS usually looks like vaseline has been plastered on your lenses.

None of these solutions work great for VR, because every little flaw of anything rendering related is hyper-magnified in VR, and so raw power is absolutely necessary.
...which then has to do with your next point:

1 hour ago, Panzerlang said:

Absolutely no point at all in getting a 5090 for VR DCS as far as I can see. For the Super? No, same condition applies. I'm getting it for the 135-degree FOV (and will then return it if/when that turns out to be yet another lie). I'll downscale it to suit my GPU and CPU.

If you have an RTX4090 then, no, I don't think the upgrade to the RTX5090 makes sense (unless you've got money to burn and "have to have the bestest", that is).
But if you come from, say, an RTX3080 or 2080Ti (and alikes), and DCS VR is your main hobby thing, then it starts to make sense - if you have the budget.

The point is, DCS is an odd beast in the world of gaming. It's probably the worst and most demanding sim/gaming title regarding VRAM consumption and inconsistent heavy rendering, with the ocasional stuttering and hitching always creeping in - always amplified in VR.
Especially in VR, with the latest headsets, you need as much raw power (core and mem clocks, speed and bandwidth) and VRAM (mem capacity) to counter the issues as best as possible, and this is available at its most on the RTX X090 GPUs only. 

I shiver just imagining if ED decides to adopt Ray-Tracing and Path-Tracing....  LOL

Edited January 8 by LucShep

[Panzerlang]

I'm wondering if there'll be significantly extra goodies for HAGS, though my estimation of its value is seen through a fog of dumbwittery. It seems to me the CPU has become a major bottleneck in DCS and more money spent on GPUs is pretty much wall-decoration spaffage.

[LucShep]

18 minutes ago, Panzerlang said:

I'm wondering if there'll be significantly extra goodies for HAGS, though my estimation of its value is seen through a fog of dumbwittery. It seems to me the CPU has become a major bottleneck in DCS and more money spent on GPUs is pretty much wall-decoration spaffage.

HAGS is recommended only if your CPU is considerably weaker then your GPU, otherwise is always best left OFF, to avoid stuttering/hitching in games.

One of the problems with DCS has to do with its own coding.
Even with the addition of Multi-Threading you still get somewhat CPU limited, even with the fastest processors that you throw at it.

Notice this in-game, when you look at the side scenery from inside the cockpit.... everything inside it and in front looks quite smooth, but glancing outside at your 9 or 3 o'clock you still always get that rhythmic stutter. Nothing I've atempted solved it so far (only going back to the much older 2.56 version did, oddly enough).

Maybe when Vulkan gets out, things will improve considerably, as we've wished for many years now. But then I'm not holding my breath for that...

Edited January 8 by LucShep

[Panzerlang]

11 minutes ago, LucShep said:

HAGS is recommended only if your CPU is considerably weaker then your GPU, otherwise is always best left OFF, to avoid stuttering/hitching in games.

One of the problems with DCS has to do with its own coding.
Even with the addition of Multi-Threading you still get somewhat CPU limited, even with the fastest processors that you throw at it.

Notice this when you look at the side scenery when in the cockpit.... everything inside it and in front looks quite smooth, but glancing outside at your 9 or 3 o'clock you still always get that rhythmic stutter. Nothing I've atempted solved it so far (only going back to the much older 2.56 version did, oddly enough).

Maybe when Vulkan gets out, things will improve considerably, as we've wished for many years now. But then I'm not holding my breath for that...
 

My 13900k is significantly weaker than my 4090, according to DCS. Yeah, see my thread 'Hunting for the stutter-free VR experience'.

[LucShep]

21 minutes ago, Panzerlang said:

My 13900k is significantly weaker than my 4090, according to DCS. Yeah, see my thread 'Hunting for the stutter-free VR experience'.

Yeah, an i9 13900K is more processor than it should be required, even for an RTX4090.  But then "this is DCS" said Sparta-like as in the 300 movie.  LOL

I'd still keep HAGS set at OFF in there (and FWIW, see thread here).

PS: Off-topic, and this will sound disruptive or like I'm selling something but, if DCS VR is getting on your nerves and got the disc space, have a go with DCS 2.56 (see my sig).
Nothing to lose with it other than time.
 

Edited January 8 by LucShep

[Panzerlang]

2 hours ago, LucShep said:

Yeah, an i9 13900K is more processor than it should be required, even for an RTX4090.  But then "this is DCS" said Sparta-like as in the 300 movie.  LOL

I'd still keep HAGS set at OFF in there (and FWIW, see thread here).

PS: Off-topic, and this will sound disruptive or like I'm selling something but, if DCS VR is getting on your nerves and got the disc space, have a go with DCS 2.56 (see my sig).
Nothing to lose with it other than time.
 

HAGS on gives me a tiny bit better performance (though it's so hard to tell the difference but it's definitely not worse). And no, not getting on my nerves, I count myself fortunate that I have to look for the stutter to really see it.

[LucShep]

 

 

Edited January 9 by LucShep

[EightyDuce]

Sadly, not a novel marketing strategy...praying on those that don't know any better, using marketing speech and colorful graphs that in reality have little tangible meaning.

For those on 20XX and 30XX series, this is probably a good time to upgrade if pricing holds up as the performance/$ is better than 40XX series, especially in the mid-high end. For those on 4090's, unless you're within that margin of ~20-30% boost to get you to that place where you can run VR at the settings you want and do so without reprojection, I don't see a reason to jump. I would not make a purchasing decision from 4090 to 5090 based on hopes of DLSS4 coming to DCS VR.

 

[Aapje]

Value per dollar is not necessarily something that matters to many 4090 buyers.

[SharpeXB]

Honestly I see used 4090s for sale at pretty good prices. Selling one to finance your upgrade doesn’t seem like much of a stretch. I don’t feel the need to have more GPU in DCS right now though. A 4090 will max this game in 2D.

[EightyDuce]

4 minutes ago, Aapje said:

Value per dollar is not necessarily something that matters to many 4090 buyers.

Probably not from financial standpoint, but "value" is different from one person to the next. In my case, it had the best value because for the money, it got me the closest to the level of performance that I found acceptable. My other option would have been a 4080 or 7900XTX, both of which would still carry a hefty price tag while not getting me to the level of performance I was looking for. But there are also those that want to have the latest and greatest and price is just a number.

 

Sadly, with DCS VR, we seemed to have picked an expensive hobby haha.

[BitMaster]

On what Planet does Jensen live ?

I rather stop playing all together than paying big bucks for fake frames.

 

This has gotten WAY out of control

[EightyDuce]

Just now, BitMaster said:

On what Planet does Jensen live ?

I rather stop playing all together than paying big bucks for fake frames.

 

This has gotten WAY out of control

Are you saying you don't have a $10,000 gaming command center like the rest of us? 

[BitMaster]

That's not the point, is the absurd philosophy behind it.

 

"Der Krug geht zum Brunnen bis er bricht"  comes to my mind

[SharpeXB]

I hate to say this about fake frames because I’m always skeptical and very nitpicky… but they look fantastic in FS2024 and Cyberpunk 2077. In FS2020 the effect was awful and earlier versions of DLSS were kinda terrible. It’s either an improvement of DLSS or the games themselves. Those two are the only ones I’ve tried it on and it seems they intend you to use it as they’re hardly playable without it. FS is CPU-bound for me in any case.

Edited January 8 by SharpeXB

[The_Nephilim]

27 minutes ago, BitMaster said:

On what Planet does Jensen live ?

I rather stop playing all together than paying big bucks for fake frames.

 

This has gotten WAY out of control

I am with you on this one. the way they explained it yes you magically see the number FPS is higher but in reality it still looks like less.. I am not sold on the fake frames thing either it fact it is really bad..