GPU and RAM - question

[talvikko]

I'm planning to build a new computer (primarily for DCS) and I have two questions:
1. Will I notice a real difference if I add 128 GB of RAM instead of 64 GB? (I know more memory is better, but if the practical difference is small, I don't want to spend money unnecessarily.)
2. Will I notice a significant difference between the graphics cards: RTX 5070Ti 16GB 256-bit vs RTX 5070 12GB 192-bit?
Of course, I realize that the 5070TI is more powerful, but I also want to spend my money wisely.
And importantly: I won't be playing VR. I don't need anything more than a monitor and a 1920x1080 resolution.

[aceviper]

Have not seen DCS fill 64gb yet...but who knows in the future.

You should be good for a few more years with 64gb.

[diego999]

1 - No. DCS is nowhere near using 64GB of RAM and it won't be for, at least, a few years.

2 - Yes. 12GB is on the low end of VRAM amount for a 2025 card. You might not notice it right now, but it could start limiting you in a couple of years. If the price difference is not outrageous, go for the ti. More future proof, too.

3 - Yes. Both those cards will laugh at you at 1080p. Throw them a real challenge: 1440p should be a nice upgrade without breaking your bank.

 

[Mr_sukebe]

I’ve yet to see more than low 50GBs of use in DCS, and that’s whilst in VR, running a number of other Apps such as Simshaker, Tacview.

So right now, more is probably overkill.  

If you don’t have an infinite budget, it’s probably more important to get a good CPU (9800x3d), PCI Gen5 drive, low latency RAM, a good GPU and then spend some time to optimise settings.

Having said that, if I were planning a new build, I’d certainly consider grabbing 128GB, “just in case”.

 

 

[LucShep]

On the GPU, definitely pick the RTX5070Ti 16GB over the RTX5070 12GB, if you can afford it.
The performance difference and longer-term usage with DCS is worth it, and especially if playing in Multiplayer (DCS there is a VRAM guzzler!).
Also, you never know if in the future you fancy a better display monitor (1440P or 4K) or even VR, and then you'll be left with less capable material.... "buy nice or buy twice".

On the RAM, I'll start by agreeing with others above - 64GB of RAM is still plentiful today, and should be for a number of years.

However, if this is a brand new higher-end system for the longer term then I'd strongly suggest a 96GB DDR5 kit (2x 48GB) with recommended speed/timings profile for your CPU and motherboard (either "AMD Expo" or "Intel XMP").   Personally, I'd recommend 96GB kits from GSKILL.

Just make sure that either the manufacturer lists your motherboard in the RAM kit QVL list, or that the specific RAM kit is listed in your motherboard's QVL list.
This is a guarantee that the specific RAM kit has been tested with the specific motherboard for stability.

Lastly, about 128GB of RAM, either in the new 128GB DDR5 kits (2x 64GB) or in a "pair of 64GB DDR5 kit" (4x 32GB).
It's generally aimed at the "prosumer" market, with more relaxed speeds and timings (=slower) or for HEDT systems using professional applications, not for gaming systems.
Currently, it's problematic on most consumer motherboards and not recommended, usually untested and unstable at the desired higher speeds/timings (i.e., get ready to "FAFO").
 

Edited 4 hours ago by LucShep
added link

[mkel2010]

I just built a system that I'm still in the process of setting up. I went with 96GB of g.Skill RAM and an ASUS TUF RTX 5070 TI OC Edition graphics card. I haven't overclocked anything yet, but I ran a baseline on the graphics card and got a maximum frame rate of 214 with an average of 172 FPS. If you'd like the details on the rest of the system I built, I'm happy to provide them.

[Bearskin]

2 things I have upgraded which gave me better performance in DCS was 32 to 64 gig memory, and a 2080 to a 4080. The one thing that IMO didn't give me any noticeable performance gain in DCS was upgrading my CPU, (but it did in other games).

[talvikko]

Thank you for your advice and replies. 
I'll ask about one of them, as it piqued my interest: will I actually notice a difference between the "original" Kingston Fury Beast 6000 card and the model from the G. Skill catalog (matched to the motherboard)? 
I'm asking because I've always used Kingston memory in my previous computers (and at work) and haven't considered any other solution.

I know that there was also talk about changing the number of gigabytes of RAM, but I was curious about the "new" manufacturer for me.

2 hours ago, mkel2010 said:

I just built a system that I'm still in the process of setting up. I went with 96GB of g.Skill RAM and an ASUS TUF RTX 5070 TI OC Edition graphics card. I haven't overclocked anything yet, but I ran a baseline on the graphics card and got a maximum frame rate of 214 with an average of 172 FPS. If you'd like the details on the rest of the system I built, I'm happy to provide them.

Thank you. Of course, I'd love to see the specs for a proven setup (though I'm afraid it might be beyond my budget) – but it could be valuable advice.

[Dragon1-1]

I use Kingston Fury Beast and it's fine. Currently running 4x16GB (had 32GB originally, decided to do a quick upgrade to 64GB), no problems with it. Reasonably fast and not too expensive.

The nice thing about RAM is, if you ever run out, if your initial build had two cards, you can add another two of the same model and double your capacity with minimum fuss. The performance hit was negligible when I did so. Go for 64GB now, you can upgrade if it ever stops being more than enough.

Edited 1 hour ago by Dragon1-1

[mkel2010]

@talvikko These are the specs of the system I just built:

Asus ROG X870E-E Gaming Wifi motherboard

AMD Ryzen 9 9950 x3D

Asus Tuf Gaming RTX5070 TI OC Edition

G.Skill Flare X5 DDR5-6000(48GBx2)

Asus Ruyjin III 360 (non-RGB model)

Samsung 9100 Pro 2TB nVMe

(I reused a case that I had, also with another nVMe and SSD drives.)

The build was not without issues. I had to return the first motherboard due to a defective memory channel. I thought the second motherboard was also defective but it turned out that the BIOS didn't support either the CPU or the Memory. Fortunately the Asus motherboard BIOS can be flashed without needing to boot into the BIOS. Once I got that sorted out, everything else has gone fine. 

One of the reasons I went with this motherboard is its use of the PCie lanes. I wanted to keep the graphics card at x16 speed while also taking advantage of the PCie version 5 speed for the nVMe drive. This board has a specific slot for the nVMe drive that will allow it to run at x4 speeds and the graphics card to keep running at x16. These two slots go directly to the CPU; it has two other nVMe slots on the same channel and using either of those drops the graphics card slot to x8. Finally, the board has two more nVMe slots that run through the chipset and don't impact the CPU PCie channels. I saw no point in spending what I did for the graphics card and not be able to use its full capacity. 

One of the reasons that I went with AMD is the socket - AM5. Unlike Intel, AMD hasn't changed their sockets for awhile. That means you could by a cheaper CPU and then upgrade later without having to change anything else.

As for the memory brand, I would decide on the motherboard first and then use the boards QVL (qualified vendor list) to choose your memory. Most of the major memory manufacturers also have a way to search their products for compatibility to a particular motherboard. I'd also suggest sticking to two sticks of memory. Modern systems sometimes have problems with more than that.