Sign in to follow this  
Ianrivaldosmith

4GB or 8GB?

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

It's always been an nVidia thing.  I think mostly because of support/drivers.

 

My GTX 770 4GB seems to still be doing pretty good.  I have always been disappointed with updates until this one which has been a good one.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For flight sims Nvidia is definitely the way to go. I haven't bought an ATI/AMD in years but from what I've read on the forums people who do struggle to get the performance the NV guys do. This may have much to do with driver quality, so caveat emptor as they say. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine runs great with a 3GB GTX780. 8GB would be perhaps overkill, but then again maybe not if you're a UHD mesh junkie :wink:. For tubeliner flights the HD Mesh is just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run a 6 GB 980ti; using an external monitor, the highest VRAM usage I've seen is about 4-1/2 GB.  Everyone's mileage might vary, depending on scenery and aircraft being used, but it would suggest that a 8GB card might be overkill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a GeForce 780 GTX with 6GB (yes this is not a "Ti" edition ... just "plain" 780 ... they were on the market for only a few months as far as I know) and this one is running - of course - quite nicely most of the stuff I throw at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd throw as much as you can possibly afford at X-Plane. 8GB will give great performance, and I think will be future safe for most addons for a while.

 

I only have 2GB and that's very easy to use up, and I'd imagine (depending on the addons) that 4GB could be used up easily enough before you get the swapping and stuttering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8gb no question. I'm still using my 680 gtx with 4gb and there are occasions that I exceed the vram limit. Admittedly this is across three screens, but still, the more you have, the safer and more future proof you'll be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there a good nvidia 8GB card yet or due soon?

Good question.  I had thought they were out there.  It appears that even the Titan is capped at 6GB, which is probably all you need, but the price is astronomical.  I notice that the Raedon prices for the 8GB cards run the gamut from about $300 to close to $1000. Don't see why there would be that much spread for what appears to be basically the same card.  You might just "nest egg" that money until the next "latest and greatest" is released.  The 770/4 is a good card.

 

John 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, I think i'll hold on a bit. I'm off to Barbados on Monday, so hopefully get to check out the Concorde experience:) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it really depends. For future-proof-ness, then the more VRAM, the better. I have a GTX 970 which has 4GB of VRAM, and I veeeery quickly use it up when running my three monitor set up. On just one monitor though, its been fine, and I run photo scenery and the UHD mesh. At the moment, Nvidia have the 6GB 980ti and 12GB Titan X, but they are priced very high, especially here in Australia where it costs $1200 for the 980ti and $1600 for the Titan X. For now, I'd suggest waiting for the next graphics card generation, which I assume will be mid next year. Hopefully it will provide cards with more VRAM considering 4K is slowly getting cheaper and more popular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a follow up on my comment about using 4 1/2 GB VRAM...

 

I kept a seperate usage monitor open on my flight last night from KPDX to KSFO, and saw the VRAM usage hit about 5 1/4 GB.  This is with HD mesh and most setting to mid/max on 10.36, using HDR and 4x AA.  So a 6 GB card is definitely of use.  I'm sure the sim scales to what you have, but it seems a case of 'more is better'.

 

It's also worth noting that I run XP at 2560x1440.

 

Of interest is that even at that resolution, with mid to high settings, GPU usage generally hovers around 25 - 35%, with frames locked at 30.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I kept a seperate usage monitor open on my flight last night from KPDX to KSFO, and saw the VRAM usage hit about 5 1/4 GB

 

Out of curiosity, do you have texture compression enabled? That seems awfully high, especially when you say everything isn't maxed out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a Nvid card 4gb and it uses every bit of it plus some untill I scale back some rendering options.

Plus I have 32gb ram to play with. Flying computer runing at 4.6 so plenty to play with.

I do use texture compression.

FPS at KSEA with heavy usage aircraft = 19 to 21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Out of curiosity, do you have texture compression enabled? That seems awfully high, especially when you say everything isn't maxed out

 

I don't use texture compression.

 

It's higher than my usual flights around Alberta/Saskatchewan/NWT.  The few times I checked before, it only ever maxed out at around 4-1/2 GB. I assumed it was the HD mesh + weather.  I was flying at 14,000 ft over very rugged terrain in broken clouds.

 

I don't know if it's worth mentioning, but I found the first part of this flight (around KPDX) to be far more taxing on the system than the rest of the journey, even around KSFO, where my rig barely even broke a sweat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I just flew a fairly short flight out of KPDX and noticed the framerate hit from a huge scenery load coming from something in that area. I have to keep my sliders pulled back a bit to stay within the 4GB limit of my GTX980 or I pay with low frames - still flyable but low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good sides:

 

- It uses less video memory. I've seen usage drop from 1.5GB to about 700MB with it enabled.

- Less stuttering because more video RAM is available.

 

 

Bad sides:

- It increases loading times if the textures haven't been pre-compressed into DDS files because the images are compressed on the fly (often badly) by X-Plane during loading

- The textures do lose some quality, but not too noticable.

 

If you're short on video RAM, then enabling compression is definitely a good move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this