Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
fogboundturtle

X-plane 10 is barely using my GPU (980 TI)

Recommended Posts

I upgraded my card from a GTX 970 to a MSI GTX 980 TI 6GB over the weekend. I wanted to see how far I can push my card. So I was running MSI Burner while cranking up the graphic in X-plane 10. My rig is an i5-4670k and 16GB RAM. Not only does my CPU not bottleneck at all, my GPU usage and power were barely going at 30-40%.  It didn't matter which settings I was cranking up. I verified in the Nvidia CP. My card is setup for maximum performance. This is with an Boeing 777 Wordliner.

 

What the hell is going with X-plane 10 ? Just to verify my sanity. I ran Metro Light in 1440p with everything maxed. I was averaging 85 fps.  So I know it's not my rig.


Claude Desrosiers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that X-plane, while utilizing more of the GPU than FSX, was still one of those programs that was heavily CPU dependant. Aren't the primary Blade element theory calculations generally all running on the CPU? 


Just Flight Beta Tester
 
We are all connected..... To each other, biologically...... To the Earth, chemically...... To the rest of the Universe atomically.
 
Devons rig
Intel Core i7 8700K @ 5.0GHz / 32.0GB G.SKILL TridentZ Series Dual-Channel Ram / ZOTAC GAMING GeForce® RTX 2080 Ti Triple Fan / Sound Blaster Z / Oculus Rift VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 2x Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB / 1x Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1000GB / 5 other regular hd's with up to 10 terabyte capacity each / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 5 Motherboard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct about the CPU being the bottleneck for most people. It´s not the flightmodel, it is actually the geometry of the objects, shadows, reflections, AI traffic, clouds and cars, etc. Your GPU will only be taxed to the max if you actually pick a setting that asks little of the CPU (reduce all of the above settings a lot), and a lot of the GPU (i.e. having a very high resolution with lots of texture VRAM use and very demanding HDR and anti-aliasing settings).

 

I went from a GTX770 to a GTX970 and haven´t noticed even the tiniest bit of framerate improvement on a "typical" setting. BUT I can ramp up the texture resolution and display everything on my 4K monitor now. This caused me to hit the GPU-ceiling on my old card...

 

Also keep in mind that most "performance meters" for the CPU take the total load into account. So if you have 4 cores, and one is firewalled, you would probably only see 25% use. X-Plane does only use the "other cores" for very limited things, like loading scenery in the background or running AI flightmodel calculations. The bulk of X-Plane will only run on one core...

 

Jan


I upgraded my card from a GTX 970 to a MSI GTX 980 TI 6GB over the weekend. I wanted to see how far I can push my card. So I was running MSI Burner while cranking up the graphic in X-plane 10. My rig is an i5-4670k and 16GB RAM. Not only does my CPU not bottleneck at all, my GPU usage and power were barely going at 30-40%.  It didn't matter which settings I was cranking up. I verified in the Nvidia CP. My card is setup for maximum performance. This is with an Boeing 777 Wordliner.

 

What the hell is going with X-plane 10 ? Just to verify my sanity. I ran Metro Light in 1440p with everything maxed. I was averaging 85 fps.  So I know it's not my rig.

 

...and while I understand your bewilderment at the numbers you see - I hope averaging 85fps is not causing too much disappointment in the X-Plane platform for you!? :wink:

 

Jan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct about the CPU being the bottleneck for most people. It´s not the flightmodel, it is actually the geometry of the objects, shadows, reflections, AI traffic, clouds and cars, etc. Your GPU will only be taxed to the max if you actually pick a setting that asks little of the CPU (reduce all of the above settings a lot), and a lot of the GPU (i.e. having a very high resolution with lots of texture VRAM use and very demanding HDR and anti-aliasing settings).

 

I went from a GTX770 to a GTX970 and haven´t noticed even the tiniest bit of framerate improvement on a "typical" setting. BUT I can ramp up the texture resolution and display everything on my 4K monitor now. This caused me to hit the GPU-ceiling on my old card...

 

Also keep in mind that most "performance meters" for the CPU take the total load into account. So if you have 4 cores, and one is firewalled, you would probably only see 25% use. X-Plane does only use the "other cores" for very limited things, like loading scenery in the background or running AI flightmodel calculations. The bulk of X-Plane will only run on one core...

 

Jan

 

...and while I understand your bewilderment at the numbers you see - I hope averaging 85fps is not causing too much disappointment in the X-Plane platform for you!? :wink:

 

Jan

my x-plane framerate is averaging 30 fps. So I'm far from the 85 fps. btw, I was monitoring all the core and none of them were maxed out.


Claude Desrosiers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my x-plane framerate is averaging 30 fps. So I'm far from the 85 fps. btw, I was monitoring all the core and none of them were maxed out.

 

Ah, ok. Thought you said that you "ran Metrolight at 1440p" and got "85fps". Not sure what Metrolight is, of course, thought it was some add-on for XP.

 

X-Plane performance is not something that anyone can diagnose from afar. I am getting the framerate that I think I should be getting. Can I bring it to it´s knees? Sure. Can I make it run at 40+ fps over Manhattan with a visual that makes me drool? Absolutely.

 

Jan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our sims never run as smooth as mainstream RPG/FPS games...  

 

What texture res are you running xp at?  Try extreme I guess.


|Ryan Butterworth|

| i7 4790K@4.4GHz | 32GB RAM | EVGA GTX 1080Ti | ASUS Z97-Pro | 1TB 860 Evo | 500GB 840 Evo Win10 Pro | 1TB Samsung 7200rpm | Seasonic X750W |

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our sims never run as smooth as mainstream RPG/FPS games...  

 

What texture res are you running xp at?  Try extreme I guess.

 I am on extreme. It's not about smootness, it's about using the GPU to it's capacity.


Claude Desrosiers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I am on extreme. It's not about smootness, it's about using the GPU to it's capacity.

In OpenGL that's the Job of the OpenGL driver (by NVidia) Laminar and so on can't even determine where parts of the code will calculated.


Karsten Schubert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I've got a 980Ti, and I can for sure say that in 1440, with HDR on, turning up AA to the max, turning up shadows to the max, and turning up scenery density to the max (more scenery causing more shadows), I can most definitely indeed max out my GPU.

 

However, I'm generally far more conservative, since I prefer my GPU at a quiet hum, instead of a vacuum cleaner imitation. :wink:

 

But it is indeed possible.


Jim Stewart

Platforms: X-Plane 11 | P3Dv4 | DCS
System: i7-6700K o/c @ 4.4GHz | EVGA GTX 980ti | 32GB RAM | BenQ 32" @ 2560x1440 | Oculus Rift | W10 Pro

Other Sim Interests: Assetto Corsa, rFactor 2, Dirt Rally, Euro Truck Simulator 2, American Truck Simulator

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what the OP is surprised about is that he is not seeing a commensurate jump in FPS as he would expect to seen in almost any other type of software when switching from a lower card to a 980Ti.

 

Of course the reason is that our current Flightsims were designed at a time when most of the "Ooommph" came from the CPU, and they were designed accordingly. In the civilian sector, we really don't have any desktop sims programmed from the ground up to take full advantage of modern hardware, yet.


Just Flight Beta Tester
 
We are all connected..... To each other, biologically...... To the Earth, chemically...... To the rest of the Universe atomically.
 
Devons rig
Intel Core i7 8700K @ 5.0GHz / 32.0GB G.SKILL TridentZ Series Dual-Channel Ram / ZOTAC GAMING GeForce® RTX 2080 Ti Triple Fan / Sound Blaster Z / Oculus Rift VR Headset / Klipsch® Promedia 2.1 Computer Speakers / ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q ‑ 27" IPS LED Monitor ‑ QHD / 2x Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500GB / 1x Samsung SSD 860 EVO 1000GB / 5 other regular hd's with up to 10 terabyte capacity each / Windows 10 Pro 64-bit / Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 5 Motherboard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you record the FPS and smoothness before you upgraded? I went from a GTX680 to GTX980 and I saw a big jump in FPS and smoothness using the same setting.  You went from GTX970 to GTX980TI, depending on your driver (as other has said) you will not see a big difference.  However, if you find yourself have a better sim experience with the new card, it paid for its price ;-)  I can't afford the TI, so I just drool with envy (LOL)


Vu Pham

i7-10700K 5.2 GHz OC, 32 GB RAM, GTX2080Super, SSD for Sim, SSD for system.  XP11.50,  P3Dv4.5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think you do not need to make up your own theory, when Ben Supnik (one of the main XP devs) has written a lot about this topic. You might start with this big write up:

Or just search his blog for relevant keywords ... for example try this:


Andras Fabian / Alpilotx

Visit www.alpilotx.net, a site about X-plane scenery

You can see some landscape and other photographs from me here:

http://www.flickr.co...s/weathermaker/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have "Compress textures to save VRAM" checked or unchecked?  Makes a big difference in VRAM loading.  If your CPU is fast enough, it has virtually no effect on framerates except in very high texture-loading.


i7-4790K o/c @ 4.8 GHz, Corsair H-110 liquid cooler, 32 GB Corsair Vengeance RAM, MSI Maximus VII Hero mobo

Samsung Pro 512 GB SSD

Corsair GFX Hydro GTX-1080 8 GB, (2) 4TB hybrid HDs

Win 10 (1607), X-Plane 10.51r2 and X-Plane 11.01b1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have "Compress textures to save VRAM" checked or unchecked?  Makes a big difference in VRAM loading.  If your CPU is fast enough, it has virtually no effect on framerates except in very high texture-loading.

Compress textures are checked. I was monitoring CPU and GPU usage and there were no where near a bottleneck. I guess I will have to make a video about it and maybe there is tweak I'm missing here.


Claude Desrosiers

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  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    34%
    $8,560.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...