Sign in to follow this  
Sesquashtoo

Some Graphic Card on-board texture-resident load in's...P3D, FSX, XPX

Recommended Posts

I just wanted to share some info, in which a reader could find interesting;

Since installing an EVGA 1070 FTW 8GB graphics card a few weeks ago, I have been able to bump up each and every feature within P3D v2.x/3.x, FSX/DX10, and XP 10.51r to their maximum possible settings in all features, in all categories.  This is how I now run all of my flight simulation.  

 

I run all my sims at a lock-down of 33 FPS, Vsync Adaptive at 1/2 my monitor refresh rate of 60 Mhz, and at DSR 2x (my native 1920x1200) at a smooth factor of default 33 percent.  This is achieved by locking down the FPS to 33 max, within the EVGA O.C. scanner, and have all my sim's in-house FPS set to Unlimited.  So, that is all universal across all my sims, now.  I call this a personal 'burnt in' config.

 

If you set your flight simulator to be max-and feature rich, and you do not have the on-board resident graphic-dedicated capacity, then your system will create a borrowed overflow, swap file of system RAM, of which will slow down your system, will, and can be the cause for lower FPS, and pause-stutter in your animation.  This is a fact, and well known.  On-board graphic-dedicated RAM is important to prime performance.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

So, about the Topic Title in hand;

 

Let's start with P3D, both v2.4, and v3.4.9

 

With the above max config, the texture load in can reach as high as 2.7 GB's of memory-resident texture files on-board your card.  If you have  4 or more resident GB's of dedicated graphic memory, then you are good to go with P3D's, and FSX/DX10, or Steam.  Not so, with XP 10.51r...that is covered further down this post.The max, memory pre-load over many scenarios, and ORBX dedicated FAT and airport locations has been 2.7 GB's or less.  For example, here is a very high count, intensive view of YMMB just off the coast. Look at the density of autogen being produced in this shot.  This is around 2.7 GB's of loaded dedicated graphic memory resident. The autogen spawned, is massive:

 

2016_10_1_6_2_14_301.png
 
2016_10_1_6_4_26_448.png
 
FYI, the EVGA 1070 FTW produces a steady 33-35 (actually, it fights to go over my O.C. FPS lock-down...) with ease.and clear texture composition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
For FSX/DX10 with the same scene, the load in max, is around 2.2 GB's of data
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
For XP 10.51r at max settings of everything that can be adjusted by slider, or button activation;
 
This is the most intensive, load-in you will see in any flight simulation product to date, unless this will change if any other 64 bit platform will come to market.
 
For XP 10.51r, the load in is massive at 6.9 GB's of memory resident textures.
 
If you have obviously, an 8 GB card, then you are good for all platforms, should you wish to to run the sims, as they were truly engineered to be rendered at. All stop's pulled, in visuals and features.  If you have a Pascal-based card of the 1070, or 1080 levels...then you can ABSOLUTELY run each sim with every feature turned on, as I am...and with even having a CPU companion feeding it data, that is already 8 years old!  I have no pressure to swap out the i7-975 Extreme CPU/motherboard combo at this time.  I easily maintain my FPS target at DSR 2x.33 across all my sims, all of them hot-flat-out.
 
So, I thought, it would be an interesting read for all...about the maximum load-in within the different flight sims, if total simulation feature-sets is your wish, or goal.
 
Cheers,
 
Ses
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Thanks. I've been thinking of replacing my 970 and this is a great help...........Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I easily maintain my FPS target at DSR 2x.33 across all my sims, all of them hot-flat-out.

 

In a Cessna, LOL !

Come on Mitch, most of us can get great performance flying simple GA from small fields. could do that two generations of hardware ago

 

Tell us how you get on with a complex airliner between large airports with a ton of Ai running and a complex hardware cockpit setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a Cessna, LOL !

Come on Mitch, most of us can get great performance flying simple GA from small fields. could do that two generations of hardware ago

 

Tell us how you get on with a complex airliner between large airports with a ton of Ai running and a complex hardware cockpit setup.

Well, I have to LOL!, respectively disagree, even by a most recent post by another user. Even with G.A., some can not run their sims full out, each and every feature.  But this post was not about a FPS competition, Glynn.

 

And as to myself telling you, about a complex airliner between large airports, of which I fly out of all the time, and with 100 percent A.I, blah, blah...for the airliners, I run those in FS9.  For complex 3rdP G.A., yep...I don't break an FPS sweat, full out.   It can be achieved.

 

Cheers,

Thanks. I've been thinking of replacing my 970 and this is a great help...........Doug

You're most welcome, glad to share the info.  An 8 GB card will cover you for every sim we cover on AVSIM...and all of them, with each and every feature that can be controlled, at maximum settings.  Your 8 GB card will cover them all....with all texture, GPU memory-resident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since installing an EVGA 1070 FTW 8GB graphics card a few weeks ago, I have been able to bump up each and every feature within P3D v2.x/3.x, FSX/DX10, and XP 10.51r to their maximum possible settings in all features, in all categories.

Whilst I know nothing about X-Plane, I'm struggling to understand how just the new GPU allows you to "bump up each and every feature... to their maximum possible settings in all features, in all categories” in FSX and P3D where so much of those programs still rely on the power of the CPU. When I updated my GPU it allowed me to run FSX at higher screen and texture resolutions and let me use more exotic anti-aliasing settings but only made a small difference to FPS - it looked better but didn't really run much better. Overclocking my CPU gave a much more significant increase in frame rates.

 

W2DR, if you run at 2560x1440 or less, I would think that you're unlikely to see a significant change in FPS in FSX or P3D by trading in your 970 for a 1070. That said, almost every other modern game will probably benefit greatly. It all depends what you use your system for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I know nothing about X-Plane, I'm struggling to understand how just the new GPU allows you to "bump up each and every feature... to their maximum possible settings in all features, in all categories” in FSX and P3D where so much of those programs still rely on the power of the CPU. When I updated my GPU it allowed me to run FSX at higher screen and texture resolutions and let me use more exotic anti-aliasing settings but only made a small difference to FPS - it looked better but didn't really run much better. Overclocking my CPU gave a much more significant increase in frame rates.

 

W2DR, if you run at 2560x1440 or less, I would think that you're unlikely to see a significant change in FPS in FSX or P3D by trading in your 970 for a 1070. That said, almost every other modern game will probably benefit greatly. It all depends what you use your system for.

Very simply to explain, at least in my usage-case.   Since having replaced my GTX 680 2 GB card, with the one stated, I have been exactly that...been able to open up all my flight sims, and keep no problem, the 33 FPS that I find, absolutely well-suited to have smooth animation, no stutter, etc.

 

Same CPU, different GPU.  In my system-case,  my i7-975 Extreme, which is an extremely capable and aggressive part, was processing more for the pipeline, than my GTX680 could actually process and send down that very, pipeline.  Simply, put, asking it to render all my sims, flat out, overwhelmed its technology and on-board texture-residency. In the case of XP, it actually disengaged the CPU/GPU driver link.  

 

This was corrected, by inserting the Pascal Technology, paired up with a full 8 GB's of texture-residency storage capability.  In my case-usage, my system, with the prior GPU installed was GPU-bound, not CPU-bound.  The i7-975 Extreme is now feeding the Pascal Tech, at one-on-one, and that is my ability, to be able to run each option and/or on-off button, as engaged.  Quite simple.  

 

There are systems obviously out there as I type, that are either CPU bound, are either actually GPU bound, or because of generationally older systems, actually both-bound.   That is, personally, how I see it.

 

I run at (monitor screen resolution native; 1920x1200) then up-processed by usage of nVidia DSR factor 2.0/33.  The end result is optimal, most excellent visuals!

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if I understand you correctly from your first post, with an i7-975 and a GTX 1070 you are able to run FSX and P3D with ALL the settings at maximum and keep the FPS at a minimum of 30 with add-on aircraft and scenery? If so, you seem to have achieved the impossible, well done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if I understand you correctly from your first post, with an i7-975 and a GTX 1070 you are able to run FSX and P3D with ALL the settings at maximum and keep the FPS at a minimum of 30 with add-on aircraft and scenery? If so, you seem to have achieved the impossible, well done!

Yeppers...that's what I am sayin'...have them locked down at 33, and don't need to go higher. :)

Totally ORBX, and 3rP  international, as well as regional airports.  I fly 3rdP G.A. and Business class in FSX/DX10, P3D, and XP, no tubes in anything but FS9.    My late laid-to-rest GPU was holding my system back.

 

Can run XP the same way, as well.

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say im slightly dubious. whats the single core performance like on that cpu, will be significantly less than something these days. i upgraded from an i7 920 which was overclocked to 4.4 or such and the new 4770k was quite a bit faster.

 

Not to say its a slow cpu at all, in multi threaded apps sure. but single threaded apps like fsx p3d etc are (mainly) wont be its strong point.

 

But hell who cares what we think, if it works well for you thats all that matters!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say im slightly dubious. whats the single core performance like on that cpu, will be significantly less than something these days. i upgraded from an i7 920 which was overclocked to 4.4 or such and the new 4770k was quite a bit faster.

 

Not to say its a slow cpu at all, in multi threaded apps sure. but single threaded apps like fsx p3d etc are (mainly) wont be its strong point.

 

But hell who cares what we think, if it works well for you thats all that matters!

Right...  I run it in HT, and I report what Mr. System gives up.  Couldn't be happier now with the i7-975 at 4.2 GHz, and the EVGA 1070 FTW combo.  For myself...no need to performance-upgrade, past this duo.  I'll upgrade in case of a system component failure. Performance wise..no pressure in that regard.

 

Sims are wide open, look fantastic, and run with smooth animation, no CTD, no VAS issues, no vid driver lock-up's.  Just enjoyment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

take a look here.

 

as you can see, multi threaded apps give your chip the best chance vs a 6700k (well on the cpu boss link) but single threaded apps.. not so much

 

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-975-vs-Intel-Core-i7-6700K

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-975-vs-Intel-Core-i7-6700K/m941vs3502

Thanks for the links, James.  Interesting read, especially with my owning one.  But having read...and knowing what my system is putting out,  I'll still stick happily with the status quo, until something decides to fly south... :)   Thanks for the links. I'll look at other CPU's when that time comes.  :hi:

 

Ses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries, as i said who cares what we think. its you whos opinion matters..

 

now, come sort my pc so it does the same! :)

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