Sign in to follow this  
Denco

WARNING - When upgrading your GPU for Xplane

Recommended Posts

I recommend going for a TITAN with 12GB of VRAM. I made a mistake when I was rebuilding my computer of buying a GTX 1080 thinking 8GB is enough. Sadly it's not. There's a big difference between Very High and Extreme texture quality with the later making custom Ortho Sceneries a lot better.

 

 

Share this post


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

I recommend going for a TITAN with 12GB of VRAM. I made a mistake when I was rebuilding my computer of buying a GTX 1080 thinking 8GB is enough. Sadly it's not. There's a big difference between Very High and Extreme texture quality with the later making custom Ortho Sceneries a lot better.

 

Last time I check my vram I was using about 6GB of vram, thats on high settings. The Titan is way overpriced, the average simmer is not going to pay that kind of money. I am waiting for AMD's high end VEGA 10 gpu with 16GB of HBM2 memory ! The price should be a lot more reasonable, hopefully ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you're not using ortho sceneries, 6 GB is sufficient. I run X-Plane maxed out (except for shadows and water reflections), and usage never surpasses 5.6 GB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using ZL17 Ortho4XP tiles for Switzerland, Austria and Italy, and it works just fine ona GTX770 with 4GB. That's on "very high" and with texture compression enabled. Although "Extreme" does look slightly better, the difference is hard to see while you're flying.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is my VRAM usage on ground at KLAX from Mister6X and FF767. Please keep in mind that Ortho textures don't increase your VRAM usage because for me it is the same with or without orthos.

 

 

I'm also running SkyMaxx, but I disabled it for one of the test's and VRAM usage was the same.Untitled.png.4be11762ff89f7790f5f4b3b393

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the reading in the X-Plane menu is about 3GB of VRAM which sounds about right with your scenery, aircraft and settings. The other reading on the top right is perhaps something to do with memory management (Windows doesn't clear RAM until needed, perhaps your GPU does the same). You should be perfectly fine with your hardware!  :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was advised by a user on reddit ( Sethos ) to disable the extended scenery. I immediately went from 30 fps at cruising altitude to 50 fps with no stutters. This one option was causing so many problems and I never realized it could be the culprit of all my fps issues :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a large difference in the sim being able to take advantage of an increased amount of available VRAM, and the sim actually needing it to function.

 

My 980ti has 6GB of VRAM, I run 'extreme' without any negative effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was advised by a user on reddit ( Sethos ) to disable the extended scenery. I immediately went from 30 fps at cruising altitude to 50 fps with no stutters. This one option was causing so many problems and I never realized it could be the culprit of all my fps issues :)

Interesting...I'm running a 970 with extended and normally do bump up against the 4GB the card has, but it's not unusual for me to get 50+ fps in SoCal with 2x AA...most other settings high except for shadows (3D on aircraft) and water reflection off.  My other settings are similar to yours except again for number of objects is lower because the placement of the low quality art over photo scenery is a bit of a negative IMO and number of roads is lower than extreme, but I do have traffic set to the kansas option.  With a 1080, you should be 100+ all the time with DSF Exteneded on (what I use).  I did have a problem when moving to 10.50...and the fix for me seemed to be deleting preferences and re-establishing them.  I read that's a recommended procedure.  Perhaps you're running multiple monitors though...not sure what display you're pushing.  Oh also have my SMP set to 30K.  You have a high end system...something seems wrong.  (I'm also running ZL17 photo.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting...I'm running a 970 with extended and normally do bump up against the 4GB the card has, but it's not unusual for me to get 50+ fps in SoCal with 2x AA...most other settings high except for shadows (3D on aircraft) and water reflection off.  My other settings are similar to yours except again for number of objects is lower because the placement of the low quality art over photo scenery is a bit of a negative IMO and number of roads is lower than extreme, but I do have traffic set to the kansas option.  With a 1080, you should be 100+ all the time with DSF Exteneded on (what I use).  I did have a problem when moving to 10.50...and the fix for me seemed to be deleting preferences and re-establishing them.  I read that's a recommended procedure.  Perhaps you're running multiple monitors though...not sure what display you're pushing.  Oh also have my SMP set to 30K.  You have a high end system...something seems wrong.  (I'm also running ZL17 photo.)

 

GPU has little to do with the extended DSF option. It's the CPU that renders geometry (autogen and initial terrain render), traffic and all that. Only thing it could help with is if you're hitting the VRAM limit but outside of that, Extended DSF is REALLY taxing in some areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is my VRAM usage on ground at KLAX from Mister6X and FF767.

 

 

 

Let me just explain a little something - the Flight Factor 767 is not exactly performance friendly, it is in fact one of the worst for performance for me with the IXEG 737 being better on performance with 5 to 7 fps more than the FF767, there are higher quality textures on the IXEG 737 but it is very well optimized, the FF767 is not. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think performance comparisons should only be done using standard planes such as the Cessna or 747... everything else is a personal offset.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend going for a TITAN with 12GB of VRAM. I made a mistake when I was rebuilding my computer of buying a GTX 1080 thinking 8GB is enough. Sadly it's not. There's a big difference between Very High and Extreme texture quality with the later making custom Ortho Sceneries a lot better.

Hi,

 

I have XP 10.51r max'ed with each and every option you have control over, to their highest setting.  That of course, includes running the sim at Extreme Res.

 

With all of the above in play, my 8GB card sill has just under 1.2 GB's of GPU resident memory, free.  Oh...that is with SMP cranked right out as well, and using a Carenado G.A. or Business class sled.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recommend going for a TITAN with 12GB of VRAM. I made a mistake when I was rebuilding my computer of buying a GTX 1080 thinking 8GB is enough. 

 

Not sure you made a mistake: if I'm not wrong that Titan, as dual GPU board, doesn't have 12Gb Vram but it has 2x6Gb as it work in SLI so the real Vram is 6Gb (in this configuration memory is mirrored, not summed), in this case your 1080 with 8Gb is better.

And X-Plane doesn't take advantage from multi GPU systems, but this is another topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure you made a mistake: if I'm not wrong that Titan, as dual GPU board, doesn't have 12Gb Vram but it has 2x6Gb as it work in SLI so the real Vram is 6Gb (in this configuration memory is mirrored, not summed), in this case your 1080 with 8Gb is better.

And X-Plane doesn't take advantage from multi GPU systems, but this is another topic.

 

You may be thinking of the Titan Z, that was indeed an SLI-in-one card, thus splitting the 12GB pool. However the newest card, the Titan X, is true single core full-fat 12GB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you're right, I was thinking at the Titan Z, checked right now and the X is indeed a very different board, thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#First world problems!

Maybe one of the moderators can pin this topic so that no other gamers make the same silly mistake :fool:

 

I just bought my GTX 1080 and have yet to go beyond more then 6 GB VRAM even over NYC with all settings pushed (for testing only). I doubt that you use more then this in XP 10 if you use reasonable settings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#First world problems!

Maybe one of the moderators can pin this topic so that no other gamers make the same silly mistake :fool:

 

Oh, I must be inferior because I'm a gamer, not a simer like yourself?

 

How does having one option turned on make someone a fool eludes me, but I guess you made a fairly good point with your display on intelligence and keen observation on where things stand. Your contribution to this thread is immense and I really hope you continue to be active on these forums since it's people like you that make the flight sim community such a warm and fuzzy place to be.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I myself have a GTX1080 and 3440x1440 34" monitor and get 70 fps in my IXEG 737 at altitude about 30 on the ground at MisterX LAX with World Traffic running etc. I see no need for a Titan X 12GB card. I also think the title is rather like clickbait. A more benign topic title would have been "Advice ...." The word 'WARNING" in CAP's seems to me to insinuate some sort of fact and I see little in the opening post except hearsay.

 

No one machine is the same and there are thousands of combinations possible so to be honest what someone else gets in FPS with one machine has no relevance at all with what someone else get's or might get with there machine with similar specs, there are just too many variables involved.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the VRAM usage for me at that time was real. Please understand that I built my new PC just for X-Plane and wasn't holding back with cheap components. My thinking when I was making a title was, and still is, if you can afford the money to buy a GTX 1080 you will be able to afford a Titan if you're upgrading for a specific sim since we all strive for max performance for our simulators. Hence the warning for users who are in the process of upgrading.

 

Anyway, I was shocked when I notice that I used almost all of the RAM on my GPU and instantly regretted not buying a TITAN, but now when I've actually discovered the cause of my problem I can see that a Titan wouldn't fix anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought my GTX 1080 and have yet to go beyond more then 6 GB VRAM

Get a quality payware airport, crank up AA and set texture resolution to "extreme". It's easy to use up all of GTX1080 VRAM, believe me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the VRAM usage for me at that time was real. Please understand that I built my new PC just for X-Plane and wasn't holding back with cheap components. My thinking when I was making a title was, and still is, if you can afford the money to buy a GTX 1080 you will be able to afford a Titan if you're upgrading for a specific sim since we all strive for max performance for our simulators. Hence the warning for users who are in the process of upgrading.

 

Anyway, I was shocked when I notice that I used almost all of the RAM on my GPU and instantly regretted not buying a TITAN, but now when I've actually discovered the cause of my problem I can see that a Titan wouldn't fix anything.

I have an 8GB card, and with XP 10.51r set to max in all clickables, and drop-down menus, and with SMP also set to all clicked, with cloud coverage to full right,  and finally with a Coronado Business Class,  I generate 6.9xx GB's of memory in residence.  Just under 7 GB's.  An 8GB card will handle full out demands, no problem, That is also with high res mesh as well in memory.

Get a quality payware airport, crank up AA and set texture resolution to "extreme". It's easy to use up all of GTX1080 VRAM, believe me.

Around 7GB's stuffed in, with all things bristling....:)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we are talking about GPU, does someone has an AMD RX 480 8GB and can speak about it´s the performance in x-plane? I plan to upgrade to get better graphics in x-plane 11, but I've heard not so good about AMD. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we are talking about GPU, does someone has an AMD RX 480 8GB and can speak about it´s the performance in x-plane? I plan to upgrade to get better graphics in x-plane 11, but I've heard not so good about AMD. 

 

If you have the money and patience I would wait for Vega 10-11 !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of talk about how much vram everyone is using and what is or isn't normal but no talk of resolution which makes the whole set of arguments pointless.

 

What are you all using? 1080p? 1440? 4k? Multi screens? Without knowing this vram measurements are meaningless.

 

Chris

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