WARNING - When upgrading your GPU for Xplane

[alfamike 67]

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.

[DocBird 79]

#First world problems!

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

 

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.

[Denco 48]

#First world problems!

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

 

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.

[Glenn_C 135]

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.

[Denco 48]

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.

[rdb 44]

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.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

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....

[leonbr 64]

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. 

[strider1 575]

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 !

[tutmeister 712]

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

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

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

Actually, that's the old school of thought...that VRAM only comes into play, in capacity, when higher resolutions are in play.  It also comes into the fact that all the rendering maps, are being, or trying to be, loaded into the faster VRAM of the card, rather than swap-filing from system memory.  You need enough, to hold all that the program wants to load into VRAM, along with the pixel size of higher resolutions beyond 1080p.  Stutter, and less-than-satisfactory AA will result, if your card's VRAM capacity can NOT hold the entire requirement in its memory for lightning fast access to the GPU. Swap files to memory, or worse yet...out from the hard drive itself...is a recipe for stutter and blurriness.

 

Not only about singular screen resolution...

[Denco 48]

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.

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

Try that with the FF 767.

[AnkH 2,271]

You should not forget the fact that there are software simply using as much VRAM as available, no matter if they actually need it or if you loose any performance with a smaller VRAM. It seems that X-Plane is like that, so if you would offer X-Plane 24GB of VRAM, it would use it. Having a full 8GB VRAM does not necessarily mean that those 8GB are not sufficient. The only way you could say this is if you compare FPS with a 1080 and a Titan X running on exactly the same clocks (memory AND GPU) so that the general performance difference is as little as possible (there will still be a difference as the Titan X has more shader cores etc.). Only then, if the Titan X provides significantly more FPS in such a comparison, you could argue that it is because of the bigger VRAM. Otherwise it is just an assumption based on no facts...

[tutmeister 712]

Actually, that's the old school of thought...that VRAM only comes into play, in capacity, when higher resolutions are in play.

 

Not sure what your point is here? I think you might have misinterpreted what I'm saying.

 

All this discussion is about how some people can max everything and use less vram than others etc etc. and I'm saying that they are pointless comparisons without knowing what resolution everyone is using - some are using 1080p and some will be using higher res or using more screens.

 

If you have everything maxxed out and then increase resolution from 1080p to say 4k then you will use more vram. How is this old school? Are you saying going to higher resolutions doesn't use more vram?

 

 

 

 

Chris

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

 

Not sure what your point is here? I think you might have misinterpreted what I'm saying.

 

All this discussion is about how some people can max everything and use less vram than others etc etc. and I'm saying that they are pointless comparisons without knowing what resolution everyone is using - some are using 1080p and some will be using higher res or using more screens.

 

If you have everything maxxed out and then increase resolution from 1080p to say 4k then you will use more vram. How is this old school? Are you saying going to higher resolutions doesn't use more vram?

 

 

 

 

Chris

 

Sure, using higher res, increases the pixel count and size...sure, but I was only pointing out that a lot of users only think of VRAM usage in terms of only a resolution increase, and not that along with that, you need to have enough VRAM to also include all the other components that are stored within that VRAM. 

 

That was the reference to ' old school'.  Only thinking that screen resolution is the only factor to consume VRAM.   You of course are not one of those users, but you'd be surprised how many relate to video RAM, only in question to what they wish to run their screens at...or choice of monitor size.