Man, this has been setting my head in a spin. Just ordered a 21:9 screen and I am beginning to ponder an upgrade to my graphics card as well. First, I was kind of eyeing the 1080GTX. But it seems the TI might me just around the corner. 

 

But then I stumbled over this. Maybe I should go full crazy and order a Titan? 

I'm quite happy with the GTX1080 which drives my sim at 4480x1080 resolution. Of course if you have a 4x monitor and have funds to spare go for it.

That's good to know, but it might help if you post what resolution (and how many monitors) you're running, and how far you're pushing the settings. ...

 

For my needs I just needed to know the relative change on my system going from Titan X to Titan X Pascal.  Wasn't really trying to compare with other systems ... but if you'd like specifics:

 

Location: default KSFO parking GA1

Time: 10:27am 

Aircraft: Carenado S500 Shrike

 

Graphics Settings ...

- Visual Effects: Max

- Texture Quality: Max

- Number of World Objects: High

- Reflection Detail: Medium

- Anti Aliasing: 2XSSA+FXAA

- Shadows: On

- Resolution: 3840 x 2160 (8,294,400 pixels)

- FOV: 70

 

Weather: xEnviro - Rain/fog/overcast (real world weather)

xEnviro Settings ...

- Min RVR = 0

- Min Ceiling = 0

- Max Turbulence = 100

- Braking action = OFF

- Windshear = ON

- ThunderStorms = ON

- Weather update = 15 min

- Clouds ...

- Max Visible range = 160 Km

- Min Visible range = 1 km

- Detail range = 30 km

- Reflections range = 30 km

- Shadow range = 30 km (bug currently no cloud shadows showing in XP11)

- Cloud Brightness = 100

- Clouds crossfade speed = 100%

- Atmosphere settings ...

- Atmosphere = ON

- Rain Effect = ON

- Snow Effect = ON

- Lighting Effect = ON

- 2D rain drops = OFF (note ON reduces 2-3 FPS)

- 3D landing lights effect = ON

- 3D clouds passing effect = ON 

- Light scattering = ON

- Post Processing = OFF (note ON reduces 2 FPS, need latest 376.19 nVidia drivers or higher to avoid VC gray overlay)

- Sound = all at 100%

 

 

You where most likely GPU bound then. The original Titan isn't that fast anymore, around the same as a 970.

 

The original Titan is old - Feb 2013, Titan Black - Feb 2014, Titan X - March 2015, Titan X Pascal - Aug 2016 ... the 970 - Sept 2014 ... but just to be clear I went from two Titan X's to a single Titan X Pascal.

 

Oh no! The members in P3D forum will miss you.

 

He'll be back ... true flight simmers are always sniffing around other platforms to see what's new ... haha

 

 

Thanks for running that test with the Titan X Pascal. I don't want my wife to see this but that is the card I planning to get. ...

 

I have to buy something of similar value for my wife ... so all my PC upgrades actually cost 2X as much ... so this time she got a nice new iPad Pro 256 GB with pen, keyboard case, etc. 

 

What driver version are you on Rob?

 

I recently discovered that the DPC latency issues with the earlier drivers don't seem to have been resolved in the latest driver either. Seems a bit better, but still the driver causing most latency on my system, with a water cooled Titan XP.

 

That said - turning off thread optimization in Nvidia control panel gives a far better performance in XP 10/11:D

 

Using latest 376.19 I haven't tested for DPC latency - put I'll fire up performance monitor and take a look.  Thread optimization OFF produces about 1-2 FPS lower performance and increases long frame count ... apparently this setting appears to vary considerably from system to system.

 

 

Denco, on 10 Dec 2016 - 07:49 AM, said:

The old Titan X must have been a bottleneck then. Considering that reflection and object density are CPU bound all of us are bottlenecked by our CPU's and considering that the performance per year is negligible don't expect this to change anytime soon. 

 

I discovered that Process Explorer does NOT show accurate GPU usage results for OpenGL based apps/games/sims ... it stays at 100% GPU usage constantly.  Oddly EVGA Precision X OC for Titan X Pascal does show GPU usage in systray but not OSD ... (and EVGA Precision X OC doesn't support OpenGL) ... that value is around 40% GPU utilization.  

 

Denco, on 10 Dec 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

I'm quite happy with the GTX1080 which drives my sim at 4480x1080 resolution. 

 

Yes, 4480 x 1080 is 4,838,400 pixels ... I'm running 3840 x 2160 so 8,294,400 pixels (almost 2X more pixels in a single 4K monitor).

 

Will upload video of my findings later.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

EDIT: Multi-Quote limits, grrr

 

For my needs I just needed to know the relative change on my system going from Titan X to Titan X Pascal.  Wasn't really trying to compare with other systems ... but if you'd like specifics:

 

{snip}

Graphics Settings ...

- Visual Effects: Max

- Texture Quality: Max

- Number of World Objects: High

- Reflection Detail: Medium

- Anti Aliasing: 2XSSA+FXAA

- Shadows: On

- Resolution: 3840 x 2160 (8,294,400 pixels)

- FOV: 70

 

Thanks, I was wondering why I'm getting such higher frame rates on a GTX 970 (40fps+), and the answer would seem to be your much higher monitor resolution -- 3840x2160 vs, my 1920x1200, and the fact that you're on Max setting and I'm on High.

 

Otherwise I'm on the same settings. I'm guessing most of the difference is monitor resolution, since a move from High(HDR) to Max doesn't drastically affect my frame rate. I'm just keeping it on High so I can stay above the 40fps threshold.

For my needs I just needed to know the relative change on my system going from Titan X to Titan X Pascal.  Wasn't really trying to compare with other systems ... but if you'd like specifics:

 

Location: default KSFO parking GA1

Time: 10:27am 

Aircraft: Carenado S500 Shrike

 

Graphics Settings ...

- Visual Effects: Max

- Texture Quality: Max

- Number of World Objects: High

- Reflection Detail: Medium

- Anti Aliasing: 2XSSA+FXAA

- Shadows: On

- Resolution: 3840 x 2160 (8,294,400 pixels)

- FOV: 70

 

Weather: xEnviro - Rain/fog/overcast (real world weather)

xEnviro Settings ...

- Min RVR = 0

- Min Ceiling = 0

- Max Turbulence = 100

- Braking action = OFF

- Windshear = ON

- ThunderStorms = ON

- Weather update = 15 min

- Clouds ...

- Max Visible range = 160 Km

- Min Visible range = 1 km

- Detail range = 30 km

- Reflections range = 30 km

- Shadow range = 30 km (bug currently no cloud shadows showing in XP11)

- Cloud Brightness = 100

- Clouds crossfade speed = 100%

- Atmosphere settings ...

- Atmosphere = ON

- Rain Effect = ON

- Snow Effect = ON

- Lighting Effect = ON

- 2D rain drops = OFF (note ON reduces 2-3 FPS)

- 3D landing lights effect = ON

- 3D clouds passing effect = ON 

- Light scattering = ON

- Post Processing = OFF (note ON reduces 2 FPS, need latest 376.19 nVidia drivers or higher to avoid VC gray overlay)

- Sound = all at 100%

 

 

 

 

The original Titan is old - Feb 2013, Titan Black - Feb 2014, Titan X - March 2015, Titan X Pascal - Aug 2016 ... the 970 - Sept 2014 ... but just to be clear I went from two Titan X's to a single Titan X Pascal.

 

 

 

He'll be back ... true flight simmers are always sniffing around other platforms to see what's new ... haha

 

 

 

I have to buy something of similar value for my wife ... so all my PC upgrades actually cost 2X as much ... so this time she got a nice new iPad Pro 256 GB with pen, keyboard case, etc. 

 

 

 

Using latest 376.19 I haven't tested for DPC latency - put I'll fire up performance monitor and take a look.  Thread optimization OFF produces about 1-2 FPS lower performance and increases long frame count ... apparently this setting appears to vary considerably from system to system.

 

 

Denco, on 10 Dec 2016 - 07:49 AM, said:

The old Titan X must have been a bottleneck then. Considering that reflection and object density are CPU bound all of us are bottlenecked by our CPU's and considering that the performance per year is negligible don't expect this to change anytime soon. 

 

I discovered that Process Explorer does NOT show accurate GPU usage results for OpenGL based apps/games/sims ... it stays at 100% GPU usage constantly.  Oddly EVGA Precision X OC for Titan X Pascal does show GPU usage in systray but not OSD ... (and EVGA Precision X OC doesn't support OpenGL) ... that value is around 40% GPU utilization.  

 

Denco, on 10 Dec 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

I'm quite happy with the GTX1080 which drives my sim at 4480x1080 resolution. 

 

Yes, 4480 x 1080 is 4,838,400 pixels ... I'm running 3840 x 2160 so 8,294,400 pixels (almost 2X more pixels in a single 4K monitor).

 

Will upload video of my findings later.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

EDIT: Multi-Quote limits, grrr

Are you able to compare the 2 cards in VR?

Thanks

Jay

I overclocked the heck out of my Strix 1080 and got about 8 more fps in X11 from stock clocks. I think the 1080ti is in my future though and I will overclock it as well. 

If and when the GTX 1080 ti is released, it may be more cost-effective than the Titan X Pascal. But 2 gigs less VRAM and 10% fewer CUDA cores than the Titan X Pascal will position it in a similar fashion to the old GTX 980 ti.

 

All that means is if you waited to upgrade from a GTX 980, you will love it. But going from a GTX 1080 to a GTX 1080 ti there may not be as noticeable a jump in performance. And the guesstimated prices are around $800-900 US.

The original Titan is old - Feb 2013, Titan Black - Feb 2014, Titan X - March 2015, Titan X Pascal - Aug 2016 ... the 970 - Sept 2014 ... but just to be clear I went from two Titan X's to a single Titan X Pascal.

 

Yes of course my mistake, still SLI doesn't do anything in XP, good choice ditching the dual GPOU setup.

If and when the GTX 1080 ti is released, it may be more cost-effective than the Titan X Pascal. But 2 gigs less VRAM and 10% fewer CUDA cores than the Titan X Pascal will position it in a similar fashion to the old GTX 980 ti.

 

All that means is if you waited to upgrade from a GTX 980, you will love it. But going from a GTX 1080 to a GTX 1080 ti there may not be as noticeable a jump in performance. And the guesstimated prices are around $800-900 US.

Let us hope that it is only $800. I went from 27fps to 32fps in P3D by overclocking the stock 1080 so I am sure there will be at least another 5 or so fps jump going from that to a stock 1080ti.

Hi there Rob!

 

Have you watercooled that Pascal, or are you running it with stock fans?

 

I'm lloking at this baby as well for my new build - if I can get hold of one. They're few and far between. Seems to me that SLI for flight simming just isn't worth it in terms of extra $$ vs. performance, so I'd rather invest in a TItan card.

 

I have not yet decided about my screen solution, so it might affect my choice down the line. I'm considering a triple monitor setup with a SpaceArm Multi Monitor Mount.

 

Seems to me that SLI for flight simming just isn't worth it in terms of extra $$ vs. performance, so I'd rather invest in a TItan card.

 

The X-Plane devs have said for years now, that SLI or other dual card approaches aren't more efficient for the way the sim handles graphics, and in fact it can slow things down. So a single fast card is the way to go.

 

Here's one of Ben's posts about it: http://developer.x-plane.com/2009/12/why-isnt-slicrossfire-a-no-brainer/

 

 

Have you watercooled that Pascal, or are you running it with stock fans?

 

OEM air cooling, no immediate plans to water cool it ... I did OC the card a little, but I didn't see any difference in FPS.

 

 

The X-Plane devs have said for years now, that SLI or other dual card approaches aren't more efficient for the way the sim handles graphics

 

I'll disagree with Ben, that's PR talking IMHO ... sorta like suggesting there is no reason to have multiple CPUs.  

 

But I do agree that multi-GPU addressing should be in the hands of the developer (for most effective use) and NOT the driver ... however implications are considerable at the design level (which would mean significant code changes) ... per nVidia's dev papers here: http://www.nvidia.com.tw/content/apacevents/siggraph-asia-2012/MultiGPURendering-sigasia2012-SVenkataraman.pdf  

 

For example what is currently missing in XP11 is good water motion, perfect example of using multiple GPUs to do this processing.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Let us hope that it is only $800.

 

Last I heard (as in yesterday) the 1080Ti will be $1000.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

For example what is currently missing in XP11 is good water motion, perfect example of using multiple GPUs to do this processing.

 

 

 

a new 3d water engine is already in the works, a "preview" (was more like a funny bug) was posted on the developers blog.

probably will come during the run of V11.

 

 

a new 3d water engine is already in the works

 

Yeah I read that ... latest CUDA libraries could help a lot with water motion ... I know Ben was trying to one up Triton but I think he's better off just going with Triton (Sundog) as it has considerable OpenGL support with CUDA.

 

http://sundog-soft.com/features/ocean-and-water-rendering-with-triton/

 

It's not perfect, but it works well and not too much of a hit in performance and can support multiple GPUs.  

 

Cheers, Rob.

It'll be heaven if we can get this kind of water in P3D or XP11. Perfectly good enough for flight sims.