GTX Titan Xp v 1080Ti: besides the massive cost diff and 1GB more VRAM, what's the difference for P3D V4?

[Noel 4,499]

I'm one to shoot for best parts for new builds, but since my 4.2y/o box is really up to the task for the time being (likely won't go V4 until all my add ons will work) except the video card I'm looking at these two options.  I'm not seeing a compelling reason to go w/ Titan Xp, but I really don't know.  1080Ti is massively stronger than my GTX Titan, so I plan to sell it and go w/ 1080Ti or God forbid, Titan Xp.  As I say, the cost difference is really substantial, yet published specs seem almost insignificant.  Please correct me if that's not the case.

[MarkW 1,491]

I am not even sure people can offer a good opinion on this yet given how new v4 is.  I think 12 months from now people will be suggesting 12 gig of VRAM (if available).

[GSalden 4,656]

The latest Titan X Pascal has the same architecture as the 1080 Ti.

Save yourself the extra cost and buy a 1080 Ti.

I have one and it drives 3 HD outside view monitors .

[Greggy_D 935]

3 minutes ago, GSalden said:

Save yourself the extra cost and buy a 1080 Ti.

Agreed. This is a no-brainer.  The Titan Xp shouldn't even be in the discussion because of the price/performance ratio.

[newtie 533]

I'm currently running Haswell/4.4/TitanBlack w/6GB/EVO Pro SSDs

I run photoscenery only with AI at my major hubs.

I have TEXTURE_EXP=10 in the config. with ~4.3VRAM used and an 88% GPU load @69c temp.

Silky smooth at 30fps solid.

A 1080 whatever wouldn't help me at all. 

 

[Jiri Kocman 20]

24 minutes ago, Greggy_D said:

Agreed. This is a no-brainer.  The Titan Xp shouldn't even be in the discussion because of the price/performance ratio.

If you want/need card with best perfromance TitanXp is no brainer and must to have, gtx1080ti is much cheaper but it is little bit slower.

[GSalden 4,656]

25 minutes ago, Jiri Kocman said:

If you want/need card with best perfromance TitanXp is no brainer and must to have, gtx1080ti is much cheaper but it is little bit slower.

The 1080 Ti is not slower.

[Jiri Kocman 20]

11 minutes ago, GSalden said:

The 1080 Ti is not slower.

It is of course. 1080Ti have less CUDA cores. 3584 CUDA on 1080Ti, 3840 on TitanXp.

This is shot from article - http://pctuning.tyden.cz/hardware/graficke-karty/46719-nvidia-titan-xp-ve-23-hrach-a-testech-vcetne-oc-na-vode?start=9

Results are avg. performance from over 20 games test. First three rows in graph are with water cooling. TitanXp in second row is not OC, it boost that high with water cooling. In default TitanXp is mostly same as OC edition of 1080Ti.

[Greggy_D 935]

And the OP's original question centers on a P3D4 use case.  Are you going to see a difference between a 1080 ti and Titan Xp in P3D4?  No way.

Waste another $400-$500 for bragging rights if you want.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

I agree that a Titan Xp is not a good value buy for P3D.  There are only 2 reasons to buy:

1) if you must have the absolute best performance possible, even if that extra performance costs another $500 and is only 7% faster than the $700 card (1080 Ti) which uses the same GPU (GP102).  

2) the extra 1GB VRAM *might* help when pushing the sim to the absolute limit

Rob Ainscough has stated a number of times now he's seen VRAM usage peak at 10.8GB on his 1080 Ti in P3D v4 with settings maxed and tons of add-ons.  That's awfully close to the 11GB limit of the card...  Food for thought.

[SimonC 116]

I remember someone somewhere saying P3Dv4 is pushing the limits of the current hardware. Which is of course right, if we start messing with TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP.

I question if these 11GB VRAM usage come from default P3Dv4 .cfg settings (sliders right, but nothing edited in the .cfg) or was for instance TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP been modded? Sounds very suspicious to me.

So all needs to be put into context. I can also say I want sharpest possible textures 100mi out @40,000ft, and need 100GB VRAM (figuratively speaking of course, no idea about the right number), but what's the point?

[TechguyMaxC 516]

1 minute ago, SimonC said:

I remember someone somewhere saying P3Dv4 is pushing the limits of the current hardware. Which is of course right, if we start messing with TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP.

I question if these 11GB VRAM usage come from default P3Dv4 .cfg settings (sliders right, but nothing edited in the .cfg) or was for instance TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP been modded? Sounds very suspicious to me.

So all needs to be put into context.

Yeah, it was Rob Ainscough, long-time P3D beta tester.  He provided details regarding the settings and add-ons which resulted in this VRAM usage.  What do you mean by "suspicious"?  

[SimonC 116]

Just now, TechguyMaxC said:

Yeah, it was Rob Ainscough, long-time P3D beta tester.  He provided details regarding the settings and add-ons which resulted in this VRAM usage.  What do you mean by "suspicious"?  

As in TSE was probably used...

Point me to the settings used please?

[TechguyMaxC 516]

Three posts on that page by Rob to paint the whole picture.  

 

[newtie 533]

See the stickies...