Gtx 970 or gtx 1080 using airliner in p3d v4

[theobrinkman 3]

At this moment I have a GTX 970 used bij P3D v4.

I ask myself what the result will be when I replace this card into a GTX 1080. And what in comparance the results twill  be in performance and fps using an airliner like 747/777.

Is it interesting to do this investment or is the difference between the two GPU's too little?

 

 

[mhamilto 7]

The answer to your question depends on several factors (at least).  What resolution will you be using, 1080p HD or 4k?  What is your CPU?  Are you using the stock program or lots of addons?  What monitor(s) are you using?  The 1080 card has 8G of VRAM compared to the 970 having 4G (actually less than 4G, but that is another story!)  So you can certainly expect better video processing with the 1080 card, as long as your CPU is sufficient to support the enhanced video capability.  There are plenty of users who have upgraded at considerable cost to a more modern video card who report effective frame performance not that much better than their older cards, and just as many who are thrilled at their new performance from the upgrade.  Older and working well is sometimes better than new and having to work out the bugs!  The common theme seems to be if you do upgrade, be prepared for some setup hiccups to get things where you want your performance to be.  Hope this helps.

[ieydis 51]

I switched from a 2G 970 to an 1080Ti.  It's a whole other world....   

Ilya

 

 

 

[mpw8679 428]

I'm using a GTX980 and I see no point in upgrading yet.  I would at least wait till the 2000 series cards come out. 

[theobrinkman 3]

Ieysis.. please explain if you want .. "a whole other world".

I'm using now a NVIDiA Geforce GTX 970 12 Mb

 

[niyoko 7]

On ‎7‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 1:26 AM, theobrinkman said:

At this moment I have a GTX 970 used bij P3D v4.

I ask myself what the result will be when I replace this card into a GTX 1080. And what in comparance the results twill  be in performance and fps using an airliner like 747/777.

Is it interesting to do this investment or is the difference between the two GPU's too little?

 

 

I'd say it's little difference. You'll have more overhead to adjust the GPU dependent sliders. I did some test a while back and posted them in the forum. Here they are for a GTX970 and GTX1080 with a PMDG 777 at FSDreamteam's KCLT. The VRAM usage was well below the 4GB of the 970.

[theobrinkman 3]

So.. bottom-line.. you think the investement in a 1080 TI is not a good thing?

[zmak 331]

It's the same as always doesn't matter what the platform. Guys on old machines saying it's smooth and those on nasa pc having stutters and everything in between lol

[lownslo 592]

Bottom-line... Mike in the first reply to your post has the best perspective.

Good luck,

Greg

[zmak 331]

43 minutes ago, theobrinkman said:

So.. bottom-line.. you think the investement in a 1080 TI is not a good thing?

I think your original post just mention 1080..not 1080ti

[niyoko 7]

5 hours ago, theobrinkman said:

So.. bottom-line.. you think the investement in a 1080 TI is not a good thing?

4 hours ago, Venturi said:

It's the same as always doesn't matter what the platform. Guys on old machines saying it's smooth and those on nasa pc having stutters and everything in between lol

I'd have to go with this as well. I posted some raw data, but what Mike said in his post is right. My charts show just a slice with certain game settings. Your mileage may vary based on a lot of different factors. I feel that the investment into a better card helps. I'm happy with my 970 now, but want a 1070 someday.

[ahsmatt7 1,199]

6 hours ago, theobrinkman said:

So.. bottom-line.. you think the investement in a 1080 TI is not a good thing?

Unless you are going to be running 4k, then no.

[theobrinkman 3]

When not using 4k but a triple monitor(3*1980)(MATROX), wanting a better framerate in the VC and a PDMG and a smooth crispy display.. would a GTX 1080/1070 , not the TI, be better than the GTX970?

[mhamilto 7]

I am not an expert in video processsing (or math) but will offer this simplistic explanation.  (Those in the know please correct my explanation).  A basic way to look at video performance is to calculate how many pixels need to be displayed on the monitor(s) you are running multiplied by the refresh rate per second.  Assuming a similar standard refresh rate (60 cycles per second = 60HZ) and that all pixels are reprocessed each cycle, then depending on the resolution you wish to display, there are differing number of pixels to process.  Each RGB pixel that displays a non-black or white colour is 3 bytes (1R, 1G, 1B) of information.  So: 

HD is 1920 X 1080 = 2.0736 million pixels X 60 times/second = 124 million pixels per second X 3 bytes per pixel = 373 million bytes or 0.373 Gigabytes per second

3 HD monitors in surround is 3 X 2.0736 = 6.220800 million pixels X 60 times/second = 373 million pixels per second x 3 bytes per pixel = 1119 million Gigabytes per second or 1.119 Gigabytes per second.

4K is 3840 X 2160 = 8.2944 million pixels X 60 times/second =  498 million pixels per second X 3 bytes per pixel = 1494 million bytes or 1.494 Gigabytes per second.

Now let's look at the video cards.  No wonder they run hot!  A GTX970 Video card has 4G of VRAM (actually 3.5G!), a 1070 or 1080 has 8G, and a 1080Ti has 11G.   It is logical that the more VRAM available on the card, the more the video processing power.  Of course, there are many more factors to consider in video processing than VRAM, like heat, power, cooling, size, sensors, etc.  Let's put these aside for this explanation.

Hence, a 4G GTX970 may be fine in 1080p where 0.37 Gigabytes are processed each second, but won't work particularly well with 4K or 3 HD monitors, where 4 to 5 times more pixels need to be processed each second.   Trying to run your simulator with a GTX970 in 4K or even 3 monitors in HD may be doable, but is a compromise at best.  You should expect slower simulator fidelity and slower framerates.  With complicated addons like PMDG, things are even more dismal.  That said, framerates are not necessarily a good indicator of performance in flight simulators, as they are with other "shooter" type games.   Usually framerates around 30 or more are fine for flight simulators, in my experience.  Get below 30 and stutters may be a problem.  But the better the video processing of the card, the better chance to show what the simulation and its addons can do.

The bottom line (pardon the pun!) is it all comes down to what you have to spend, and what efforts you want to make to get the new card installed and setup.  Rarely is everything perfect out of the box.  The most expensive cards now like the 1080Ti's will last you several years before they are "obsolete", and the 1070 or 1080 will be outpaced in about 2 years.  If you want to "future-proof" your video system, get a 1080Ti, but be prepared to spend lots more for it than the 1070 or 1080.  You will spend more, it will work nicely with your addons in a 3 monitor HD setup you propose, and will last a bit longer.  But beware the extra cooling and power supply needs for the 1080Ti compared to your current 970, and make sure your CPU is not a bottle neck for the GPU.  That's my 24 bits!  Hope it helps, and if my explanation is a way off, please feel free to add in any corrections, so we all learn more. Thanks for your great questions!

 

Mike H.

 

[ieydis 51]

1 hour ago, mhamilto said:

A GTX970 Video card has 4G of VRAM (actually 3.5G!)

Mike,

 

Theo claims he has a 970 card with 12GB of RAM.  I've never heard of such a thing!  

Ilya

On 7/9/2017 at 8:21 AM, theobrinkman said:

I'm using now a NVIDiA Geforce GTX 970 12 Mb