I'm itching to upgrade a little bit but there is only I so much I can do with the current board. I was thinking about getting a 1080ti and a 4k monitor.

Seem like a reasonable thing to do our am I going to run into a bottleneck?

 

4K is incredibly demanding on the graphics card and you don't really see the benefits unless your monitor is 32"+. 1440p at 27" is a nice compromise and will run on a GTX980 (as I am doing).

10 hours ago, ckyliu said:

4K is incredibly demanding on the graphics card and you don't really see the benefits unless your monitor is 32"+. 1440p at 27" is a nice compromise and will run on a GTX980 (as I am doing).

PMFJI. You’re running at a resolution I’m considering once a 64-bit version of Concorde is available.

Increasing the workload by a factor of 4 will surely have an impact on FPS or will it with my card, a 1080?

That’s why I’m considering a AOC 32” 2560*1440 monitor which increases workload by a more reasonable 77% and seems a decent compromise.

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/315-aoc-q3279vwf-wqhd-freesync-monitor-mva-2560x1440-75hz-169-5ms-20m1-displayport-hdmi-dvi-vga?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI1fXH2cK82wIV1uFRCh2DeQuCEAQYAiABEgIE2_D_BwE

Edited June 5, 20188 yr by Ray Proudfoot

@Ray As you said you are rendering 4x the pixels going from 1080p to 2160p (4k) so you'll almost certainly see a significant FPS drop regardless of your hardware; how much will depend on existing GPU, graphics memory and CPU utilisation. i.e. if you're only using 40% of those now there's lots of spare capacity to increase resolution, if you're using 85% already then you're going to see a performance drop (you can track usage with GPU-Z).

I've got a GTX980 4GB and I'm almost maxing it's graphics memory at 1440p, along with my 4.5 GHz processor and it won't maintain 30 fps unless I start to dial things back a little (you can see my settings in a screenshot I posted in the thread linked to at the bottom). 32" is probably the limit for 1440p, if you go any bigger it's going to start looking fuzzy or blocky.

You can use nVidia DSR to simulate the effect of having a higher resolution, but I found in practise the performance hit with the actual 1440p monitor was more than DSR led me to believe, although that could be because I retained my 1080p monitor for desktop stuff. But it will at least give you an idea.

 

Edited June 5, 20188 yr by ckyliu

Thanks @ckyliu, I have tried that Nvidia DSR test but with Concorde over central London I was running out of VAS so it wasn’t very helpful. I always want to test in the most demanding areas because if the hardware can cope there it can cope anywhere.

Given I have an i7 and a 1080 it should be able to cope if your system can. I fly a Learjet 25 and Carenado PC12 but Concorde is the most demanding.

I’m in no hurry as it will be a few months before Concorde is available and I don’t plan on getting v4 until it is.

I’m currently using a Sony 32” FullHD TV which is just about okay resolution wise but felt the jump to 4K was too great to maintain decent performance. Hence the compromise with QHD.

Good point abusing GPU-X for monitoring. I’ll give it a shot. 

The performance gain I got going from a 1070 to a 1080ti on a 1920x1200 monitor was pretty much wiped away when i went to a 1440P monitor under gpu intensive loads ....i run pretty high settings.

I think some here will say that the1080ti in SLI is needed if you want to play P3Dv4 at 4K with the settings one might use at 1080p.

Edited June 5, 20188 yr by FunknNasty

@Ray Proudfoot No problems. Didn't realise you were running 32 bit still, I would upgrade to P3Dv4 before doing monitor resolution and potentially hardware upgrades as you will probably find v4 more efficient and you require extra VAS at =>1440p anyway.

Your system will definitely cope, it's just how much you'll have to sacrifice in the graphics settings to get a decent framerate.

Edited June 5, 20188 yr by ckyliu

Right now I am running 2560*1440. on a 27" 2k monitor. The main reason I want to go 4k is to get a larger monitor. As mentioned, I 27" is a good size for 2560*1440, but 4K would be needed if I went much larger.

1 hour ago, FunknNasty said:

The performance gain I got going from a 1070 to a 1080ti on a 1920x1200 monitor were pretty much wiped away when i went to a 1440P monitor under gpu intensive loads ....i run pretty high settings.

I think some here will say that the1080ti in SLI is needed if you want to play P3Dv4 at 4K with the settings one might use at 1080p.

Might that be down to your i5 processor? Perhaps a bit of a mismatch?

45 minutes ago, ckyliu said:

@Ray Proudfoot No problems. Didn't realise you were running 32 bit still, I would upgrade to P3Dv4 before doing monitor resolution and potentially hardware upgrades as you will probably find v4 more efficient and you require extra VAS at =>1440p anyway.

Your system will definitely cope, it's just how much you'll have to sacrifice in the graphics settings to get a decent framerate.

The unknown factor is how better FPS might be in v4. I might get it before Concorde comes out because I want it long term even FSL don’t release it for whatever reason.

Most of my flying is IFR so loads of antigen don’t interest me. Detailed coastlines are nice plus busy airports with plenty of Ai.

35 minutes ago, duckbilled said:

Right now I am running 2560*1440. on a 27" 2k monitor. The main reason I want to go 4k is to get a larger monitor. As mentioned, I 27" is a good size for 2560*1440, but 4K would be needed if I went much larger.

32” seems to be the max size for 2K but that’s not a problem for me as I have that size TV for FullHD. 4K starts at 27” but text would be a nightmare at that size. Probably 40” minimum.

41 minutes ago, duckbilled said:

Right now I am running 2560*1440. on a 27" 2k monitor. The main reason I want to go 4k is to get a larger monitor. As mentioned, I 27" is a good size for 2560*1440, but 4K would be needed if I went much larger.

Man, I think Ron is considering something that your looking for. I think one could get away with a 32" 2K without significant compromise in picture quality.

2 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

Man, I think Ron is considering something that your looking for. I think one could get away with a 32" 2K without significant compromise in picture quality.

Makes me wonder if I would notice the difference between 1080 and 2k on my 27".

I don't have sliders all the way right, but I do have a lot going on in the sim - lots of ai, Active Sky (no 4096 clouds), lots of add on scenery, ORBX stuff. I do get some slow loading textures and choppy performance from time to time.

I'm really just trying to find a way to improve things without a complete rebuild. Bigger monitor. new GPU or more memory are the only things I can think of. 

32 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Might that be down to your i5 processor? Perhaps a bit of a mismatch?

 

With all do respect Ray, I think you missed the point of my post.

Edited June 5, 20188 yr by FunknNasty

13 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

With all do respect Ray, I think you missed the point of my post.

You said “The performance gain I got going from a 1070 to a 1080ti on a 1920x1200 monitor was pretty much wiped away when i went to a 1440P monitor under gpu intensive loads ....i run pretty high settings.”

My point was the 1080i is the fastest graphics card available so any reduction in performance could well be down to the CPU running out of grunt. The 1080i is more than capable of running in 4K but it needs to be paired with a powerful i7.

Well my 4GB GTX980 (with a mild overclock) is the bottleneck on my [email protected] system because P3Dv4 really leans on the graphics card a helluva lot more than FSX ever did. I am GPU limited despite my processor being from 2011.

The 1080ti is a crazy expensive card though. I wouldn't bother with SLI as I don't believe it works all that well with P3D, certainly not for what it costs.

Edited June 5, 20188 yr by ckyliu

10 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

You said “The performance gain I got going from a 1070 to a 1080ti on a 1920x1200 monitor was pretty much wiped away when i went to a 1440P monitor under gpu intensive loads ....i run pretty high settings.”

My point was the 1080i is the fastest graphics card available so any reduction in performance could well be down to the CPU running out of grunt. The 1080i is more than capable of running in 4K but it needs to be paired with a powerful i7.

Don't have my calculator if front of me but if I had it would it show us the pixel counts of 4k vs 2k vs 1080p.

Now, while the calculator will not tell us why the pixel count is important to know we can you use those numbers as a starting point in our quest to research why it is important. 🙂