Hi folks,

With newer nVidia 20xx Super GPU cards, how important is having 11GB VRAM in XP 11x if I want to run a few "must-have" add-ons?  Eg, Orbx True Earth libraries, accurate weather, clouds, and max settings, on 3 x1080 displays? (not stretching surround, but independent renderings for each screen). Being that the new Nvidia super cards only have 8 GB of VRAM, I wonder if that means they aren't recommended for what I want to do, and therefore the only option for me is the 2080ti, (since I can't find a reasonably priced 1080ti)?  Are the newer "super" cards so fast, that you can easily  get away with just having 8GB of VRAM instead of 11 GB on the nVidia TI GPUs?

The PC that I'm building for this is: (I have most of parts, except the GPU and display monitors/TVs)

Intel - Core i7-8086K 4 GHz 6-Core Processor (hoping to OC to 5 Ghz)
Noctua - NH-D15S 82.52 CFM CPU Cooler (plus an extra 140 fan to make dual fan configuration)
Asus - ROG STRIX Z390-E GAMING ATX LGA1151 Motherboard
Corsair - Vengeance LPX 64 GB (4 x 16 GB) DDR4-3200 Memory
Intel - 660p Series 2.048 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive
Samsung - 970 Evo Plus 1 TB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive
Cooler Master - MasterCase H500 ATX Mid Tower Case
SeaSonic - PRIME Ultra Titanium 850 W 80+ Titanium Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply


Thanks,
Ghost Flyer

Edited July 10, 20196 yr by ghost flyer

If you want to use ORBX TE and Texture Quality set to maximum you will need the 11GB. 

I'd say the 11GB easily outweigh the performance edge the 20XX cards have. Many times I have checked my VRAM during flights to find out I am using 8.5 - 10 GB and thinking wow, without the 11GB, I'd be outta luck now. And that only by running orthophotos, default 737 and World Traffic. X-Plane easily exceeds 8GB VRAM usage. It's funny, I have the 11 GB and I am running "Medium" texture res. to make sure I'm out of trouble. On the performance side, my 1080ti is bored all the time, just waiting for the CPU (4790K) to get the job done.

Edited July 10, 20196 yr by Colonel X

Of course he would need a super computer processor to process a lot hat stuff to push the data to the card so it can do some work, but who needs cpu's, all you need is teh most expensive GPU. dont you???

I'm currently running a 8 gig 2080 with a 9900k, 32 gigs ram and it handles the new TE PNW fine.

Heck, I'm flying the Orbx TE Washington scenery just fine at 30-45 FPS on my GTX 970 with just 3.5 GB of usable VRAM. Texture is only on High (HDR) but I'm using maximum world objects. The monitor resolution is a big part of the performance here, and I'm using 1920x1200, not higher resolution. This Orbx scenery is surprisingly well optimized for a card like the 970 if you're not pushing the sliders to max or running a 4k monitor.

Using real weather with ActiveSkyX throwing in 3 cloud layers will start to drop it into the mid 20's FPS though, so I do need a GPU upgrade in the near future. I'm not sure I'm looking for 11 GB though. The new GTX 2060 Super with 8 GB is looking like a nice bang for buck without getting into crazy money (for me).

" Heck, I'm flying the Orbx TE Washington scenery just fine at 30-45 FPS on my GTX 970 with just 3.5 GB of usable VRAM. Texture is only on High (HDR) but I'm using maximum world objects. The monitor resolution is a big part of the performance here, and I'm using 1920x1200, not higher resolution. "

Exactly the same card specs here. If I set the same texture  and world objects settings, I too get over 30 fps, sometimes 50. Which is more than enough to please me. My 34" widescreen is 1920x1200. High resolution is not worth much to me, as it kills f.p.s., costs a fortune, requires more cpu & gpu power, and adds only a very little to the enjoyment. As compared to dense scenery and better f.p.s. which to me seems to add far more enjoyment than high resolution.

 

On 7/11/2019 at 4:19 AM, dbw1 said:

I'm currently running a 8 gig 2080 with a 9900k, 32 gigs ram and it handles the new TE PNW fine.

Yep TE GEB only with a 9900KF/2080/32 gb ram / and several M2 drives and running fine 35 plus with zibo / ASXP/ WT3 and Xvision

When you weigh 'importance' against 'nice' - consider the financial outlay.  A year from now, when the dust has settled on 'Vulkan', MSFS etc you may be congratulating yourself for your restraint.

I'm also running a lowly GTX970. I use mostly high settings and never have issues, stutters or freezes in X-plane. Sure, XP11 will gladly use up as much RAM and VRAM as you throw at it, but is it essential? Absolutely not!

..all current simulators are CPU driven and investing to much in GPU right now doesn't make lot of sense, we need for some tech changes and progress to be made. I run 1080 and sliders set to almost all high and Ortho4xp, and rarely get into "Trouble"

 

Cheers

 

Yair