Is it worth it to try overclocking a 1080 Ti with my overall system specs below? I have the 9900K @ 5.0GHz and performance of P3D is very good. I have tried unsuccessfully to use MSI Afterburner to overclock the GPU to see if I can move a slider or two. I also have not tried doing anything with the 3200 main memory from the ASUS UEFI.

Thanks, Bruce

Edited September 9, 20196 yr by bbuckley
typo

45 minutes ago, bbuckley said:

Is it worth it to try overclocking a 1080 Ti with my overall system specs below? I have the 9900K @ 5.0GHz and performance of P3D is very good. I have tried unsuccessfully to use MSI Afterburner to overclock the GPU to see if I can move a slider or two. I also have not tried doing anything with the 3200 main memory from the ASUS UEFI.

Thanks, Bruce

First, there really isn't any need to run the 9900K at 5.0GHz (unless you're only talking about the Turbo function).  If you've O/C'd to 5.0GHz and you fly online then you don't have to wonder why you pass other aircraft flying the same speed with the same weather as you have any more, it's the frame rate being tied to simulator time affecting that and it's just unnecessary.

Having the 9900K O/C to about 4.5 or max 4.6GHz would be fine, in fact I would just lock the processors to that instead of having them cycle up and down (that Turbo function is fine for somethings but hurts as much as it helps with flight sim).  Try locking those cores and you'll be amazed at the difference it makes, and settings to 4.5 or 4.6 GHz it will prevent any bottleneck with the GTX1080.

Best wishes!

 

Heya Bruce!

We're almost all CPU bound, even you running your 9900K at 5.0GHz all cores coupled with your 1080Ti.  Over the years, I've never noticed a worthwhile gain in performance overclocking a GPU for FSX/P3D... and it's because I've always been CPU bound!

As I recall your RAM is Samsung "B" die... now that might be worthwhile to overclock.  Keep in mind, though, that overclocking memory is a science and art all it's own.  It can be very time consuming and sometimes frustrating.  I keep telling myself I should try overclocking my "B" die 3600 when I find the time, and maybe I will... when I find the time.

Cheers,

Greg

4 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

First, there really isn't any need to run the 9900K at 5.0GHz (unless you're only talking about the Turbo function).  If you've O/C'd to 5.0GHz and you fly online then you don't have to wonder why you pass other aircraft flying the same speed with the same weather as you have any more, it's the frame rate being tied to simulator time affecting that and it's just unnecessary.

Having the 9900K O/C to about 4.5 or max 4.6GHz would be fine, in fact I would just lock the processors to that instead of having them cycle up and down (that Turbo function is fine for somethings but hurts as much as it helps with flight sim).  Try locking those cores and you'll be amazed at the difference it makes, and settings to 4.5 or 4.6 GHz it will prevent any bottleneck with the GTX1080.

I have to disagree with most of this...4.5 GHz -> 5.0GHz is a better than 10% bump in CPU speed, especially on that all-important core running the main thread.  Having some overhead there makes it possible to absorb CPU workload spikes without producing long-frames--stutters.  On my 5.3GHz 8086K, the core running the main thread (core 0) is typically running at around 60-70% with P3D running, but there are spikes that push it much closer to 100%, and the ability to power through those without hitting the wall is the difference between smooth and stutters in those situations.  Locking the cores is somewhat pointless for the purpose of smoothing out P3D, as the constant heavy workload on the main thread while P3D is running is enough to keep the CPU clock ramped up to its max without any need for intervention in the BIOS settings.

I can't find a good reason to recommend leaving performance on the table when it's right there for the asking.  Overclocking may not be a complete game-changer, but if you can make it work with what's in the box, why wouldn't you? 

For the OP...overclocking your 1080Ti might make a minor difference in those situations where the GPU loads are very heavy...multiple layers of weather, aggressive AA at night with DL etc.  I think the majority of performance GPUs are already binned by the manufacturer and the better ones are already factory-overclocked, so in practice there most likely isn't a lot of performance gain to be made unless you do something like add a water-cooling jacket and jack the voltages up way past what would be supportable with the factory air cooling.  Truth be told, I've actually had several factory-overclocked cards that couldn't reliably hold their factory overclock settings when running FSX/P3D and I had to dial them back a notch to get them stable.  Most video cards are sold to us already clocked way past nVidia's specs, anyway.

Regards

5 hours ago, DaveCT2003 said:

If you've O/C'd to 5.0GHz and you fly online then you don't have to wonder why you pass other aircraft flying the same speed with the same weather as you have any more, it's the frame rate being tied to simulator time affecting that and it's just unnecessary.

I fly online but exclusively PilotEdge. I've never noticed any of this phenomenon. But I limit my frames externally by RTSS ScanLine x/2 with my monitor on 60Hz. I get a very smooth ride at ~30FPS constantly.

5 hours ago, lownslo said:

As I recall your RAM is Samsung "B" die... now that might be worthwhile to overclock.  Keep in mind, though, that overclocking memory is a science and art all it's own. 

You remember correctly! But I agree with the science and art... haven't tried it yet.

2 hours ago, w6kd said:

For the OP...overclocking your 1080Ti might make a minor difference in those situations where the GPU loads are very heavy...

I just flew a test flight in some intense scenery and used HWMonitor. GPU utilization was mostly ~65%. Spiked to 100% at least once though.

Thanks all!

2 hours ago, w6kd said:

I have to disagree with most of this...4.5 GHz -> 5.0GHz is a better than 10% bump in CPU speed, especially on that all-important core running the main thread.  Having some overhead there makes it possible to absorb CPU workload spikes without producing long-frames--stutters.  On my 5.3GHz 8086K, the core running the main thread (core 0) is typically running at around 60-70% with P3D running, but there are spikes that push it much closer to 100%, and the ability to power through those without hitting the wall is the difference between smooth and stutters in those situations.  Locking the cores is somewhat pointless for the purpose of smoothing out P3D, as the constant heavy workload on the main thread while P3D is running is enough to keep the CPU clock ramped up to its max without any need for intervention in the BIOS settings.

I can't find a good reason to recommend leaving performance on the table when it's right there for the asking.  Overclocking may not be a complete game-changer, but if you can make it work with what's in the box, why wouldn't you? 

For the OP...overclocking your 1080Ti might make a minor difference in those situations where the GPU loads are very heavy...multiple layers of weather, aggressive AA at night with DL etc.  I think the majority of performance GPUs are already binned by the manufacturer and the better ones are already factory-overclocked, so in practice there most likely isn't a lot of performance gain to be made unless you do something like add a water-cooling jacket and jack the voltages up way past what would be supportable with the factory air cooling.  Truth be told, I've actually had several factory-overclocked cards that couldn't reliably hold their factory overclock settings when running FSX/P3D and I had to dial them back a notch to get them stable.  Most video cards are sold to us already clocked way past nVidia's specs, anyway.

Regards

If you don't fly online (VATSIM, IVAO, etc.) then I can understand.  If you do... a time will come when you understand.

Also, speaking as someone who is formally trained and worked as a computer engineer over many years (PC's to mainframe super computers to server arrays), I know that gamers will always seek out the highest performance, even when it's not needed. If it's not needed, computers will always run better at less than maximum speeds - that's 100% of the time by the way, no margin of error.  Also important to note that temps that are read are very specific, and are not take on each component on a motherboard and there are blocks of transistors that run hotter than temps being reported. Moreover, and as you know doubt are aware, running a processor at a higher speed than the graphics card can handle under heavy load creates a bottle neck and the undesired results which stem from that.  In this situation, one doesn't have to O/C the graphics card (the OPs original question), but rather just reduce the O/C on the processor.

Another way of looking at this... my Ford will in fact drive very well at 140+mph, but I don't always have to run it at that speed.

Best wishes my friend.

 

Edited September 9, 20196 yr by DaveCT2003

In this current comparison your 1080Ti proves it is still a great card two years after release.  Of course, this is comparing gaming titles but we can hope someday us orphan step children who enjoy flight sims may get some attention...   Either way, your GPU is no slug!

Greg

 

3 hours ago, lownslo said:

In this current comparison your 1080Ti proves it is still a great card two years after release.  Of course, this is comparing gaming titles but we can hope someday us orphan step children who enjoy flight sims may get some attention...   Either way, your GPU is no slug!

Greg

 

Great article Greg. Interesting that their test rig is a 9900K @5.0GHz. I've had my 1080 Ti a little over a year and it's been awesome and I'm running a 4K 40" TV.

I'm in one of those very rare periods of time in FlightSim world, where everything about my sim setup, PC, software, and controls, are all working beautifully! Time to tweak something! 🤣 That's what prompted my overclocking question. But all things considered, and listening to great advice, maybe I should just fly and enjoy a while.

2 hours ago, bbuckley said:

...maybe I should just fly and enjoy a while.

Yep, that's what I've been doing!

Have fun,

Greg

20 hours ago, bbuckley said:

Is it worth it to try overclocking a 1080 Ti with my overall system specs below? I have the 9900K @ 5.0GHz and performance of P3D is very good. I have tried unsuccessfully to use MSI Afterburner to overclock the GPU to see if I can move a slider or two. I also have not tried doing anything with the 3200 main memory from the ASUS UEFI.

Thanks, Bruce

CPU and even RAM overclocking can bring significant benefits, especially to sims which mostly use the CPU.  Overclocking of video cards rarely brings a benefit, but can lead to rapid overheating of the card.  Just my experience.

9 hours ago, bbuckley said:

But all things considered, and listening to great advice, maybe I should just fly and enjoy a while.

I agree! Fly and enjoy your sim!

3 hours ago, stans said:

CPU and even RAM overclocking can bring significant benefits, especially to sims which mostly use the CPU.  Overclocking of video cards rarely brings a benefit, but can lead to rapid overheating of the card.  Just my experience.

Thanks, I may try the RAM sometime, I think I'm just gonna leave the GPU alone. I tried using MSI to overclock the GPU one time and it crashed P3D in flight. I quickly reset everything and rebooted and went "whew". 

On 9/9/2019 at 2:11 PM, DaveCT2003 said:

If you don't fly online (VATSIM, IVAO, etc.) then I can understand.  If you do... a time will come when you understand.

Also, speaking as someone who is formally trained and worked as a computer engineer over many years (PC's to mainframe super computers to server arrays), I know that gamers will always seek out the highest performance, even when it's not needed. If it's not needed, computers will always run better at less than maximum speeds - that's 100% of the time by the way, no margin of error.  Also important to note that temps that are read are very specific, and are not take on each component on a motherboard and there are blocks of transistors that run hotter than temps being reported. Moreover, and as you know doubt are aware, running a processor at a higher speed than the graphics card can handle under heavy load creates a bottle neck and the undesired results which stem from that.  In this situation, one doesn't have to O/C the graphics card (the OPs original question), but rather just reduce the O/C on the processor.

Another way of looking at this... my Ford will in fact drive very well at 140+mph, but I don't always have to run it at that speed.

I've flown and controlled on VATSIM for years, always with overclocked computers.  Never had any sort of issue on either side of the scope with a plane flying faster than others because the computer was clocked faster. (?)

As for computers running "better" at lower speeds...define "better."  I have five overclocked computers in my man cave dating back as far as 2006 (my last surviving Win XP box, a dual-core Conroe X6800), and if there has been any degradation to the longevity of the components, any failure that's going to occur as a result is at a point that's far, far past the point where the components are obsolete anyway.

If the GPU can't keep up with the CPU, the only real downside is that the CPU's throughput is limited to something below it's capacity--at that point in time--by the GPU's inability to take frames as fast as the CPU could produce them.  But the workload while running P3D varies widely--even if your GPU can't handle, say 30 fps at 4K resolution at night with dynamic lighting on, it might handily deal with a less-extreme load flying over an urban area heavily-populated with autogen buildings and trees, and in that case the CPU is going to need every bit of throughput it can muster to feed the GPU without the frame rate sagging or becoming unstable.  The OP's 9900K can push his 1080Ti to its limits in some situations, in which case the stronger the GPU the better...a case where an overclocked GPU would help.  And the OP's 1080Ti can handle 4K frames at 30 fps all day long with scattered clouds over ORBX SoCal with an 8-core overclocked 9th Gen CPU running the main thread maxxed out at 100% trying to deal with all the autogen and AI traffic over the LA basin.

The key to a great simming computer is to have balance--you want both a CPU and a GPU that can handle its respective peak anticipated workload while producing a stable stream of graphics frames. 

Using your Ford analogy, you might be able to get away with putting a smaller engine in it and still hit 140 mph, but not going up a hill with a 50 mph headwind.  We want that Ford to be able to take the hill whenever we need it to.

Regards