Hardware related question - RAM

[High_Alpha 42]

If the mods think this is better suited to another forum section my apologies, please move it as as you see fit...

I've got several questions regarding ram usage, the ideal spec recommends 32GB of ram. Are people seeing close to that in usage on max settings at 4k in places like New York? How will lots of mods affect ram usage? Once DX12 is supported will more than 32GB make a noticeable difference on a CPU like a 10900K? Do you think 64GB is a better choice long term, especially with VR use? Any input is much appreciated!

Edited August 24, 2020 by High_Alpha

[Heli 66]

When I ran 4K ultra settings in Las Vegas which has photogrammetry, MSFS alone was using 17gb.  I like to leave Edge browser and other software open while gaming so my total ram usage was around 23gb.  You may not need 64gb ram because when you run VR there is no way we will be able to play at 4k ultra settings. 

Edited August 24, 2020 by Heli

[SKEWR 364]

Hey!

This weekend I upgraded from Tower 4000MHz 16GB of RAM to Crucial Ballistix Max 4400MHz 32GB RAM. It took maybe 2 minutes to upgrade (let's not talk about the price! LOL) As someone living in the NYC area, I had to do the test. On my system the sim was not close to the maximum use of RAM. When I had 16GB, the WIN10  managed the RAM well. Max RAM usage I remember seeing before the upgrade was 70ish % used. With the 32GB, I sit at 23% usage going up the East river and down the Hudson (I need more testing to verify). Interestingly, my frame rates stayed between 31 and 27 over NYC in the DA62 no matter what setting I used in Graphics options.

 

Mods: I'm not sure how mods will affect RAM usage. There aren't enough mods out there yet to gauge the usage.

DX12: VRAM could be an issue, but I don't think physical RAM will be affected.

VR & 64GB: Not sure here either. The only reasons I did not get 64GB was I only wanted to use two sticks of RAM (versus 4) and the prices weren't that great. With VR, I think the CPU/GPS needs to pump out 90FPS and may not benefit from RAM amount, but RAM speed won't ever hurt!

 

My system for reference: I9900k OC to 4.8 on water cooling, ASUS 2080TI, 32GB of crucial RAM (listed above), 3440 x 1440 35 inch ultra wide ACOG monitor (not 4K)

 

[javelina 56]

7 minutes ago, SKEWR said:

Hey!

This weekend I upgraded from Tower 4000MHz 16GB of RAM to Crucial Ballistix Max 4400MHz 32GB RAM. It took maybe 2 minutes to upgrade (let's not talk about the price! LOL) As someone living in the NYC area, I had to do the test. On my system the sim was not close to the maximum use of RAM. When I had 16GB, the WIN10  managed the RAM well. Max RAM usage I remember seeing before the upgrade was 70ish % used. With the 32GB, I sit at 23% usage going up the East river and down the Hudson (I need more testing to verify). Interestingly, my frame rates stayed between 31 and 27 over NYC in the DA62 no matter what setting I used in Graphics options.

 

Mods: I'm not sure how mods will affect RAM usage. There aren't enough mods out there yet to gauge the usage.

DX12: VRAM could be an issue, but I don't think physical RAM will be affected.

VR & 64GB: Not sure here either. The only reasons I did not get 64GB was I only wanted to use two sticks of RAM (versus 4) and the prices weren't that great. With VR, I think the CPU/GPS needs to pump out 90FPS and may not benefit from RAM amount, but RAM speed won't ever hurt!

 

My system for reference: I9900k OC to 4.8 on water cooling, ASUS 2080TI, 32GB of crucial RAM (listed above), 3440 x 1440 35 inch ultra wide ACOG monitor (not 4K)

 

Curious to see what your FPS is when on approach and landing at JFK.   When I was tooling around NYC I was in the low 30's, with a few drops here and there to 25/26.  But that was for only a sec or two, and I was back to 31 or so.

It was when I came into JFK, on approach, from the East heading West, my FPS tanked to 16-18...  Until I touched down and cleared the East end of the terminal.  Once I did that, my FPS went between 27-31...  Some pretty intense objects, etc, on that side of the Airport I presume.

[SKEWR 364]

@javelina

Will try it. Landing 31 L or R and I'll report back with FPS.

Oddly from the initial tests I actually got worse frames (27-22) in the TEB area (Lodi, Edgewater, North Bergen, Moonachie etc...)

[javelina 56]

It was 31L.  thanks!  curious to hear your results!

[captain420 3,099]

I got 64GB, didn't want to run into the issue of will I have enough blah blah like some of the threads here. The max ram consumption I've witnessed is about 23GB. Someone even went up to 27GB. 32GB should be the sweet spot, but if you're like me and don't want to worry about RAM, go with 64GB if you can.

[n4gix 4,947]

3 minutes ago, captain420 said:

but if you're like me and don't want to worry about RAM, go with 64GB if you can.

My new sim rig came with 64GB installed already, so I'm all good. 

[javelina 56]

3 minutes ago, captain420 said:

I got 64GB, didn't want to run into the issue of will I have enough blah blah like some of the threads here. The max ram consumption I've witnessed is about 23GB. Someone even went up to 27GB. 32GB should be the sweet spot, but if you're like me and don't want to worry about RAM, go with 64GB if you can.

I was kinda of the same thought process, so I went 64GB's as well. 

Heck, call me crazy, but I had a spare NVMe slot in my rig.  So I bought another (a 3rd one).  I now have my O/S on an NVMe, my flight sims on a second NVMe, and that new 3rd NVMe, I'm currently using as my swap/pagefile drive....   😀

[SKEWR 364]

54 minutes ago, javelina said:

It was 31L.  thanks!  curious to hear your results!

I did the flight from Linden (LDJ) to JFK 31L. 

CPU had spikes up to 84% but average 60%

GPU was at 67% averaged 62%

FPS

Leaving NJ 31-30

Over lower Hudson ( near Verrazano) 33-30

South of JFK (Base leg) 31-27

On approach 28-24 with spikes of 31 and bottoms of 24.

 

Next time I need to setup a take screen shot button. I pressed PrintScrn button and the sim paused like i took a pic, but nothing.

[High_Alpha 42]

Thanks for all the testing and hardware spec information! Does anyone know how ram frequency and latency improves performance? I know there has been other in depth benchmarks done, but nobody has looked at this aspect of performance as far as I am aware. Since getting a nearly constant 60 frames at ultra might just barely be possible with an RTX 3090 I'd like to be able to get as many extra frames on average as possible, so is it worth getting 64GB of 4000 MHz ram?

Edited August 25, 2020 by High_Alpha

[craigeaglefire 197]

you'll be fine with 32GB but 64GB is an insurance policy,

go for the best speed you can - but not at crazy prices - you actually will not notice much difference,

personally, i use Corsair Vengeance 32GB @ 3200 & no problems with MFS (2080Ti/9700K).

[Irishbug63 0]

On 8/24/2020 at 10:36 PM, High_Alpha said:

Thanks for all the testing and hardware spec information! Does anyone know how ram frequency and latency improves performance? I know there has been other in depth benchmarks done, but nobody has looked at this aspect of performance as far as I am aware. Since getting a nearly constant 60 frames at ultra might just barely be possible with an RTX 3090 I'd like to be able to get as many extra frames on average as possible, so is it worth getting 64GB of 4000 MHz ram?

Holy smoke Alpha! No one seems to have understood your question here other than myself. I too want to know if 4000MHz of RAM (not the physical size of the RAM) will offer better performance than 3600Mhz or 3200Mhz RAM. Everyone seems to be hung up on how much RAM in GB's they have, rather than the frequency and/or latency of the ram they're using. Did you happen to gain any knowledge on this topic? I'm trying to configure a system but I'm hung up on RAM frequency I should go for but more importantly will it even make a difference using higher frequency RAM. Any information you could provide on this topic would be great.

 Thanks

[Mace 1,904]

23 minutes ago, Irishbug63 said:

Holy smoke Alpha! No one seems to have understood your question here other than myself. I too want to know if 4000MHz of RAM (not the physical size of the RAM) will offer better performance than 3600Mhz or 3200Mhz RAM. Everyone seems to be hung up on how much RAM in GB's they have, rather than the frequency and/or latency of the ram they're using. Did you happen to gain any knowledge on this topic? I'm trying to configure a system but I'm hung up on RAM frequency I should go for but more importantly will it even make a difference using higher frequency RAM. Any information you could provide on this topic would be great.

 Thanks

I tend to gravitate toward lower latency when I am spec'ing out ram.  If my sticks-of-interest were 3600 and a nice CAS Latency, I'd go for 3600 lower CL's over 4000's with a higher CL.  I feel CL is more important to my overall running than freq of ram, within reason.

Maybe my thinking is flawed and someone has add'l info on this but that's how I usually look at things with respect to system ram.

[Irishbug63 0]

39 minutes ago, Mace said:

I tend to gravitate toward lower latency when I am spec'ing out ram.  If my sticks-of-interest were 3600 and a nice CAS Latency, I'd go for 3600 lower CL's over 4000's with a higher CL.  I feel CL is more important to my overall running than freq of ram, within reason.

Maybe my thinking is flawed and someone has add'l info on this but that's how I usually look at things with respect to system ram.

So so tell me, from your experience since your original post. Does lower latency and/or higher frequency RAM, affect flight simulator 2020?  If yes, by how much more performance did you observe? And lastly, is there a RAM sweet spot that offers both max performance vs. cost that you can recommend? Today will be the day I whittle down my RAM choices and I will submit my purchase order for the computer, tomorrow. 

 

Thanks!