@fppilot Hi Frank, I'm the original poster of this info at the FS2020 forums, and beyond the technical reasoning leading to the idea of using 64GB instead of 32GB with a 3090 because this card has 24GB VRAM, which a sizeable amount could be backed in RAM because of the use of DX11 (or DX10/9/OGL), there are a number of people who are confirming it is indeed helping them removing most if not all hurdles they have in VR effectively, and this might just be because when in VR a much higher amount of VRAM is used, or as equally possible, because when in VR there is bug in FS2020, or SteamVR, or WMR, or the DX11 driver, which is causing such amount of VRAM/RAM usage. But one thing for sure, it is really helping people beyond any placebo effect. Maybe not everyone, but some certainly.

Edited March 9, 20215 yr by RXP

12 minutes ago, RXP said:

@fppilot Hi Frank, I'm the original poster of this info at the FS2020 forums, and beyond the technical reasoning leading to the idea of using 64GB instead of 32GB with a 3090 because this card has 24GB VRAM, which a sizeable amount could be backed in RAM because of the use of DX11 (or DX10/9/OGL), there are a number of people who are confirming it is indeed helping them removing most if not all hurdles they have in VR effectively, and this might just be because when in VR a much higher amount of VRAM is used, or as equally possible, because when in VR there is bug in FS2020, or SteamVR, or WMR, or the DX11 driver, which is causing such amount of VRAM/RAM usage. But one thing for sure, it is really helping people beyond any placebo effect. Maybe not everyone, but some certainly.

+1²  My only point is that all the fluff about the RTX 3 series is totally with and about near zero availability.

 

2 minutes ago, fppilot said:

+1²  My only point is that all the fluff about the RTX 3 series is totally with and about near zero availability.

 

You can't even get a 2080Ti for less than an arm and a leg

1 hour ago, RXP said:

@fppilot Hi Frank, I'm the original poster of this info at the FS2020 forums, and beyond the technical reasoning leading to the idea of using 64GB instead of 32GB with a 3090 because this card has 24GB VRAM, which a sizeable amount could be backed in RAM because of the use of DX11 (or DX10/9/OGL), there are a number of people who are confirming it is indeed helping them removing most if not all hurdles they have in VR effectively, and this might just be because when in VR a much higher amount of VRAM is used, or as equally possible, because when in VR there is bug in FS2020, or SteamVR, or WMR, or the DX11 driver, which is causing such amount of VRAM/RAM usage. But one thing for sure, it is really helping people beyond any placebo effect. Maybe not everyone, but some certainly.

It is possible, but also remember that with unoptimized code anything is possible. If the code were optimized correctly, it shouldn't generally affect it AFIK from all the theory I know as a programmer, but it doesn't mean my theory is all encompassing and there is something I haven't thought about, but I would usually point to bad unoptimized code if 64GB is making a big difference compared to 32GB. As noted in other threads, memory buffers are not flushed entirely all at once as some non-programmers might be thinking, but it is the edges are altered as differing formats of data rely on LIFO, FIFO, but when using memory buffering responsibly (for gaming) you don't really need more than 16GB, maybe 32GB at absolute most. The CPU or GPU can only handle so much new data as you throw at it in a given timeframe. Any programmer can be sloppy and need 512GB of memory if they want to be.

Edited March 9, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

1 hour ago, Alpine Scenery said:

Any programmer can be sloppy and need 512GB of memory if they want to be.

Yep, I just replaced a server with 512GB for just that reason, the software was not optimised for a small memory footprint. The new one, as I mentioned before, is 1.5TB of ram (24 x 64GB RDIMM, we could have gone 3TB with LRDIMM but thought that might be a bit excessive) .  The code is also not optimised for multithreading properly limiting us to  maybe 100 threads or so meaning we went with a pair of 6248R CPU's for 48 cores and 96 threads at 3Ghz base rather than two 6258R which would have given us 56 cores and 112 threads at only 2.7Ghz base.  The new server has 4 x1200w PSU for a total of 4800w to cater for up to 6 x A100  Tesla but we did not buy Teslas as the software is not optimised for Teslas either.

Thing is it it ended up being cheaper to pay $50K or so for a new server rather than pay to have the software optimised and rewritten to handle multiple Teslas and more threads.

The software is the key to everything.

Edited March 9, 20215 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

Just now, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

Yep, I just replaced a server with 512GB for just that reason, the software was not optimised for a small memory footprint. The new one, as I mentioned before, is 1.5TB of ram (24 x 64GB RDIMM, we could have gone 3TB with LRDIMM but thought that might be a bit excessive) .  The code is also not optimised for multithreading properly limiting us to  maybe 100 threads or so meaning we went with a pair of 6248R CPU's for 48 cores and 96 threads at 3Ghz base rather than two 6258R which would have given us 56 cores and 112 threads at only 2.7Ghz base.  The new server has 4 x1200w PSU for a total of 4800w to cater for up to 6 x A100  Tesla but we did not buy Teslas as the software is not optimised for Teslas either.

Thing is it it ended up being cheaper to pay $50K or so for a new server rather than pay to have the software optimised and rewritten to handle multiple Teslas and more threads.

The software is the key to everything.

Right, and with huge server datasets it's also harder to optimize the algorithms because of the cache hit/miss from having a sheer ridiculous amount of data that may be unpredictably called upon.

With gaming, the game knows the direction you are moving and can use a LOD to surround the loading and 95% of everything is completely predictable when caching game objects. Not that server programming is harder than game engine coding (its not), its just that gaming programmers have no excuse to need 64 GB Ram. You are also talking about maybe 10GB to 20 GB of data to load from 50 GB versus hundreds of GB or even terrabytes on a server.

As video cards become more powerful and other techniques are used that use more memory, it may make sense, but given the current entire speed of a GPU/CPU combo, 64GB should not be needed.

Edited March 9, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

10 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

It looks good, but what is the take away from this? The description says you're running 32GB.  And it's not clear what FPS you're getting.

For the non believers, this sim is amazing and will only get better. This is a short hop to and from Toronto/City Centre CYTZ in Carenado's new PA28R ARROW III. Roman Designs freeware Greater Toronto Enhancement Pack has been used in conjunction with LUMI 3D STUDIOS - TORONTO (CANADA) NIGHT LIGHT ENHANCED MSFS. The runway textures have also been altered with ZINERTEK - ENHANCED AIRPORT GRAPHICS MSFS v1.5. Currently my set-up is limited by internet bandwidth, which I have just barely enough to support these extreme LOD's in high detail. Realtime weather and air traffic are in use and ATC is offline (I think it has more variety in the voices). Yes, I have faster net on the way, and I am awaiting with as much patience as possible. I have had success running LOD 9 terrain when the MSFS server has been kind to me, and have had my Object LOD as high as 7 and will post more videos, especially once my internet situation is fixed. I have also had success with increasing AA, Raytraced shadows, and reflections past Ultra. My PC specs: 9900k, 64GB G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C14D-32GTZR, Gigabyte Z390 AUROS XTREME, EVGA RTX 3090 FTW3 Ultra, 2 1TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe. Honeycomb Alpha and Bravo, Logitech Rudder. Roman Designs GTA https://flightsim.to/file/538/greater... LUMI 3D STUDIOS - TORONTO (CANADA) NIGHT LIGHT ENHANCED MSFS https://secure.simmarket.com/lumi-3d-... ZINERTEK - ENHANCED AIRPORT GRAPHICS MSFS https://secure.simmarket.com/zinertek...

 

Looks clearly stated Im running 64Gb, my take from this is that im running High LODs in full Ultra and its pretty smooth for MSFS right from takeoff to landing. It's only been said 10000+ times about this sim, its not about fps, its about smoothness. Hopefully your eyes are on par to judge this.

9 hours ago, fppilot said:

Reports have that is also makes a ton of difference with MSFS 2025, when it is alleged that 3090's might possibly be available.

Oh my......

 

I knew what I wanted and snapped on it back in October. I still have 2 1080ti's I was using in sli before hand... Im glad I saved them thinking one day I might be able to donate this to a someone not as comfortable as myself. Would you like one, from your sig you could use one 🙂

9 hours ago, Noel said:

You can't even get a 2080Ti for less than an arm and a leg

Yes, the worst that can happen now is that our graphics cards suddenly dies, then it's game over...

1 hour ago, Smartbomb said:

Looks clearly stated Im running 64Gb, my take from this is that im running High LODs in full Ultra and its pretty smooth for MSFS right from takeoff to landing

And this is why despite any claim of "64GB is unnecessary" it makes sense when you're pushing data. Why? Because in this case, instead of having to stream smaller pieces of data as you fly along in order to discard farther geometry and bring new one to view and surrounding, the game can initially stream much more data from the get go to VRAM (meaning you have mesh loaded up as far as 100nm instead of 25nm) and as you go, it can stream same new data over a longer period of time because this new data won't be visible until much later. And this is the 2nd benefit: because the 24GB VRAM allow loading more data farther away, you can end up having enough data beyond visible reach, which means when updating new data it won't be needed right away for rendering and therefore won't make the rendering engine stall until the entire data is uploaded to VRAM (because it doesn't need this data for rendering the next frame).

I don't know if FS2020 is pushing the envelop this far but it might well be. Or they could have implemented VR as 2 separate render paths with duplicated data for example, which would explain why in VR, and maybe only in VR, you're consuming much more VRAM than expected. It makes sense because separate data prevents access contention for the rendering.

In any case, most users with a 3090 in VR are reporting higher VRAM usage than in 3D, be it a bug, an implementation feature, a DX11 issue, I don't know, but whenever you use VRAM with buffers in DX11, you can expect a copy of these buffers in RAM too and the more, the merrier in this case.

1 hour ago, RXP said:

And this is why despite any claim of "64GB is unnecessary" it makes sense when you're pushing data. Why? Because in this case, instead of having to stream smaller pieces of data as you fly along in order to discard farther geometry and bring new one to view and surrounding, the game can initially stream much more data from the get go to VRAM (meaning you have mesh loaded up as far as 100nm instead of 25nm) and as you go, it can stream same new data over a longer period of time because this new data won't be visible until much later

In any case, most users with a 3090 in VR are reporting higher VRAM usage than in 3D, be it a bug, an implementation feature, a DX11 issue, I don't know, but whenever you use VRAM with buffers in DX11, you can expect a copy of these buffers in RAM too and the more, the merrier in this case.

Look at 50+ benchmarks of games, AFIK - not one is enhanced that I know about from 32GB to 64GB, regardless of the video card. I'm sure there is an anomaly here and there from an unfixed bug, but it would be very rare. From a programming perspective, it also doesn't make sense that DirectX would need this much data pushed, even with a very small memory leak. As noted, game caching algorithms are very predictive, unlike servers. Not just from past performance, past benchmarks, but every logical and rational algorithm used.

Not saying it's impossible, as there is some really unusual situations that might cause it, but it sounds very strange.

 

Edited March 9, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery

1 hour ago, RXP said:

In any case, most users with a 3090 in VR are reporting higher VRAM usage than in 3D

How much more, percentage-wise?

10 minutes ago, Alpine Scenery said:

Look at 50+ benchmarks of games, AFIK - not one is enhanced that I know about from 32GB to 64GB, regardless of the video card. I'm sure there is an anomaly here and there from an unfixed bug, but it would be very rare. From a programming perspective, it also doesn't make sense that DirectX would need this much data pushed, even with a very small memory leak. As noted, game caching algorithms are very predictive, unlike servers. Not just from past performance, past benchmarks, but every logical and rational algorithm used.

I believe you're missing an important point, but I might be wrongly reading you as well: this is not a general solution, but a specific empirical result for FS2020 (not any other game) and in VR (not in any other benchmark test). Furthermore, it is about FS2020 rendering engine (not any other game caching algorithm).

I don't believe the point is arguing about knowledge about how game engine are working in general, rather it is debating whether anyone with a 3090 running FS2020 in VR is also finding better performance with 64GB than with 32GB, and in this case, trying to finding the reasons it is so happening. I'm exposing some probable reasons why it is happening, but this is not meant for others trying to argue why it shouldn't for those who don't get any better experience.

@Noel I might miss some, but it seemed to me everyone with a 3090 and 32GB who has upgraded to 64GB AND who has reported their results, were saying it was better for them.

 

Edited March 9, 20215 yr by RXP

2 hours ago, Ixoye said:

Yes, the worst that can happen now is that our graphics cards suddenly dies, then it's game over...

How is your 2080Ti running MSFS?  Even my 2070 Super is able to maintain vsync to 30Hz w/ almost all settings at ultra almost all of the time.  Seems like 11Gb for 3440x1440 should be pretty dang good enough no?

7 minutes ago, RXP said:

I believe you're missing an important point, but I might be wrongly reading you as well: this is not a general solution, but a specific empirical result for FS2020 (not any other game) and in VR (not in any other benchmark test). Furthermore, it is about FS2020 rendering engine (not any other game caching algorithm). I'm exposing some probable reasons why it is happening, but this is not meant for other trying to argue why it shouldn't.

I don't mean to sound argumentative, I was just stating reasons that it sounds weird. The rendering relies on caching, memory is about caching when talking about extreme amounts of memory because it is impossible to "quickly" load something large enough to be of any direct consequence when talking about this amount of memory. 

Edited March 9, 20215 yr by Alpine Scenery