Hi,

I'm currently considering upgrading my RTX 2070 Super.

I'm currently not sure which GPU to get.

My favorites are currently:

RTX 3080 12GB
6900 XT 16GB
6800 XT 16GB

What can you recommend?

16GB VRAM from AMD would be quite good, but I believe that AMD cards often have problems with Flightsim.
And performance is better with NVIDIA cards..

Anyone from 2070 Super to 3080 or AMD?

do you notice a performance boost in P3D?

5 minutes ago, RAMMSTEIN1977 said:

Hi,

I'm currently considering upgrading my RTX 2070 Super.

I'm currently not sure which GPU to get.

My favorites are currently:

RTX 3080 12GB
6900 XT 16GB
6800 XT 16GB

What can you recommend?

16GB VRAM from AMD would be quite good, but I believe that AMD cards often have problems with Flightsim.
And performance is better with NVIDIA cards..

Anyone from 2070 Super to 3080 or AMD?

do you notice a performance boost in P3D?

RTX 3080  with 12 GB is good enough. I would definitely go for Nvidia RTX.

I have never exceeded 11GB at ultra high settings WITH VR. And never exceeded 9GB without VR. And only at KMIA with Truesky I managed to exceed 10GB with VR activated.

Most of the time VRAM hovers between 4GB and 8GB

All above with 4k at 32inch monitor. 

Marcus (P3D Beta Tester) 😉

 

Edited March 13, 20224 yr by mpo910

Do your research with professional hardware review sites. You will find the Radeons equal to Geforces, and in some cases better. I have two RTX (3090 and 2080Ti) and two Radeons (6800XT and 6900XT). My Radeons serve on my main PC's (one of which is my MSFS machine), and they are rock solid, good drivers and cooler with lower watts than the Geforces. People are too fast recommending Geforces as if it was still the year 2004.

Don't expect much preformance improvement with a GPU upgrade. I went from a 1070 to a 3070 Ti and the only thing that happened was that it now handles dynamic lights at night better. Very little other benefit on my system. It did make a huge difference for MSFS, Elite Dangerous and just about any other game I've tried.

Edited March 13, 20224 yr by andreh

2 hours ago, Vlooi said:

Do your research with professional hardware review sites. You will find the Radeons equal to Geforces, and in some cases better. 

How do Radeons handle Nvidia Waveworks is the question I'd ask. That will dictate if I go Radeon or Geforce in the future seeing its an integral part of Prepar3d now. 

47 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

If you can wait, I would ... even if you don't plan on buying next Gen GPU, release of these new series would significant lower the price of current units.

That's how it was until the launch of the 30 series with the supply issues and recent black swan event. As supplies increase I hope we can get to that however the current geopolitical happenings worldwide, especially as they concern resource producing countries, has me a bit cautious. But if things stabilize, then I'd second the advice of waiting for the new AMD and Nvidia GPU's. 

(1) RTX 3090 + i9 12900K vs RX 6900 XT + Ryzen 9 5950X - Test in 1080p & 4K - YouTube

In this test the AMD runs hotter than a 3090.

7 hours ago, andreh said:

Don't expect much preformance improvement with a GPU upgrade. I went from a 1070 to a 3070 Ti and the only thing that happened was that it now handles dynamic lights at night better. Very little other benefit on my system. It did make a huge difference for MSFS, Elite Dangerous and just about any other game I've tried.

I disagree, I went from a 1070Ti to a 3080Ti and I've been able to run with dynamic cloud shaders and vegetation shadows, two things I've not been able to run with previously except in the barest of trees or clouds.

The 3080Ti is quite the powerhouse, but of course Rob's remark of up and coming GFX cards being 2~3x the performance of todays top cards would be even better 🙂

Then again in ~3 years the same will happen again.

Cheers

 

 

^^ I guess one argue about what performance improvement really means, but I'd call that a dissappointment in terms of what you got for all that money you must have spent. A few extra shadows...The bump in performance in other games is A LOT higher by comparison. In Elite Dangerous and msfs I could bump all settings two steps at least.

Also, you don't appear to be using EA. I fly in VR so that might be a factor too. I wasn't able to increase any quality settings without inducing stutters. Sometimes I can run EA clouds at high instead of medium and I can raise the supersampling in the Oculus Tray tool by .1. That's it. Hardly worth £800 if you look at P3D alone.

Edited March 14, 20224 yr by andreh

Unless your running a 4K monitor the 3090 is wasted and even then overpriced.

And if the think things are going to get better you may be disappointed.

  'China's Silicon Valley' Locked Down, Could Affect Supply Chains | Tom's Hardware (tomshardware.com)

Although this is a P3D thread, I think AMD GPUs still have some unresolved flickering issue with X-Plane 11. Not sure if X-Plane 12 will fix it but may also swing your decision.

3 hours ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Depends if you've tapped out your CPU ... performance is a balance between CPU and GPU.  If you pair a low-end CPU/RAM/Chipset with a high end GPU, then you'll not see much benefit.

Cheers, Rob.

Likely the case as my cpu is an old 6700k. Nevertheless, I'm happy with my p3d performance and everything else I do is also fine, better even. My point was simply that disappoment with gpu upgrades and p3d is rather commonplace and that the OP should be prepared (no pun intended).

8 hours ago, andreh said:

Likely the case as my cpu is an old 6700k. Nevertheless, I'm happy with my p3d performance and everything else I do is also fine, better even. My point was simply that disappoment with gpu upgrades and p3d is rather commonplace and that the OP should be prepared (no pun intended).

A CPU upgrade will give you a bigger bang for buck than any GPU, I went from a I7 7700K to a I9 10900K and a ASUS APEX MB for a lot less then the cost of a 3080 GPU, 10 cores no HT all cores working in P35v5.

PS MSFS in 4K ultra 40% CPU load 70% GPU load no addons MSFS still in development, in fact the PC load is less now than 6 months ago could be now being optimised for XBOX, My grandson has an XBOX 1 and the other week he told me he played MSFS for the first time on Game Pass no downloading, But he`s into racing games.  

Edited March 15, 20224 yr by G-RFRY

On 3/14/2022 at 8:30 PM, andreh said:

^^ I guess one argue about what performance improvement really means, but I'd call that a dissappointment in terms of what you got for all that money you must have spent. A few extra shadows...The bump in performance in other games is A LOT higher by comparison. In Elite Dangerous and msfs I could bump all settings two steps at least.

Also, you don't appear to be using EA. I fly in VR so that might be a factor too. I wasn't able to increase any quality settings without inducing stutters. Sometimes I can run EA clouds at high instead of medium and I can raise the supersampling in the Oculus Tray tool by .1. That's it. Hardly worth £800 if you look at P3D alone.

Just a few extra shadows ? well, when there are thousands of trees it's more than just a *few* extra shadows and I can certainly drive the GPU to max%.

Actually those shadows and dynamically lit clouds *are* 2 x extra steps up, practically everything else is at the max already.

And I don't mean just slider max, I mean custom tuned config files to the max for things like curve alignment, shadow cascades and draw distances, cloud layering, texture resolution, autogen trees and buildings above and beyond the max slider levels plus many other tuned settings.

And yep I don't have EA running because I'm running v4.5.

Additionally I use the cuda cores for Neat Video rendering, check it out, It's an amazing piece of software for video cleanups, although even with all that GPU power it still took some 8 hours to render out just over an hour of video.

https://www.neatvideo.com/

Cheers

2 hours ago, Rogen said:

Just a few extra shadows ? well, when there are thousands of trees it's more than just a *few* extra shadows and I can certainly drive the GPU to max%.

Actually those shadows and dynamically lit clouds *are* 2 x extra steps up, practically everything else is at the max already.

And I don't mean just slider max, I mean custom tuned config files to the max for things like curve alignment, shadow cascades and draw distances, cloud layering, texture resolution, autogen trees and buildings above and beyond the max slider levels plus many other tuned settings.

And yep I don't have EA running because I'm running v4.5.

Additionally I use the cuda cores for Neat Video rendering, check it out, It's an amazing piece of software for video cleanups, although even with all that GPU power it still took some 8 hours to render out just over an hour of video.

https://www.neatvideo.com/

Cheers

So, running 4.5, no EA, no VR and no complex pmdg airliner (at least acc. to the screenshots). Our circumstances aren't comparable then. But I'm happy you got something out of your gpu upgrade. I didn't, much at least (in p3d). Good example of how milage may vary.

Edited March 15, 20224 yr by andreh

32 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

There lies the issue as to why you aren't seeing better utilization of your GPU. 

If it's a common problem then those having this common problem will need to find the balance ... one OR the other component upgrade rarely pays dividends in terms of optimal utilization.  Being single generate behind is about as far as I would go when doing component upgrades that are just ONE component ... several generations behind and you're under utilizing the upgraded component.

If it's a budget concern for those with this common problem, then I'd recommend waiting until the budget is sufficient to do a CPU and GPU and motherboard/chipset and maybe RAM upgrade ... that will provide the best return on investment.  I do see that as a common thread "I can afford one component, which one" ... my response would always be wait.  Like I said, one generation variance is ok, but several generation variance and single component upgrades aren't going to be as fruitful.

Cheers, Rob.

 

Indeed, but since it runs well now for everything else but P3D, I will wait and see how the PMDG performs for MSFS once it's released. If it's acceptable then I'll just leave it as it is. I don't plan to use P3D anymore after that anyway.