Do we know the rough performance difference between the 4090 and soon to be released 4080?

My thinking is this... the main appeal of the 40-series cards for MSFS is due to the effective frame rate doubling of DLSS3.

On my current 3090 with settings of 4K, Ultra, LOD400, TAA, I'm getting around 45-55FPS with dips down to 30-40 with tons of mods and scenery.  If the 4080 offers no advantage over the 3090 other than just doubling my frame rate with DLSS, that gets me over 60FPS in almost every situation.  That's perfect. Now the 4090 might be 10% better than the 3090 right?  But that's not really going to add much is it?  I mean going from a low of 30FPS (3090) to 60FPS (4080) to 66FPS (4090) it seems that the 4080 is the best value and 4090 is well into diminishing returns territory.  What do you think?

Edited November 3, 20223 yr by Virtual-Chris

Sounds like you're getting great performance already with the 3090. If everything is nice and smooth already then what your actual fps is not important. You most likely will spend a lot of money for the 4000 series card for little to no actual benefit in the sim. 

I upgraded from a 3080Ti to a 4090 as it was a big improvement for VR using the Varjo Aero. If it wasn't for that, I would have stayed with the 3080Ti as I was very happy with the 2D performance. I don't chase fps. If its smooth while flying, that's all that matters. But if you have the funds, go for it.

 

 

 

 

Is anyone else intentionally holding off on the 4090 and waiting on the 4080?

Now that the new AMD graphics cards have been announced, it will be interesting to see how the 7900xt at $899 will perform (or the 7900xtx at $999). AMD seems to be taking on Nvidia on price.... Announced to be available on Dec 13, 2022.

Edited November 4, 20223 yr by pgde

2 hours ago, pgde said:

Now that the new AMD graphics cards have been announced, it will be interesting to see how the 7900xt at $899 will perform (or the 7900xtx at $999). AMD seems to be taking on Nvidia on price.... Announced to be available on Dec 13, 2022.

Does AMD have something similar to DLSS3? If not, I’m afraid they are going to have limited appeal. The big thing this generation seems to be DLSS3 frame generation which seems to offer very little trade offs for a doubling of FPS. 

It seems that AMD has announced something similar to DLSS3 but it won't be here until next year, and it remains to be seen what kind of support is required from games and how well that will take off. I think for flight simulation, DLSS3 seems to be a saviour for those moments when FPS goes down the toilet with study level airliners and demanding airport scenery packages so Nvidia seems to be the smart investment for now.

On 11/4/2022 at 2:12 PM, Virtual-Chris said:

DLSS3 seems to be a saviour for those moments when FPS goes down the toilet with study level airliners and demanding airport scenery packages so Nvidia seems to be the smart investment for now.

It's not, DLSS3 induces a frame-by-frame insertion, but it does not help response time. When there is real lag in a game, the response of the screen gets worse, things do not respond right. It might help slightly if you are flying straight and not touching the controls, but only if the FPS is still relatively smooth, when the render start to render end time is out-of-synch (which it often is with lag), then DLSS does nothing to help and may make it slightly worse.

It will be like the difference between a wave hitting a rock and spraying in all directions versus a wave hitting a boat and flowing back. Neither are going to look smooth, they both will have that inherent jerky change out of place, one just has fewer pieces flying around so to speak.

Edited November 6, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery

3 minutes ago, Alpine Scenery said:

It's not, DLSS3 induces a frame-by-frame insertion, but it does not help response time. When there is real lag in a game, the response of the screen gets worse, things do not respond right. It might help slightly if you are flying straight and not touching the controls, but only if the FPS is still relatively smooth, when the render start to render end time is out-of-synch (which it often is with lag), then DLSS does nothing to help and may make it slightly worse.

It will be like the difference between a wave hitting a rock and spraying in all directions versus a wave hitting a boat and flowing back. Neither are going to look smooth, they both will have that inherent jerky change out of place, one just has fewer pieces flying around so to speak.

@Cpt_Piett would you care to comment? I recall you stating that DLSS3 was a saviour in these situations where the FPS tanked at large airports.

https://hardforum.com/threads/nvidia-dlss-3-frame-generation-lock-reportedly-bypassed.2022529/page-3

 

1 hour ago, Alpine Scenery said:

It's not, DLSS3 induces a frame-by-frame insertion, but it does not help response time. When there is real lag in a game, the response of the screen gets worse, things do not respond right. It might help slightly if you are flying straight and not touching the controls, but only if the FPS is still relatively smooth, when the render start to render end time is out-of-synch (which it often is with lag), then DLSS does nothing to help and may make it slightly worse.

It will be like the difference between a wave hitting a rock and spraying in all directions versus a wave hitting a boat and flowing back. Neither are going to look smooth, they both will have that inherent jerky change out of place, one just has fewer pieces flying around so to speak.

I don't feel that input lag or response time are a major factor in my enjoyment of the flight simulator like it can be in a competitive shooter.  I think DLSS is ideal for situations where the engine is main thread limited, struggling to feed your GPU, and as a result you're getting slide show like FPS that starts to look like a movie shot on film.  If the GPU can smooth panning in these situations, that's all that matters. I don't need better response times, just smoother rendering of the response I have. 🙂

In fact, I can't think of a better application for DLSS than a flight simulator... lag is inconsequential, the rendering can be largely main-thread limited, and any (artificial or otherwise) boost in the FPS is a welcome improvement.

Edited November 6, 20223 yr by Virtual-Chris

Just now, Virtual-Chris said:

I don't feel that input lag or response time are a major factor in my enjoyment of the flight simulator like it can be in a competitive shooter.  I think DLSS is ideal for situations where the engine is main thread limited, struggling to feed your GPU, and as a result you're getting slide show like FPS that starts to look like a movie shot on film.  If the GPU can smooth panning in these situations, that's all that matters. I don't need better response times, just smoother rendering of the response I have. 🙂

Fair enough, but on my setup in the largest airports, it really gets kind of jerky overall.
 

1 minute ago, Alpine Scenery said:

Fair enough, but on my setup in the largest airports, it really gets kind of jerky overall.
 

Do you have a 4000 series car with DLSS3?

9 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Do you have a 4000 series car with DLSS3?

Nah, just a 3080 12GB, but I'm just basing it on DLSS in general and what the issues always have been and what others have said still are.

I am comparing with no traffic (other than static FSLTL), no seasons addon, and some settings turned down, which should be roughly equivalent to the 4090.
If I had a 4090, I'd want to run everything, but I also need a new CPU so not much point for me yet.

I also run in 1440p, not 4k, as I don't see any benefit to 4k if you are already using a 4k display but upscaling 1440p.
Hence, 2560x1440 upscaled by a good 4k display already has less issues than DLSS.

Before I would even try DLSS, I would just buy a Samsung with Judder reduction and try that first, and run 2560x1440.
The MSFS rendering engine just isn't really clean enough to have much difference in 4k vs. 1440p, I couldn't see anything really.
4k is a waste of electricity in MSFS, in some games it's not.

That said, when I was shopping for a new display, I didn't see that many Samsungs with good contrast ratios other than their real expensive stuff, so I just got the TCL 43", which unfortunately doesn't have judder reduction or motion smoothing. I just got tired of shopping, as I wanted a display with at least 5000:1 contrast ratio and under $400, and the TCL was all I could find.

 

Edited November 6, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery

3 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

@Cpt_Piett would you care to comment? I recall you stating that DLSS3 was a saviour in these situations where the FPS tanked at large airports.

First of all I agree with you that the slight increase in input lag that might occur with DLSS3 is inconsequential in MSFS. It's highly unlikely that you will notice it. 

And I do think that one big advantage with DLSS3 is in tight situations (heavy scenery, complex aircraft addon, AI traffic) when fps is tanked due to main thread limitations. DLSS3 will not help mainthread render times, but will effectively double fps due to frame generation. 

I think the result is quite impressive - but it's worth noting that @TravelRunner404 has noted that there are issues due to poor frame consistency i.e. stutters. If I understand things correctly. 

Now that I've found a method of doing 4K video captures with negligible performance hit on MSFS, I might spend some time today making some videos to show DLSS3 in action with the PMDG 737-700 at major hubs e.g. iniBuilds Heathrow. 

Edited November 6, 20223 yr by Cpt_Piett

The issues are hard to compare, it takes a lot of testing, so just firing it up is a bit anecdotal, though I realize you are better than average at this sort of thing.

Does DLSS enabled beat 1440p without DLSS, because the resolvability of what MSFS is rendering really isn't up to 4k levels anyhow, the AA might be.
I don't see it guys, I'm not convinced, have read lots of stuff and used the previous version of DLSS. Some of the most renowned gamers even just trying it in fairly slow action single player games are just seeing way too many side effects for it to be useful, and the side effects you see aren't necessarily the same from one PC to another, so it depends on your display as well. 

Too many variables IMO, I'm sticking with raw performance in 1440p which is very predictable.

 

 

Edited November 6, 20223 yr by Alpine Scenery