Hi,

Can someone put into simple terms why I would see a GPU load of 98%, when I'm only using 8455MB on a card that has 24GB memory and a memory controller load of 14% in X-Plane 12?

Thanks

Mike

Edited January 17, 20233 yr by Mike_CFII_MEL

What resolution is it pushing? More pixels is often equal to more %usage. If the CPU is less loaded it would probably mean the GPU is bottlenecked. Would have to look at frametimes to gauge that.

3D water, 3D vegetation, and possibly other stuff, is all computed while the CPU is thinking. In other words, the GPU is being used all the time now. All in parallel. No rest stops.

VRAM usage is a function of how much texture and polyogns it's trying to render. So lots of 4k addons/ortho or being in an area with a wide variety of geometry would load up VRAM (including hi res ground mesh). I've never seen it go much beyond 10/11 gig with all that eye candy turned up though. VRAM isn't the best gauge of %usage expectations. Especially with 24 of them. Same with system RAM.

12 hours ago, blingthinger said:

What resolution is it pushing? More pixels is often equal to more %usage. If the CPU is less loaded it would probably mean the GPU is bottlenecked. Would have to look at frametimes to gauge that.

3D water, 3D vegetation, and possibly other stuff, is all computed while the CPU is thinking. In other words, the GPU is being used all the time now. All in parallel. No rest stops.

VRAM usage is a function of how much texture and polyogns it's trying to render. So lots of 4k addons/ortho or being in an area with a wide variety of geometry would load up VRAM (including hi res ground mesh). I've never seen it go much beyond 10/11 gig with all that eye candy turned up though. VRAM isn't the best gauge of %usage expectations. Especially with 24 of them. Same with system RAM.

Hi,

This happens in both 2K and 4K, yet I maintain 30fps with the 2K and a swing between 24-28 at 4K. I have my setup locked at 30fps and 30Hz. The sim is nice and smooth, I'm just having a hard time understanding the numbers being shown. Never seen the VRAM close to maxed out, if it was I'd get it... But it looks like the card can handle more based on vram still available and the controller at 14%. So I would think my FPS should still remain at 30 even @ 4K. 

If I remove vSync the numbers jump into the mid 40s @ 2K and remain between 24-28 @ 4K. I would think seeing the frame rate drop on the 4K settings would show VRAM maxed out, yet it's not even close. That's what throws me. 

Edited January 17, 20233 yr by Mike_CFII_MEL

FSR, perhaps?

11 hours ago, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

would show VRAM maxed out

Here's another way of thinking about it. One could write a GPU shader that does nothing more than compute a=1+1 in an infinite while-loop and it would could be made to show 100% GPU usage and take up ~16 bits of VRAM if 'a' was declared as a 16bit integer.

Maybe if your VRAM was maxed out and the GPU was waiting for new buffers to arrive across PCIE bus, you might see a slowdown. Or if the VRAM was entirely full of triangles instead of textures and the shaders were doing something derpy with it.

But XP is doing neither of those things. It's probably your pixel count going up against a yet-to-be-optimized-fancy-new deferred rendering engine plus lots of behind-the-frames computing.

Like Bob said: FSR?

Edited January 18, 20233 yr by blingthinger

13 hours ago, blingthinger said:

Here's another way of thinking about it. One could write a GPU shader that does nothing more than compute a=1+1 in an infinite while-loop and it would could be made to show 100% GPU usage and take up ~16 bits of VRAM if 'a' was declared as a 16bit integer.

Maybe if your VRAM was maxed out and the GPU was waiting for new buffers to arrive across PCIE bus, you might see a slowdown. Or if the VRAM was entirely full of triangles instead of textures and the shaders were doing something derpy with it.

But XP is doing neither of those things. It's probably your pixel count going up against a yet-to-be-optimized-fancy-new deferred rendering engine plus lots of behind-the-frames computing.

Like Bob said: FSR?

Hi,

I'll be checking FSR once I get my systems back together, just picked up an Asus TUF 4090 board and I'm rotating video boards. 

Edited January 18, 20233 yr by Mike_CFII_MEL

On 1/17/2023 at 5:37 AM, blingthinger said:

3D water, 3D vegetation, and possibly other stuff, is all computed while the CPU is thinking. In other words, the GPU is being used all the time now. All in parallel. No rest stops.

GPUs in other simulators obviously "think" better. if they offer much better graphics, very complex aircraft and GPS instruments calculations, still at double the fps and all this with only half the GPU % load of what x-periment 12 delivers then this can only be attributed to less efficient, not well optimised programming. and this using the most powerful GPU, RTX 4090 @ 4K, i9-9900K @ 4.8 GHz, 64 GB ram at maximum settings.

Edited January 19, 20233 yr by turbomax

They simply can't help themselves.

🤦‍♂️

 

Edited January 19, 20233 yr by GoranM

On 1/16/2023 at 10:15 PM, Mike_CFII_MEL said:

Hi,

Can someone put into simple terms why I would see a GPU load of 98%, when I'm only using 8455MB on a card that has 24GB memory and a memory controller load of 14% in X-Plane 12?

Thanks

Mike

It means your video card is stretching it's legs, especially at 4k

3 hours ago, turbomax said:

GPUs ... "think" better

Oooo!! Tell us more about how GPUs... *cough*.... "think"!!!

3 minutes ago, blingthinger said:

Tell us more about how GPUs... *cough*.... "think"!!!

irrelevant to answer Mike_CFII_MEL's question, but loosely quoting your very own *cough* post "stuff, is all computed while the CPU is thinking."

99% GPU load and still delivering sub-standard graphics at lower fps compared to other similar apps obviously is hinting to what if not inefficient, not well optimised coding?

5 minutes ago, turbomax said:

but loosely quoting your very own *cough* post "stuff, is all computed while the CPU is thinking."

Ah gotcha. You were quoting me. Twice actually.

On 1/17/2023 at 9:22 PM, blingthinger said:

yet-to-be-optimized-fancy-new deferred rendering engine

 

Edited January 19, 20233 yr by blingthinger

The azure servers must be down. 

1 hour ago, turbomax said:

99% GPU load and still delivering sub-standard graphics at lower fps compared to other similar apps obviously is hinting to what if not inefficient, not well optimised coding?

just a consequence of doing full 3d tree and complex cloud systems over miles of render distance at 4K instead of melted buildings, single breed 2D trees and clouds that look like volcanic ash at 1 or 2 miles render distance. afaict.

But yes, you are at least right that substandard last gen/dx12 rendering doesnt offer the gpu as much to do.

It was discussed at length across the industry almost 12 months ago

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/ditch-directx-and-start-using-vulkan-with-pc-games/

 Thats why Laminar are still hiring, while those deeply invested in substandard tech are surely worried about their jobs right about now...

Do you even use 4K?

Edited January 19, 20233 yr by mSparks

2 hours ago, GoranM said:

They simply can't help themselves.

🤦‍♂️

 

Hi,

Does AVSIM have a way to block their text, if not that would be nice option. Already have a few that I don't bother reading, scroll right past them. 

Edited January 19, 20233 yr by Mike_CFII_MEL