Question about Upgrading Computer for MSFS

[David Mills 4,773]

I'd like to hear from anyone who's recently upgraded from a 1000 series Nvidia card to a 4000 series card. The 4000 series is expensive, and I'm wondering whether those of you who have upgraded feel like you got your money's worth. I'm thinking about buying a new computer, so the CPU will be an upgrade for me as well. My current computer and graphics card (a 1070) are almost 8 years old. I currently get good performance out of MSFS -- a fact that surprises me. So I'm wondering whether an upgrade is worth the money in terms of MSFS performance? Give me your honest thoughts.

Edited January 30, 2023 by David Mills

[rickjake 243]

Its been several years since I had my 1080ti, but I recently went from a 3080ti to a 4090 and was quite surprised at the improvement it has made. The 3080ti was a decent performer. 

I always fly in VR, so the improvement was quite noticeable, but most likely less so in 2D mode.  However going from a 1000 series to a 4000 series, well that's a 4 generation jump. You should see a large improvement, as the 4000 series cards can take advantage of frame generation, etc.  

The question will become, what CPU are you running?  Once you upgrade your GPU to the 4000 series, your CPU will be the bottleneck, as it struggles to supply the GPU. 

[David Mills 4,773]

3 minutes ago, rickjake said:

I always fly in VR, so the improvement was quite noticeable, but most likely less so in 2D mode.

I'm glad you brought that up. Do I understand correctly that a better graphics card generally has a greater positive influence on VR performance rather on 2D performance?

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

There are people on the main forums that went from a 3090TI to a 4070 and they say the drop back to 12 GB VRAM really effects them in VR. So for VR the VRAM matters a lot.

General speaking - non VR -  you need both CPU and GPU to be around the same tier for optimal results.

CPU effects things like LOD, FM and some other stuff like cockpit animations and glass screens.

GPU effects most other graphics stuff including textures and special effects.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Glenn Fitzpatrick

[rickjake 243]

Just now, David Mills said:

I'm glad you brought that up. Do I understand correctly that a better graphics card generally has a greater positive influence on VR performance rather on 2D performance?

Generally yes, as VR needs to render two screens, up to 4K each, depending on the headset. 

 

[pmb 5,137]

I went from a 1080Ti to a 4080 a month ago. Results are to be taken with a grain of salt as I bought a completely new system (my previous CPU was an i7-6700K).

I was still satisfied with my (6 years) old system running around 30 fps+ on my 2D screen (see sig) using pretty high settings. While I am sure some will contradict, I found this sufficient, even more as I didn't experience microstutters (aside rare loading pauses e.g. when main hubs came into the view). I still find MSFS performance amazing given what it displays.

The crux was VR (Reverb1), though. Performance went down to 20 and below when I switched to VR, which I managed to live with for some time but finally it didn't work anymore. VR fps jumped to 40+ now despite an accompanying switch of supersampling settings (either way, doesn't matter much which setscrew) from 80 to 130.

BTW, I am still Main Thread limited, as I was before, but not by a too big margin.

Overall, to me, the new system was a total game changer. I am not so anxious about MSFS detail eating up the performance I have new. But there will undoubtedly new VR hardware become available, and at a point I'll buy it - and be where I was. 

Have gone through this cycle all 5 yrs. since 1990.

Kind regards, Michael

[David Mills 4,773]

6 minutes ago, pmb said:

I went from a 1080Ti to a 4080 a month ago. Results are to be taken with a grain of salt as I bought a completely new system (my previous CPU was an i7-6700K).

I was still satisfied with my (6 years) old system running around 30 fps+ on my 2D screen (see sig) using pretty high settings. While I am sure some will contradict, I found this sufficient, even more as I didn't experience microstutters (aside rare loading pauses e.g. when main hubs came into the view). I still find MSFS performance amazing given what it displays.

The crux was VR (Reverb1), though. Performance went down to 20 and below when I switched to VR, which I managed to live with for some time but finally it didn't work anymore. VR fps jumped to 40+ now despite an accompanying switch of supersampling settings (either way, doesn't matter much which setscrew) from 80 to 130.

BTW, I am still Main Thread limited, as I was before, but not by a too big margin.

Overall, to me, the new system was a total game changer. I am not so anxious about MSFS detail eating up the performance I have new. But there will undoubtedly new VR hardware become available, and at a point I'll buy it - and be where I was. 

Have gone through this cycle all 5 yrs. since 1990.

Kind regards, Michael

Michael,

     Since your previous hardware is very close to my current hardware, and your new computer is very close to what I'm considering as a purchase, I'd be especially interested to hear about your increase in performance apart from VR as well. Did you see a big jump in FPS on a 2D display too. With your new 4080, have you used the DLSS 3 frame generation? What are your thoughts about that? Do you feel you got your money's worth with your new system?

[Ricardo41 5,949]

4 hours ago, David Mills said:

 I currently get good performance out of MSFS -- a fact that surprises me. So I'm wondering whether an upgrade is worth the money in terms of MSFS performance? Give me your honest thoughts.

I can't speak to VR, but for 2D throwing expensive hardware at MSFS is a waste of money. A "better" PC won't magically transform your simming experience. Plus, you'll be dialing up those settings, thus erasing all the performance gains that your shiny new hardware bought you. 

You said it yourself: the majority of complaints about performance comes from folks with "high end" hardware. 

But if you must spend money, my advice would be: if you're happy to run MSFS at 1080p - 1440p resolution at high/very high settings, spending around $1500 is enough. 

[Mace 1,927]

5 hours ago, David Mills said:

I'd like to hear from anyone who's recently upgraded from a 1000 series Nvidia card to a 4000 series card. The 4000 series is expensive, and I'm wondering whether those of you who have upgraded feel like you got your money's worth. I'm thinking about buying a new computer, so the CPU will be an upgrade for me as well. My current computer and graphics card (a 1070) are almost 8 years old. I currently get good performance out of MSFS -- a fact that surprises me. So I'm wondering whether an upgrade is worth the money in terms of MSFS performance? Give me your honest thoughts.

"worth the money" , well, how much do you want to spend I'd ask, but I would rather characterize it by saying there are some good price-vs.-performance options these days particularly on the Intel area of things as their latest can still use DDR4 memory.

I tend to agree with those who say there is a point of diminishing returns, at least when it comes to certain types of hardware.  For example, ask yourself if all of the cores on a 13900K are really going to deliver added performance in the sim.  If you are building primarily for sim, I have a hard time rationalizing the cost of a 13900K.  Instead I see a 13600K/KF or possibly 13700K doing just as well and for less money.  Perhaps someone will come along here and offer more insight on that, but that is currently my thinking.  The money saved can go towards the exorbitant video card prices.

On the AMD side -- if investing in an entirely new rig (and if you are switching platforms, you should be looking at AM5, as AM4 is end-of-life), the cost-vs.-performance does not presently work out as well as Intel, with the relatively new AM5 platform meaning that you MUST go with expensive DDR5 memory and expensive AM5 motherboards, although those prices have fallen somewhat over the past two months.  Again, the high core count 7900X, 7950X...I would investigate a 7700X or 7700 over the higher-core-count cpu's if you are building primarily for the sim.  And then there is the elephant in the room which would be the 7800X3D, 7900X3D, and 7950X3D, supposedly coming out next month.   As we know, the predecessor 5800X3D cpu performs very, very well in the sim.  You could also conceivably build a "budget" AMD sim rig based around the end-of-life AM4 5800X3D cpu and DDR4, and that paired with an nvidia 4xxx would give you DLSS3/Frame Generation and would set you up for a while...

As for graphics cards, we have the rather unpalatable concept of spending $1,900 (RTX4090) vs. $1,300 (4080) or something less than that for a 4070ti or whatever the lower-level models are.  I do not use VR so my use-case is a little different than yours. As for me personally, I think Frame Generation is a big deal, and I would like to have that capability moving forward.  We might be able to get 100+(!) fps smooth with FG in a baseline no-AI no-addon situation, and then load down the sim but still maintain 60+ fps smooth with FG.  That's a huge thing for us.  Look where we were 5 years ago...buying 30hz-capable monitors just so we could get 30/30 smooth.   Now it's the opposite. Today, we might want monitors that give very high refresh rates.

 

[GCBraun 2,392]

IA good CPU couple with a 4XXX RTX card (4090 of possible) is indeed a game changer for MSFS due to frame generation technology. Currently experiencing triple digits fps in most scenarios at 4K with my main rig, something that was not remotely possible with my previous card (a very decent 3090). 

Edited January 30, 2023 by GCBraun

[JJ_ 41]

I can't speak for VR, but after 7+ years, I just built a system (1st time building). I went from an i7-4790K, MSI 1080ti with 32GB RAM (with 4 monitors 1080p) to a i9-13900KF, Gigabyte 4090 with 32MB DDR5 RAM (with 4 monitors 1080p). The 4090 was not available for several months, so used my 1080ti with the new system and wow, it was a huge difference even without the new graphics card. MSFS is still very CPU dependent, so that's where I noticed a difference. My original system was bottlenecking on the CPU. With the new CPU and 1080ti, it bottlenecked on the GPU and now with the 4090, the bottleneck is back on the CPU. I was putting money away for 7 years, so my goal was to buy the best possible hardware, so it can last me a long time while I save over the years for the next one. I hope that helps. Feel free to reach out if you need more specifics, glad to help if I can.

Edited January 30, 2023 by JJ_
Added a dash between i9 and 13900KF.

[bobcat999 8,484]

I have a 3080Ti, but my performance was actually made better by upgrading my CPU to a 13900k. 

On my previous CPU, it was flat-lining (showing 100% usage in Task Manager) on two threads, so I was CPU limited (or main thread limited) and this was causing me my slight stuttering issues and lack of smoothness.  Meanwhile, my 3080Ti was only running at about 75%, if that!

I am on 4k mainly ultra, with DLSS, I can hit 60fps in general, and still quite smooth with my cheap freesync monitor if it does drop slightly below that. 
The monitor needs about 45 minimum to stay smooth on freesync. 

DLSS is making a massive difference with the GPU - it barely breaks into a sweat now.  I don't notice the slightly blurry screens now (caused by DLSS) with a bit of extra sharpening added.

So it is about matching all the components really.  Like they say, pointless putting a Ferrari engine in a Ford Fiesta.

Edited January 30, 2023 by bobcat999

[Ricardo41 5,949]

My question for David would be: why the need to buy a new PC? Is the old one broken beyond repair? Will buying new hardware magically transform your sim experience?

99.99% of hardware talk is just marketing nonsense, pushed by hardware manufacturers and their associated sponsored youtube channels.

13 hours ago, David Mills said:

I currently get good performance out of MSFS

That's my point. I would leave well enough alone.

[filou 2,744]

4070ti and a 5800X3D  for 2D in 4k without any problem and without breaking the bank.

 

[sidfadc 1,344]

I will follow this thread closely, I'm in the market for a new PC.  Currently running i7 4790k and 1070 @ 1080P, 2D no VR.  I can hit anywhere from 15 FPS to 40 FPS scenario/aircraft depending.  However I do fly on Vatsim a lot for Virtual Airlines which takes me into the big airports (with lots of traffic) and my performance is in the 15-25 FPS range with stutters.

I recently watched this video by Chewwy which for me is the holy grail - so when I do upgrade I'm shooting for a 4090 with frame generation, seems a no brainer for me.