new monitor with GTX 1080 TI

[GCBraun 2,390]

Big OLED TVs with VRR are currently the best option for MSFS, considering TAA/DLSS/FG support. 

I have different screens here, and always use my 48" OLED as my main screen and sometimes different monitors and tablets for secondary instruments, FMCs, etc. Even when using multiple screens, I am generally above 100fps and never below 60 with TAA and FG.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,903]

25 minutes ago, SteveW said:

I have had a Dell 43" 4k 16:9 3840x2160@60Hz flat display for 3 years

It’s bizarre that there’s nothing between 32” and 43”. A 38” would suit me perfectly.

Does yours support 30Hz natively?

[bvdboomen 256]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

That's assuming that 60fps is achievable.

Achieving 60fps is different in my opinion. I'm talking about having a performance space in the 60hz time frame before the scene is being redrawn. If one acts, like there is a 30hz monitor and aim for 30fps, then you have 30hz left as headroom. But again, from a grey memory.

[bvdboomen 256]

EDIT: double due to no refreshing of the page.

Edited April 5, 2023 by bvdboomen

[SteveW 1,792]

34 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Does yours support 30Hz natively?

Yes 60/30/24/20Hz refresh.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,903]

23 minutes ago, bvdboomen said:

Achieving 60fps is different in my opinion. I'm talking about having a performance space in the 60hz time frame before the scene is being redrawn. If one acts, like there is a 30hz monitor and aim for 30fps, then you have 30hz left as headroom. But again, from a grey memory.

That's beyond my level of understanding, sorry.

[rolly 3]

20 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

You have a CPU very similar to mine and the same GPU. Whilst I don’t use MSFS I can easily achieve 30fps at most airports in P3D v5 in 4K using a BenQ UHD monitor.

It has a native 30Hz capability plus 50 and 60 as @Mace says. I remain happy with mine as it’s a high quality monitor.

I’m not sure why you’re looking for a 144Hz monitor since it’s unlikely you’ll ever get 144fps with your current hardware.

You need to beef up your GPU and then depending on which one you go for look at a suitable monitor. For a 3000 or 4000 series Nvidia card 4K should be achievable with suitable settings in MSFS.

The problem with getting a better GPU is bottleneck!! The GTX 1080TI is pretty much what this Intel CPU can handle!

 

[CarlosF 1,234]

On 4/3/2023 at 5:24 PM, rolly said:

I only have the flight sim on this system and I don't play nothing else

144 is pointless for MSFS with your current hardware, but I can understand getting the best bang for your buck. I have a  1080P/120mHz curved monitor and setting MSFS vsync to 1/3 within the sim gives me 40fps almost everywhere, which is incredibly fluid.

[rolly 3]

Well I got a lot here to think about!! Some not too easy to understand.

So if this is possible, any of you can suggest some monitor for refresh rate (100, 120, 240Hz) and resolution 1080P, 1440P or other resolutions.

VA, IPS, which one for msfs 2020. At least 32" . Price not really an issue for the monitor. I think 4K is not for this system!!!

Seams to me many high end monitor are 144 and 165HZ!!

Thanks to all for your feedbacks.

Edited April 5, 2023 by rolly

[CarlosF 1,234]

7 minutes ago, rolly said:

At least 32"

For that size monitor, you definitely need 2K otherwise the image quality will be reduced (pixelated) with 1080p.

Edited April 5, 2023 by CarlosF

[Reader 2,009]

6 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

32” is the largest size for a 4K monitor.
You have to switch to TVs after than and the smallest is around 40” which is too large for many like myself.

This is simply not the case.
I am sitting here, looking at a 43" 4K monitor.
This one.
The picture quality is stunning and it is (for me) not too large at all.
It does make the 32" monitors that are on either side of it look quite small though. 

Edited April 5, 2023 by Reader

[Ray Proudfoot 8,903]

1 hour ago, rolly said:

The problem with getting a better GPU is bottleneck!! The GTX 1080TI is pretty much what this Intel CPU can handle!

 

There will be aspects of MSFS that can be boosted by a more powerful graphics card. Weather is one. But generally I agree that getting a zero bottleneck is the ideal solution.

But balancing between processor intensive apps and graphically intensive apps means the 4090 is ideal for the AMD 7950XD3 in 4K.

https://pc-builds.com/bottleneck-calculator/result/1mw1ci/2/processor-intense-tasks/3840x2160/

45 minutes ago, Reader said:

This is simply not the case.
I am sitting here, looking at a 43" 4K monitor.
This one.
The picture quality is stunning and it is (for me) not too large at all.
It does make the 32" monitors that are on either side of it look quite small though. 

Clearly a new model not around when I bought my BenQ back in 2018. That’s too large for my setup sadly. And I can still remember using a 15” 800*600 around 30 years ago. How lucky we are now. 😁

[rolly 3]

20 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

There will be aspects of MSFS that can be boosted by a more powerful graphics card. Weather is one. But generally I agree that getting a zero bottleneck is the ideal solution.

But balancing between processor intensive apps and graphically intensive apps means the 4090 is ideal for the AMD 7950XD3 in 4K.

https://pc-builds.com/bottleneck-calculator/result/1mw1ci/2/processor-intense-tasks/3840x2160/

Clearly a new model not around when I bought my BenQ back in 2018. That’s too large for my setup sadly. And I can still remember using a 15” 800*600 around 30 years ago. How lucky we are now. 😁

Yep, great site to know your bottleneck!!

Just check mine at "2560 × 1440 (QHD (1440p))" and it showed 0% bottleneck

and at "3840 × 1600 (Ultra-Wide 4K) " showed  10% bottleneck.

so the first result seam the sweet spot for my system.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,903]

4 minutes ago, rolly said:

Just check mine at "2560 × 1440 (QHD (1440p))" and it showed 0% bottleneck

You should check for both processor and graphic intensive tasks. Graphic bottleneck is less critical.

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

10 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I can't find a 4K 16:9 monitor larger than 32". There must be a reason.

They exist, but you do not see them at Walmart as they are not exactly cheap.

https://www.mwave.com.au/product/hp-z43-1aa85a4-43-uhd-4k-led-monitor-ac14334

https://www.mwave.com.au/product/philips-436m6vbrab-43-4k-uhd-hdr-400-mva-monitor-with-ambiglow-ac12692

https://www.mwave.com.au/product/aoc-g4309vxd-43-144hz-4k-uhd-1ms-hdr1000-gaming-monitor-ac52658

https://www.mwave.com.au/product/phillips-439p1-43-4k-uhd-va-lcd-multiview-business-monitor-ac58733

https://www.mwave.com.au/product/asus-rog-swift-pg48uq-138hz-475-4k-gsync-compatible-01ms-gaming-oled-monitor-ac59242

https://www.mwave.com.au/product/samsung-odyssey-ark-55-165hz-4k-1ms-hdr-165hz-va-miniled-curved-gaming-monitor-ac60730