2 hours ago, flyhalf said:

It's crazy now, the rig I bought in 2021 cost $3.5k with a 3070, and now a similar level purchase with a 4090 would cost 8k. 

A rig with a 3070 is not a similar purchase than today's 4090. A better comparison would have been with a 3090 and in 2021, due to the extreme shortage of graphic cards caused by cryptocurrency mining, you would have to spend 3.5k just for the video card.

Edited December 13, 20232 yr by virtuali

I would not buy any card that have less than 24GB today, I will wait for information on MSFS24 performance requirements, I hope the new sim will be better memory optimized, if not, I will sell my card and upgrade to a 4090, but AMD's cards will also be interesting for sure.

Edited December 13, 20232 yr by Ixoye

4 hours ago, Ixoye said:

 I will sell my card and upgrade to a 4090, but AMD's cards will also be interesting for sure.

Indeed. I kinda gave up on Nvidia when it comes to memory honestly. The AMD looks like they have a sweet spot of price/performance. 

On 12/11/2023 at 1:43 PM, Bob Scott said:

The improved smoothness is nice to have with FG...things like AI jets flying past while you're holding for takeoff look better.

There is a downside, though--you have to use DX12 for FG to work, and there's a nasty bug in MSFS' DX12 implementation that's been around (and apparently unacknowledged by Asobo) for going on a year and a half where the ground textures on add-on scenery are randomly replaced by blurry Bing photo tiles--it's really exacerbated if you change cameras to an outside view.  I've foregone FG because of this...I find DX11 at ~40 fps is a better experience than dealing with the DX12 bug just to gain the relatively small improvement in smoothness from FG.  Now if you're a VR user, that frame rate boost probably makes enough of a difference to make dealing with the tile problem worth the distraction.

A pity we don't hear more about this bug Bob. I had no idea about this, and as someone where hi-fidelity imagery is as important as performance, then this is a big deal! I get more than my performance I need with my current setup. I have been considering my next build, which would be based around a triple monitor setup, but if this is the sacrifice when using FG and a 4090 with DX12, then I will have to seriously reconsider. Maybe it will be sorted in 2024(?)

On 12/11/2023 at 5:06 PM, Maxis said:

Hmm .. you don't "have to use" Nvidia for frame generation for MSFS. You can save yourself a few bucks if the funds are tight and get a team red 6 (6800xt and up) or 7 (7800xt and up) series GPU and  download their latest tech preview driver and do their driver level frame generation (Aka Fluid motion frames). Works in both Dx 11 or 12 and the latest version of the preview driver has the frame pacing and image quality (in taa mode) on par with Nvidias in game implementation. Properly set up with the freesync or gsync of your monitor i think this way of frame generation is a very very strong alternative.

I am seriously considering RX 7900 XT, 24gb of VRAM and very appealing price. How is the experience with Fluid motion in MSFS?

3 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

Indeed. I kinda gave up on Nvidia when it comes to memory honestly. The AMD looks like they have a sweet spot of price/performance. 

It seems that MSFS performs particularly well on current gen AMD cards, take a look at this extensive GPU test on MSFS from Feb 2023 (google translate from German)... I see you live in Germany so I suppose you can just read the original version 😉  https://www-pcgameshardware-de.translate.goog/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-Spiel-15259/Specials/Benchmark-2023-CPU-GPU-1411823/2/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp

They tested a large variety of scenarios, ranging from CPU limited to GPU limited and even RAM-limited situations. Overall it seems like the 7900XT even beats the 4080 in MSFS by a solid 10%, while in other games it is typically 10-20% behind the 4080. Maybe this advantage has to do with the Xbox graphics architecture being based on AMD hardware. 

Anyway, I'm aiming to replace my 6700XT at some point, eying a 7900XT or 4080, but I'm not in a hurry right now. I've been mostly satisfied with this AMD GPU, it was great value when I got it at MSRP back in 2021 when the mining craze was in full swing, but now it feels a bit limiting. Anyway, life events don't leave me much time for simming or gaming at the moment, so I'm giving it some time. 

If MSFS was the only title I'm playing (sorry, I mean "simming"), I'd probably take the 7900XT. Performs well in MSFS, and has 20GB, more than the 16GB of the 4080. But I also play other games, and the 4080 has its advantages with ray tracing... Or I bite the bullet and save up the money for a 4090... we'll see...

For me, AMD cards have been running without problems the last few years. One area though where people seem to have lots of issues with AMD is VR. So if you're planning on getting a VR headset, make sure you check the current situation with AMD GPUs in VR.

Edited December 13, 20232 yr by pstrub

I think, we might see an RTX 4080 Ti/Super early next year. This would probably have 20 GB and will supposedly/hopefully be priced similar to the current RTX 4080. This could be a good option, if you want high performance, 20 GB and raytracing at a price lower than the one for the RTX 4090.

https://www.xda-developers.com/rtx-4080-ti-with-rtx-4090-performance/

 

3 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

I am seriously considering RX 7900 XT, 24gb of VRAM and very appealing price. How is the experience with Fluid motion in MSFS?

Yes, if you have a fast CPU, the AMD 7900 XT is a great choice, I am strongly considering buying it myself as I have a 7800X3D and have good enough performance without Frame Generation.

4 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

I am seriously considering RX 7900 XT, 24gb of VRAM and very appealing price. How is the experience with Fluid motion in MSFS?

Frame pacing initially was not great on the first version of the driver but that was addressed fully on the subsequent versions. The frame generation experience for me now is excellent. For my card (6800xt/16gb) I have more than enough power to push my 3440x1440p resolution to the point that i actually increase render scaling to keep the gpu busy. I lock my actual frames at 40 fps using rtss and the frame gen adds an additional 40 frames as i personally do not need more than 80 frames. Smooth as silk.

So comparing the two gpus 7900xtx vs rtx 4080. Well generally speaking the 7900xtx slightly beats the rtx 4080 in rasterization. Once you turn on ray tracing though the tables turn and there is an advantage that favors the RTX card. Additionally, Due to the Supers coming out in January Nvidia can either price the Super above the regular 4080 or put the 4080 Super in the price slot and lower the price of the present 4080 non Super (Wishful thinking). We will see.

Now, if you built your PC exclusively for simming and nothing else like myself i do not mind recommending the 7900xtx. The reason i purchased my AMD card was that i knew MS/Asobo had to equally support and optimize for AMD and Nvidia as the gpu for the current Xbox Series X is essentially a 6800 Non XT while recognizing that Nvidia has most of the PC builder market. Additionally as some have now noticed Nvidia is being stingy with gpu ram and i wanted a bit of future proofing at the time when i was making my decision. However, going with AMD usually means waiting a little longer for cutting edge features. For a few months there i lost hope of getting frame gen support for my card. The feature did arrive eventually though and i appreciate that.

For more a more hands on report of the experience of using a 7900xtx I think @pilotter is best equipped to answer as he has the more recent card. But for me .. no new GPU needed for this sim till 2024 or if i upgrade to 4k.

 

On 12/12/2023 at 2:26 AM, flyhalf said:

I run at 1440p and have observed max Vram in the range of 12-13Gb

Standard 1440p or Ultra Wide?

I have a 7900XTX 24 GB and the rest of my specs below. I use project lasso to put Msfs on the Vcache CCD and have a stripped operating system. With AIG and a payware airports my cpu is now lower then my 7900xtx at 170 renderscale. This gives me a 35 to 40 fps without stutters ( really fluid even looking sideways in the cockpit while the aircraft is rolling ). Not yet fully convinced with fluid frame generation because you will need at least 60 to 70 fps to use it properly. but it's still in beta and getting better with every release just hope that Asobo wil implement it like they did with Avatar and some other games.

Only thing what I always would like to have added is something like the Nvidia filter.

5 hours ago, Ixoye said:

Standard 1440p or Ultra Wide?

Ultra wide, whatever 3440x1440 comes to. 

With the new leaks here https://videocardz.com/newz/msi-rtx-40-super-leak-confirms-rtx-4080-super-and-rtx-4070-ti-super-with-16gb-memory RTX4080 Super will have the same vram and still costs a lot. Disappointing 😞

I was considering a 4000 series card for the frame generation but now w the software update for other RTX cards (I have 3080) that allows frame gen w AMD software on RTX cards why would I spend crazy money on a 4000 series card? I can tell you w this new software I am getting no less then 90 FPS anywhere anytime in the Fenix A320 which is notorious for being heavy on the system.  I can see this setup being very good for at least another 2 yrs.  

6 hours ago, omarsmak30 said:

With the new leaks here https://videocardz.com/newz/msi-rtx-40-super-leak-confirms-rtx-4080-super-and-rtx-4070-ti-super-with-16gb-memory RTX4080 Super will have the same vram and still costs a lot. Disappointing 😞

I was very disappointed when I read that, I will switch to AMD next time.