1 hour ago, Rimshot said:

Fuera de tema, pero ¿por qué todas las citas que haces aparecen en español?

En cuanto al tema, no me fiaría de ese video. De todos modos, me interesa una 5090. Mi buena y vieja 3080 Ti todavía cumple con el trabajo para el tipo de simulación que hago.

Because I read this on an Android phone and Chrome automatically translates all I have to see how to disable that.

I cannot wait to unload my old, useless and cheap  4090 to one of you peasants.
 

 

Any takers?  

2 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Half of that is only 25 frames per second, that isn’t enough for current frame generation to work with properly, hence the artefacts you get. Frame generation requires a good stable frame rate. Without it, it’s gonna create issues for you. It depends if you can look past them. Some can, some can’t. 

If a stable 50 FPS is required for frame generation to work properly I wonder if we actually need FG for (flight)sims. Yes, with FG we can double or triple our FPS but apart from satisfying a FPS fetish I don't see much of a point to get more than 50 FPS.

I've got a 3090 so I might be interested in upgrading to a 5090 or 5080. The latter would be a downgrade in VRAM though, but the 5090 is probably too expensive. €2000 for the Founders Edition is already a lot of money, other manufacturers will want more than that.  And then there are the expected shortages...

We will first need to see reliable reviews to learn how good it is without FG. If it is 25% above the 4090, I might be interested, that will probably be 50% better than my 3090.
 

12 minutes ago, Allard said:

Yes, with FG we can double or triple our FPS but apart from satisfying a FPS fetish I don't see much of a point to g

 I would be interested mostly for VR

27 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

 I would be interested mostly for VR

where FrameGeneration doesn't work, as we had to accept unfortunately for the last 3 years. only option is DLSS4.

Edited January 21, 20251 yr by turbomax

56 minutes ago, Allard said:

Yes, with FG we can double or triple our FPS but apart from satisfying a FPS fetish I don't see much of a point to get more than 50 FPS.

There is lots of reasons to use frame generation to get more that 50. It’s not just about the frames. 120hz is smoother than 60hz, as is head tracking, so if you can achieve a base of 50 frames and double it using frame gen, you’re laughing. 
 

A higher frame rate produces a smoother image with more detail. Motion clarity; more and more new monitors are coming out with high HZ, and something has to drive them. Not one person can honestly tell me 60hz is better than 120hz and on and on. Simply put flight sim at 120hz is better than at 60hz. It’s a perceivable difference especially if using head tracking, hence where frame generation comes in. And now multi frame generation. 
 

I know some people are happy with 30 frames or 60hz. Each to their own. But once you experience 120hz working as it should in a flightsim using head tracking, for me, there is no going back. 
 

https://www.arzopa.com/blogs/guide/refresh-rate-60-vs-120#:~:text=Competitive gaming%3A In competitive gaming,more immersive and realistic experience.

Edited January 21, 20251 yr by Ianrivaldosmith

18 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

There is lots of reasons to use frame generation to get more that 50. It’s not just about the frames. 120hz is smoother than 60hz, as is head tracking, so if you can achieve a base of 50 frames and double it using frame gen, you’re laughing. 
 

A higher frame rate produces a smoother image with more detail. Motion clarity; more and more new monitors are coming out with high HZ, and something has to drive them. Not one person can honestly tell me 60hz is better than 120hz and on and on. Simply put flight sim at 120hz is better than at 60hz. It’s a perceivable difference especially if using head tracking, hence where frame generation comes in. And now multi frame generation. 
 

I know some people are happy with 30 frames or 60hz. Each to their own. But once you experience 120hz working as it should in a flightsim using head tracking, for me, there is no going back. 
 

https://www.arzopa.com/blogs/guide/refresh-rate-60-vs-120#:~:text=Competitive gaming%3A In competitive gaming,more immersive and realistic experience.

I have a triple setup with three 60Mhz TVs.  What advantage if any is going beyond 60MHz in the sim going to produce?

 

7 minutes ago, Malcolm Street said:

beyond 60MHz

that would be nice and even please Ianrivaldosmith 😃

Edited January 21, 20251 yr by turbomax

42 minutes ago, turbomax said:

where FrameGeneration doesn't work, as we had to accept unfortunately for the last 3 years. only option is DLSS4.

Perhaps I should have clarified that I would only be interested for VR if the non-FG base fps on the new cards was enough higher to make them attractive.

Since most of their gains seem to be FG based, not sure if I'm all that interested, at least not at those prices.....

19 minutes ago, Malcolm Street said:

I have a triple setup with three 60Mhz TVs.  What advantage if any is going beyond 60MHz in the sim going to produce?

 

I explained it one post above yours. It’s more difficult using triple screens. I assume your views are fixed, in which case you probably wouldn’t notice as much. 
 

A lot of people here at Avsim (used?) to argue it’s pointless going above 30FPS, or that higher refresh rates don’t matter. They do. 
It’s hard to express in words, it’s much better to experience it in person. But head tracking or fast panning a simulation at 120hz/frames is so smooth and the motion clarity is so good, I personally could never go back to anything below it. 

5 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

not sure if I'm all that interested, at least not at those prices.....

agreed. all my hopes are therefore on the new DLSS 4. I expect most MSFS users with 4090s will and can wait for the generation after the 5090. 

3 hours ago, fakeflyer737 said:

 you peasants.  

Dr. Y, is that you?

6 hours ago, SierraDelta said:

Your opinion is noted, but given the depth of my pockets I’m regardless getting a 5090 on the 30th, OK?

We need deets!  I'm not planning on it but after seeing the word not allowed poor optimization on 2024 (which maybe will get fixed SU2?) I'd consider it for a later date.

15 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

They will once the scalpers buy up most of them in the first minute after they go on sale.

Unless things have changed very much, nobody but the very lucky will get these cards at retail for quite a while.

Remember the video of the guy who brought a 4090 on the street from a stranger, in what looked like a drug deal in New York?

I'm keeping my 3090 for now as I know it can get 90fps in 2k in MSFS 2020/24 - Asobo needs to optimized then I'll look for a CPU upgrade. 

14 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

The problem is that it now puts the onus less on devs to optimise games that properly take advantage of raster in favour of putting the Onus on your GPU, specifically DLSS. So now we're getting specification sheets that say 4k60fps** with the asterisk being using multi frame generation.

Quite frankly it's lazy and disenfranchises people with shallow pockets who can't afford to buy the latest and greatest or buy a card every gen. So now you have people who can't use multi frame generation or better yet frame generation at all, having to deal with poorly optimised games that get trumped up performance from AI.

Here’s an article explaining exactly what you said:-

https://www.xda-developers.com/why-nvidias-dlss-ruins-pc-gaming/