Nvidia 3000 Series Tonight

[Jinx]

HM-2 said:

8700k will most likely be your problem.

I wouldn't have thought so - 12 threads should be ample.




How much RAM and what is its speed? I would want at least 32 GB for MS flight simulator and preferably at least 2933. Does it stutter when loading assets? I would recommend having it installed on an NVME drive if possible.

[HRL]

Yep, if it’s installed on a HDD that will cause problems.

Isn’t MSFS the one where it streams assets too? So your internet connection could play a part potentially?

[Calza]

Eth is crashing hard - this could have a good impact on prices. The market is very reactive...

[anonymous-user]

8700k is likely the issue. I know it has 6 cores and 12 threads but it’s pretty much 4 years old - the single core performance isn’t up to the job of being paired with a 3080 Ti in this game. I just upgraded from a 7700k to a 5600X because I was getting stuttering and it was even holding back my 3060 Ti. The difference in average frames is good but the consistency of frame times is WAY better. Unfortunately you probably need to spend more money scotty

[HM-2]

Jinx said:

I wouldn't have thought so - 12 threads should be ample.

Zen 2 is a good chunk faster core for core in newer applications than an 8700K. Also that chart shows a huge difference in 1% frames between 6/12 and 8/16 core, about 25%.

Weirdly, flight sim doesn't seem to scale property on thread counts that aren't multiples of 8. 4 core 8 thread outperforming 6/12, and 8/16 outperforming 12/24 when it comes to 1% frames. Though that might be an anomaly of core architecture clustering in Zen 2.

Edited by HM-2 on Wednesday 8th September 09:47

[Jinx]

F20CN16 said:

8700k is likely the issue. I know it has 6 cores and 12 threads but it’s pretty much 4 years old - the single core performance isn’t up to the job of being paired with a 3080 Ti in this game. I just upgraded from a 7700k to a 5600X because I was getting stuttering and it was even holding back my 3060 Ti. The difference in average frames is good but the consistency of frame times is WAY better. Unfortunately you probably need to spend more money scotty

(note the above is with a AMD 6900XT, 32 GB 3200 RAM)

Not too much though you may notice the dips below 30 fps - still only going to get a small improvement with a 11700k.

[HM-2]

Jinx said:

(note the above is with a AMD 6900XT, 32 GB 3200 RAM)

Not too much though you may notice the dips below 30 fps - still only going to get a small improvement with a 11700k.

Again, that's a big difference in 1% frames. 25% at 1440p and 32% at 4K.

[anonymous-user]

I agree. I find people massively underestimate the impact an old CPU has in their system. On other forums I frequent, people have 3080s paired with 4th gen Intel CPUs (just one example). Madness.

Jinx, your latest image only proves the point I and HM-2 are making. And that’s just average frames and 1%. If we could see 0.1% and frame times it would really show it.

MSFS 2020’s dev console even shows you when there’s a CPU bottleneck. I guarantee it will show scotty’s is CPU limited and the frame time graph will be dancing all over the place.

Edited by F20CN16 on Wednesday 8th September 09:56

[aparna]

How does one understand the correct pairing of GPU to CPU and PSU?

[HM-2]

aparna said:

How does one understand the correct pairing of GPU to CPU and PSU?

GPU/CPU depends somewhat on use cases. PSU used to be relatively easily but 3000 series have made this a bit of a crap shoot as Ampere produces a lot of 12v noise which can trip various protections on PSUs. Lots of the Seasonic PSUs, even 1300+W ones, have experienced issues with fault protection tripping due to 12v noise and feedback on the sense wires.

[RacerMike]

aparna said:

How does one understand the correct pairing of GPU to CPU and PSU?

It's probably not super accurate but:

https://pc-builds.com/calculator/

Problem is that Flight Sim is horribly badly optimised. I think people are struggling to get more than 25fps in cities and high load environments even on really powerful systems with 3090s. Mine is smooth enough, but of course like me (also on VR) you really want more than 80fps. You'll probably find you're not actually bottlenecked....it's quite possibly just the poor optimisation by Microsoft. I still dip to 40fps at times (and below in some rare situations).

I find it varies hugely by game. Assetto Corsa Competizione was basically unplayable on my 2060 Super in VR. To get an acceptable frame rate I had to drop the quality so much the detailed draw distance was practically just in front of the car which felt myopic in VR. Swapping to the 3090 everything is on ultra and I rarely dip below 80fps even with other cars on the grid. I'm on an i7 9700F (not overclockable) for reference.

By contrast iRacing I can't actually run at max settings....but no one can! The big impact is having 'object self shadowing' which is not a CPU related task so the fact is unfortunately, some games are even beyond the current capabilities of 3000 series cards. Or rather they are due to not being well optimised. iRacing is 13 years old after all....

[Jinx]

F20CN16 said:

I agree. I find people massively underestimate the impact an old CPU has in their system. On other forums I frequent, people have 3080s paired with 4th gen Intel CPUs (just one example). Madness.

Jinx, your latest image only proves the point I and HM-2 are making. And that’s just average frames and 1%. If we could see 0.1% and frame times it would really show it.

MSFS 2020’s dev console even shows you when there’s a CPU bottleneck. I guarantee it will show scotty’s is CPU limited and the frame time graph will be dancing all over the place.

Edited by F20CN16 on Wednesday 8th September 09:56

Problem is the only upgrade to the 8700k without upgrading the motherboard is a 9900k - not much of an upgrade for games that rely on IPC such as MS flight simulator. I would try to maximise what I was using before making a £500 + upgrade investment. Going from 16GB to 32GB RAM has helped some users with the stutter issues so would be my first port of call (and is re-usable in an upgraded system anyway).

[anonymous-user]

I increased my RAM from 16GB to 32GB and it helped back when the game was a memory hog. Not now since the sim update last month.

If a £500 motherboard and CPU upgrade is too much for someone who just got a 3080 Ti, it would have been smarter to buy a 3070/3070 Ti instead and then use the money left to get the new CPU and motherboard (for this particular game, which has some unique demands admittedly).

Incidentally I paid £431 for my 5600X and Gigabyte Aorus Pro X570 board (both new) so it’s not crazy money. I would take a bet that my FPS flying over a city in MSFS 2020 is higher than an 8700K/3080 Ti system. It would be interesting to test that (5600X/3060 Ti)

Edited by F20CN16 on Wednesday 8th September 12:07

[mmm-five]

I don't have it installed, but give me an hour (was actually almost 4 hours) and I'll download the beast and give it a run at 1440p on my 5800X and RTX3080Ti (yes, I know it's a waste of a 3080Ti but I'm waiting for a good deal on a 4k or ultrawide).

My guess is I'll get 50-55 FPS average on ultra.

---

Edit to add...

I'm pleasantly surprised to say I was averaging 85fps with peaks of 100fps and lows of 70fps...with everything on @ 1440p...live traffic, live weather, photogrammetry, ultra settings, flying at about 1000 feet over countryside, water, cities.

Machine config is:

• Corsair iCue 220T
• AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
• Nvidia RTX3080Ti FE
• 32gb (4x8gb) 3600mhz Corsair Vengeance RAM
• Asus ROG Strix X570-F motherboard

Edited by mmm-five on Wednesday 8th September 15:48

[HM-2]

I just got a 5900X and X570S board (Aorus Pro AX). Came in at about £700 and an absolutely massive performance hike from my lapped 6900K at 4.4GHz.

[Lucas Ayde]

RacerMike said:

It's probably not super accurate but:

https://pc-builds.com/calculator/

Problem is that Flight Sim is horribly badly optimised. I think people are struggling to get more than 25fps in cities and high load environments even on really powerful systems with 3090s. Mine is smooth enough, but of course like me (also on VR) you really want more than 80fps. You'll probably find you're not actually bottlenecked....it's quite possibly just the poor optimisation by Microsoft. I still dip to 40fps at times (and below in some rare situations).

I find it varies hugely by game. Assetto Corsa Competizione was basically unplayable on my 2060 Super in VR. To get an acceptable frame rate I had to drop the quality so much the detailed draw distance was practically just in front of the car which felt myopic in VR. Swapping to the 3090 everything is on ultra and I rarely dip below 80fps even with other cars on the grid. I'm on an i7 9700F (not overclockable) for reference.

By contrast iRacing I can't actually run at max settings....but no one can! The big impact is having 'object self shadowing' which is not a CPU related task so the fact is unfortunately, some games are even beyond the current capabilities of 3000 series cards. Or rather they are due to not being well optimised. iRacing is 13 years old after all....

Pretty sure I read that MSFS only utilised 4 cores. Means that adding more cores won't really help much for that specific title. Of course, if they update it to support more cores then that will be a different story.

In general, 6 cores is the sweet spot for games. Virtually nothing benefits from more at the current time so if you are a gamer, a 5600X will be pretty much as good as a 5900X or even a 5950X... (the 5900X and 5950X chips have better silicon so might get slightly better core clocks on the whole).

[HM-2]

Lucas Ayde said:

Pretty sure I read that MSFS only utilised 4 cores.

Don't think this is true- the FPS charts on the previous page show pretty big gains in 1% frames going from 4/8 to 8/16.

Lucas Ayde said:

In general, 6 cores is the sweet spot for games. Virtually nothing benefits from more at the current time so if you are a gamer, a 5600X will be pretty much as good as a 5900X or even a 5950X... (the 5900X and 5950X chips have better silicon so might get slightly better core clocks on the whole).

It varies. Some games deal with multicore architecture better than others, but a 5600X-5800X will suit most gamers.

[FourWheelDrift]

2016 real time strategy game Ashes of the Singularity can utilise 10 cores.

[RacerMike]

iRacing still only uses 1!

But as for MSFS - This video is showing dips down to 30fps with an i9-10900k and a 3090! Which shows you how intensive the game is. 30fps on an Oculus would be quite stuttery, but ties in with my performance at the lower res but higher demand of VR.

[scottyp123]

I don't mind getting another motherboard and CPU if it will make a noticeable difference, I've got other uses for the 1080/8700 pc anyway.

My setup at the moment is 3080ti, 8700k, FS2020 and windows are on a M.2 NVME drive, there are 32GB of ram but only the basic ones, but I've set the XMP profile on the mother board to overclock them, not sure of the speed, the CPU is overclocked to 4.9Ghz.

I did have the 1080ti overclocked a fair bit, is it worth doing the same to the 3080ti?

So if I do get another CPU it seems the latest i7's are about £350 or so, similar to what my old one is but the i9's are about £500 and they seem pretty much the same to me. Which is best (value). Also does it need to be a "Z" motherboard if I want to OC everything.