Maybe, maybe not, who knows?
As much as I respect Jörg, I can’t say, is that so, is it wishful thinking or is it a self-fulfilling prophecy? But that doesn’t really matter as long as it will be two thirds at some point.
The tactic is of course clever as, without stating any facts, it subliminally implies something like “Hey, what’s wrong with me? Everyone is moving to 2024, do I have a problem? Am I a weirdo?” to all those who are still stuck in 2020 
.
A joker, whoever thinks.
Rather ridiculous I agree.
That’s interesting. I wonder what the breakdown is by platform (Xbox vs PC)
On steamdb it appears to be vice versa these days
I do only VR, and so far what I’ve picked up from folks is that 2024 generally looks better (not everyone agrees) but performs slower in VR. So I’m still on 2020 (13700K and 4080). I upgraded from 32 GB to 64 GB RAM recently (DDR4) but it didn’t really make anything smoother that I could tell. I still get load-in stutters sometimes if I move my head around.
For me the 4080 was the sweet spot of cost + power consumption (and heat). 5080 seems to be similar performance to the 4080. 5090 performs better but apparently does so via raw power.
I tried the newer NVIDIA drivers with DLSS4 (57x.xx) but had various issues with that driver set so I rolled back)
AMD’s X3D intrigues me but I’m skittish on compatibility and in VR from what I’ve seen it doesn’t make nearly as much difference from the upper-tier Intels as some of the benchmarks would imply. At high resolution (VR) it seems to be GPU limited, though I guess it depends a lot on the aircraft and the situation. The A320V2 is not really usable to me in VR. I assume that’s CPU limited because of how complicated it is. 747, 787, Cessnas/etc., they work okay enough for me in VR with roughly medium graphics settings. My CPU is thermally limited because I can’t cool it as much as it would like, so in that respect the AMD chips would be better since they’re so much more efficient.
Sorry for the rambly post, I don’t mean to derail the conversation. I’m in a holding pattern I suppose, haven’t heard enough positive about 2024 to invest the time or money over 2020, especially since Career Mode seems to be the most interesting difference yet also the most buggy. To wit: Mission instructions VR invisible. Missions not playable therefore - #22 by Stewartwoody
Hoping someone can help me to understand the physical power cable installation for the Nvidia RTX 5090. I’m researching for a first build PC for flight sim, and reading all about the dumpster fire that the 12VHPWR and newer 12V-2x6 connector evolution has become.
My simple question is, do these newer higher-end, higher-power GPUs draw any of their power from the motherboard PCIe slot?
I understand this much:
The PCIe slot on a motherboard can supply some power to a PCIe card, but it’s only up to 75W, which is almost meaningless to a high-end GPU.
The RTX 5090 has the new 12V-2x6 power connector which can draw up to 600 Watts. Ideally your PSU would be ATX 3.1 and PCIe 5.1 rated, with the same 12V-2x6 port and a single dedicated 12V-2x6 cable, rated to deliver 600W to the card.
But the new X870E motherboards (for AMD AM5 processors like the 9800X3D) have a supplemental 8-pin “PCIe Power” port. According to Corsair, this can supply an extra 150W via the PCIe slot (for a total of up to 225W via the slot).
I’m wondering if it is better to connect the motherboard’s supplemental 8-pin PCIe power port to the PSU - and if you do, will the GPU then draw what it needs from both the slot and the dedicated 12V-2x6 power cable - perhaps relieving the strain on both?
Or, is it better not to? Does the GPU ignore the power available from the motherboard?
I understand the new ATX3.1 and PCIe5.1 use the sensing pins in the 12V-2x6 cable to determine the power available to the card - so having some amount of power available from the motherboard slot makes it… confusing.
I only do high end VR. Believe me, the x3Ds make a big difference even when capped to 45fps and GPU-limited. Frame pacing becomes much more consistent, eliminating virtually all microstutters and making even 45fps seem very smooth . To be fair, I havent compared the 9800x3d to a recent Intel, but to the 7800x3D I had before. And that was already way better than the Intel I had before, and it beat the cohort Intel chips in MSFS benchmarks.
Theres a reason that there’s a conse aus about the x3D chips being the best choice for MSFS, and that includes VR! 9800X3D is an absolute beast for this sim. Highly recommend it!
As for compatibility, that hasn’t been an issue with AMD CPUs for many years. It seems their GPUs can be sketchy in that department, but not the CPUs.
I have my 5090 connected with the 12V-2x6 power cable that came with my NZXT C1500w ATX3.1 5.1 PSU. One less joint for resistance on the power delivery.
My GPU will take no more than 10-15w from the PCIe power slot with 95%+ of all power supplied coming from the cable.
Now try with an airliner
Interesting - so does the 5090 actually draw some power from the PCIe? How do you know, does it show in software?
Download Tech Power GPU Z. It will show all stats about your GPU including power draw.
Still shopping for PC parts for a build, but will do once I’m set up. thanks.
Following the cascading news about the Nvidia RTX 5000 series launch. Yikes:
Thanks for the input! I had heard mixed things despite the benchmarks. For example: Moving from a 13900K 4090 setup to a 14900K 4090 setup - #27 by darkmark327
My compatibility worry is less about the CPUs and more about the rest.
Two examples:
Of course, right after I got the 13700K, that whole voltage fiasco erupted. Plus the thing is so power-hungry I’d probably get better performance just by not hitting thermal limits (since these AMD chips are so much more efficient). So I guess it comes down to “is the performance worth burning a few hundred bucks and spending a day rebuilding the guts of the PC”…
In terms of video card, only the 4090 or 5090 would be enough of an upgrade on the 4080, and they are simply too. large. The 4080 is also in a sweet spot of power/performance.
As far as the 5090 goes, the driver situation is horrendous right now, the melting cable situation is worrisome (assuming this is accurate: https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/kb5YzMoVQyw and the 32-bit PhysX thing is just pathetic. Oh right, plus the whole “missing ROP” issue, in which NVIDIA either had an embarrassing lack of QA or thought they could pull a fast one on us.
I briefly tried DLSS4 on the new drivers and it was great, but I had to roll them back because the drivers were unreliable. I’ll try again when they can go more than 4 days without another driver release.
Yeah you would need to reinstall. It’s a hassle but nowadays it’s actually quite quick if you do some basic preparations, backing up your desktop with one drive etc. Depends on your setup of course but I too have usually dreaded doing it, but then it’s done in a couple of hours and you have squeaky clean and super responsive machine!
Would love to see recommended settings for vr in MSFS 2020 using an RTX 5090, 9800 X3D and MeganeX Superlight 8K headset.
I just now switched from the 4090 to the 5090.. i saw next to ZERO change in fps even on 2d/flat, keeping everything the same in 2024. In VR with OG native crystal .. i also saw ZERO change in fps (i swear the online reviews seemed to show an uplift). Im on the latest nvidia 19th may, did the clean install option, set dlss to the “latest” in nvidia app, dlss on “performance” for vr too.
EGLC 2024 (bare install), seeing about 64 fps (compare to like 84 in 2020), and VR is about 48 fps (bare), 2020 was 77 fps in vr.. this is on either the 4090 oc or the 5090 oc. Im stumped.
3dmark nomad jumped from 9800 to 13999 tho(14900k slight under volt)
EDIT: i used a test win clean partition and retried, i actually see an uplift of about 8 fps at eglc to 68-70 in 2D and an uplift of 10 fps from 48 to 58. **has 10 fps been the avg for those switching from 4090 to 5090 (og crystal at native res)?
UPDATE: strange but i uninstalled/removed su3 beta, then put it back on, i can now get really good performance native res in VR, around 66 fps bare no community etc (foveated off, on i lose a bit of fps in su3b), this the c172 at EGLC
A post was split to a new topic: Fluidity Issues with RTX 5090 using MSFS2024
It would be very helpful if you could turn on the fps window and post a screenshot as that would provide additional info when the sim is running.
Hello,
I tried to make a video, but the file size was too large to post on the forum. So I took some screenshots. I hope this helps. I’m still testing. Maybe I’ll find the right configuration.
Thank you.
Screenshots are very helpful and clearly shows you are cpu limited as it takes your cpu 3 times more time to render a frame than your 5090 (19.9ms vs 6ms). Ideally you want these to be more balanced to achieve a very fluid sim experience. So essentially your gpu is falling asleep as your cpu is working frantically to feed it frames to output.
So to help out the sim to be more fluid you need to increase the parameters to increase work for the gpu and decrease work for the cpu. This is a good youtube video to help you fine tune MSFS 2024.
This is a good link for explaining the various sim settings.
Hello,
I watched the YouTube video you suggested. I found it really interesting. I learned a lot, and it helped me fine-tune my setup to achieve the fluidity I wanted.
I want to thank you for the help you gave me.
Have a nice day.
