Got it. I am happy to test out a location / settings / resolution combination with DX11 // DX12 // DX12 + FG for you if you’d like, just let me know the parameters and I’ll fire it up. High level, FG absolutely helps with the jerkiness (removes CPU bottleneck), but it comes at a visual price IMO. Probably worth it 9/10 times.
Sure! I’d love it if you could take off in a stock A320 from Heathrow runway 9L, with FSLTL enabled (default settings if you feel like changing that) and Global Rendering Quality set to Ultra (all default). With those settings, halfway down the runway if you could do Active Pause and try:
- DLSS quality with FG
- DLSS quality without FG
- TAA with FG
Can you do a screenshot of this in dev mode with DLSS Qualify with FG? I think when you enable FG the extra framerate isn’t reported in the Developer mode FPS counter, is that true? Does it show up if you have the Steam in-game fps counter?
So I wonder what results you would get with the 5900x paired with the rx 7900xtx? In many artificial benchmark tests the 5900x will beat the 7600x but I think the 7600x will do a little better in gaming.
I have a 5900x with a RX 6800 and am happy with it at this point running MSFS but wonder how much improvement a rx 7900xtx would provide.
Didn’t do screenshots (sorry), but here are the numbers:
- DLSS Quality w/ FG = 122 (and yes, the dev mode FPS counter shows 61 but FrameView shows 122)
- DLSS Quality w/o FG = 61
- TAA @ 100 rendering scale w/ FG = 106
- TAA @ 100 rendering scale w/o FG = 60
- TAA @ 125 rendering scale w/ FG = 74
- TAA @ 125 rendering scale w/o FG = 53
- TAA on DX11 (no FG option) @ 100 rendering scale = 69
- TAA on DX11 (no FG option) @ 125 rendering scale = 59
^^^ for me, again, this is why I stay on DX11 and do 125 scale. 59 is more than enough (and I got 55 when I maxed everything out but LOD @ 350).
So what exactly does the 125 TAA scaling improve for you vs 100? Isn’t the glass cockpit already sharp at 100?
I will be getting this card, thanks. Just waiting for a price drop.
I keep waiting for the 3D cpus release because I need more cores (rumors say there will be a 12 or 16 option). Six is like going back to 2010, the 7600x is not good enough for my productivity. Benchmarks are right.
Yes, from my experience 5900x wasn’t the best for gaming, I had to admit it. I noticed the change between the 5900x and 7600x. Not that much of a difference, but still. For example less stutters from time to time.
I think both are almost equivalent in gaming. But the 7600x is more stable giving a few more frames thanks to the higher frequency core speed.
I would say max 8fps avg over the 5900x with said gpu. And less fps drops panning.
And yes, both bottleneck the RX 7900XTX.
Although I think you would get less drops/stutters or just zero if you pair the 5900x with the GPU. Due to the huge vram.
Despite having better fps and performance with the 7600x in my case. Maybe good silicon with my undervolts.
I have some old data from Time Spy.
both paired with rx 6900XT.
CPU score and FPS avg:
r 7600x: 10 467 / 35.17 FPS
r 5900x: 13 789 / 46.33 FPS
r7950x: 15 111 / 50.77 FPS
But why don‘t you just get a large screen with that lower resolution?
I don‘t get why someone would make it so complicated (screen resolution too high for what the system can handle, then using cpu/gpu power to render upscaling of lower resolution).
Simply use the screen resolution, within the form factor and resulting ppi your system can handle?
LOL. You want me to replace my 65" LG C1 with something same size but lower resolution? You’re not making sense, there is no such screen and if there was, buying one would be stupid. The reason you use DLSS is to boost framerate at the expense of a slight reduction in image quality. If you’re fine with jerky framerate, good for you, don’t use DLSS, you don’t need a 4080. This discussion is for those of us who like very fluid framerates at 4K and the slight image quality trade-off is not a big deal. How slight is the question, this is why I’m asking for details and subjective impressions too. You already decided you don’t want it, thanks for your input.
Not pun intended, neither care about you two. But isn’t the post tittle “7900XTX and 7900XT in MSFS”. I can understand the discussion would be more centered in these cards owners impressions in their performance in MSFS. Or people considering acquiring one. Or the options available from competitors. I think it is implicit the many options that these card offer for every consumer. For example the option of use scaling features. Some people like it, some don’t.
I think based on the reviews of these cards, if you’re just looking for pure rasterization performance without the fancy upscaling and frame insertion features, you’re much better off buying an RTX 30-series card.
THIS and other post mentioning the blurriness added with FG. If you want fps 100. It’s a super nice option.
If your specs can reach 70fps~ native with any card I would not border. Unless the power consumption or heat is a problem.
Yes, the 3090 ti that can give even 30%~ less performance native than the 7900XTX in some games. Reaching an avg of 15% in most games. “They are the same picture”
Anyone have anything interesting to say about the Radeon 7900XTX and the 7900XT?
Thank-you very much!
It’s okay to disagree, but let’s please be civil in the way we disagree with each other. Thank you.
Well, that thread has started to gain some heat…
Anyhow, i personnally went with the 4080, bought couple of days ago, a Phantom one, to be precise. Since i could not snatch a 7900XTX FE (would have been a bad choice actually), and since Nvidia have started to cut on price, it was litterally at the same price than the 7900XTX from XFX originally, i.e. €1300 (yeah, Europe taxes and shipping included).
I will be busy building up the rig with my daughter (7 year old) and my nephew (14 year old) during Christmas because it is fun and also the best thing my dad did to me when I was 6 (i remember building that 486DX4 like it was yesterday, and it served me during my whole life).
On the topic: i will be ready to do loads of testing for the community, so we can have user feedback experience and compare perf and smoothness with 7900xtx. System is:
- Case: Fractal Torrent Compact
- PSU: Corsair 80+ 850W
- CPU: Ryzen 7600X → will probably buy the 7800x3d when available and if CPU limitation
- Mobo: Asus Strix B-650 A Wifi
- DDR: Corsair DDR5 5200
- HD: Samsung Evo 980 Nvme 1 To
- GPU: Gainward 4080 Phantom
- Monitor: Xiaomi 34’ Ultra Wide
- Accessories: Honeycomb Alpha, Bravo, and Thurstmaster TFRP
I will probably buy a VR headset soon, still undecided between G2 and Pico 4.
your generally condescending attitude here is unpleasant.
My cpu is a 5800x3d, g-sync on, 165 Hz.
No idea what you are trying to tell us.
Jerkiness is not to be defeated by increasing average frame rates.
Jerkiness are stutters, drop outs in the video stream, that are mostly caused by other bottlenecks than what you describe.
Anything above 30fps is perceptually smooth in this sim, as long as it is delivered consistently without stuttering, also in the most demanding situations.
The difference between 120fps with a 4080 and 90fps with an 7900XT is irrelevant for playing the game/sim smoothly, and anyone paying inflated prices for such a difference acts foolishly. I would put my money in stutter free, but that is not on the market (yet).
MSFS bottleneck is the stuttering when shifting data between ssd, different levels of cache memory, RAM, CPU and GPU, it‘s in the architecture. You will only see a meaningful improvement from a new GPU subsystem in your whole system, if it makes the difference between significantly less stutters @ >30fps or alternatively worse.
You can argue as much as you want if a 4 lane or 6 lane freeway gets more traffic through, if your on ramp is one lane only. It‘s a straw man debate.
Generally it’s NOT about getting 120 fps vs 60 fps most of the time (99.9%). I’s about getting 30+ fps 99.9999% of the time. And if it were easy, Asobo/MS probably would have coded the software already that way. DLSS is not the game changer for that problem, no matter how often you keep implying it here otherwise.
The few 100ms stutters while approaching into a dense scenery airport are what kills our immersion. Not if it’s delivered with 30, 50 or 80 fps in average. Your screenshots above show all cards to be 60fps or better 99.9% of the time and thus more than sufficient for this sim. But that’s not good enough for stutter free apparently, which is not a problem of the GPU in the first place.
Windows is not a realtime OS. It’s a major challenge, and I wish Asobo would dedicate more resources to that fundamental problem, rather than to more eye candy.
That’s a beautiful Christmas plan! I would have gone for the green card if it had more vram. I need it for other activities with my pc. But other than that lowered price is a pretty good choice.
Out of curiosity once you got your fabulous pc assembled. Could you share how much vram it consumes in Dx12 at 4K (In any handcrafted airport stand of your choice, give it a few camera movements to fill it). And how much system ram.
VR needs scaling for the moment.
For the best color accuracy, better contrast and better resolution and perceived sharpness the G2 is your best choice (make sure you get the revision v2). It needs a really good card to move it at 4k native. So scaling it is the way to go for the moment. I returned mine because I feel the Varjo Aero are the best option (super expensive) or wait for a 2023 G3. Actual G2 is… good, really good. But you will find its flaws about the sweet spot and fringing in the borders if you move your eyes too much instead of your head. But apart from that it is an incredible experience to be in a cockpit for first time.
Any RX 7900 XTX or RTX 4080 owner with multi-monitor configuration ?
I will for sure do that testing - I believe we have a similar configuration (what is your RAM? I have 32Gb at 5200) barring the GPU, so that is a perfect testing bench for the community. From what you gathered and by previous testing in older generation (there is a post in this forum about 6900 vs 3080), I am fairly sure we will see a lower VRAM consumption.
For the headset, there is this video that just aired couple of hours ago which I was waiting for: PICO 4 vs HP REVERB G2: WHICH IS BETTER? MSFS 13900K, RTX 4090 - YouTube
I was ready for pulling the trigger on the G2, but he kind of convinced me otherwise. Although the risk is that the 4080 falls short of the VD God mode, maybe I will still buy it and try.
More to come!
Has anyone had an opportunity to test VR on 7900 XTX?