7900XTX and 7900XT in MSFS

Make sure you get a beefy PSU.
Minimum 850 w or better.
My only gripe so far is this beast a power hungry SOB.
In game like MSFS it easily draws high 400w.
Yesterday my game room’s circuit breaker tripped when I was flying in DCS.
I then realized that I had a portable heater running and some other electronics like big TV running at the same time.

That’s also on the plan (currently on a 750W corsair). I have a Be Quiet 500FX case and tower cooler, and will probably go with them for the PSU too. They have some new ones coming out and I’m thinking a 1000W Pure Power 12M.

I’m really torn between some high end 7900XTX card or a 4090. But in the end, I want max performance at 4k so I think I have to bite the bullet and go with a 4090. CPU will be a 7950x3D.

1 Like

If you can afford the 4090 and are not trying to save cash, just get the 4090. I have a 7900 XTX Merc 310 and love it. I upgraded my psu from a thermal take 750 Gold to a new MSI mpg A1000G, and my GPU from a 1080 GTX.

I almost purchased a used 4090 from Best Buy but hesitated too long. For the long haul, I would prefer the 4090, but if you are not planning to utilize DLSS, AMD is a cheaper and still “competitive” choice.

That is your wallet and decision ultimately, but you are cashing in a lot for playing full 4k. I do already with a 4080 and an amd 7600x.

The configuration you are planning would be to go full VR and even then you would be really going way above what MSFS needs.

But i repeat, that is your sole decision :slight_smile:

I was eying up this one, but I can’t find any info on the overall length. According to PC Part Picker, it says the length is 344mm, which I could fit. Do you know if that is with the z-bar support, or does that add additional length? My case limit is 369mm, so debating if I should go with a different one, or consider an aftermarket support bracket. I had been looking at this one in part for its specs and reviews, but also to fit the black and silver theme I’m planning to build out.

@Mooncatt3953 I have had every intention of measuring the z bar, but have not had a chance yet. Hoping to get you a measurement tomorrow.

It is long! I have an ATX case and the Z bar protrudes into the area for extra HDD bays. On the best buy 7900 XT (XFX) Q & A, the answer for the z bar there was 380 mm.

I’ll measure mine tomorrow.

I had that gpu. And I can say that the length it is correct but if you install the z-bar support you add like 5cm~ more. I remember that I had to cut the internal front of my previous case to fit the xfx 6900xt. And when the xfx 7900xtx arrived I had to cut even more. After rma I just bought a bigger case and a bigger gpu xD

Of course with my previous setup the 7900xtx z-support didn’t fit at all. I solved it with a 9€ gpu support (those cylindrical very simple ones) and had not issues. In fact it was visualy cleaner than the z-bar.

Yeah, not a fan of the looks of the z-bar even if it would fit.

Today I tested a 7900XTX. I’ll send it back. This card does not give more performance in VR or pancake mode than my 3080Ti while using 100 W more power and being very loud even through a headset. No way. In VR it even loses 2 FPS against the 3080Ti.

All this on a cleaned DDU’ed system and some overclocking paired with a 5800X.
Maybe this would get better with a faster CPU - I am limited by main thread.

Just my findings.

EDIT: I gave it a second chance. When upping the render scale, the 7900XTX clearly beats the 3080Ti. In VR it is slightly ahead (about 2 FPS, 40 FPS in PMDG 737 at cruise level with clouds at high setting). So I keep it despite minimal gains in practical usage.

@Mooncatt3953 I measured today and it comes out to 388 mm when I round up with the Z-bar attached.

@SergeantXA320 I am also main thread limited with my 5900X. I have gone through about a month of fine tuning the system and still the main thread is my limit.

I did upgrade from a 1080 GTX, so… I’ll probably keep the 7900 XTX. The only way I would change it out, is for a great deal on a good open box 4090.

A pencil cut to size and two rubber pads does the same job :smiley:

1 Like

You could also go to an aircraft shop and ask to see there trash parts bin. Might find a cool piece of aviation to MacGyver into a stand.

Good to know, thanks. My new plan is to wait, until the prizes of the upcoming 7800X3D settle. I’ll try that with my 3080Ti and wait for a good 4080Ti or 4090 deal.

Oof, thanks. Maybe I’ll get one of the Asus gpu support brackets. Those look pretty cool. Lol

@Mooncatt3953 Today I installed a gigabyte 4080 gaming oc, on a friends rig, and have to say that the merc 310 7900 xtx is shorter. The Z bar makes the length almost as long as the 4080, just wanted to add that for comparison.

Also, the mounting support for the 4080 from gigabyte is a nice one, but it mounts through the motherboard screws. Not sure what I really think of that yet. The Z bar mounts to the GPU and then the Case itself. Food for thought.

Frame generation being the only test that matters is very very subjective.
Firstly, it doesn’t even work in VR so if you are MSFS VR only which a lot of us enthusiasts are it counts for nothing.
I have a 4090 so I speak from my own experiences. DLSS on any setting is significantly harder to see cockpit detail on numbers and controls. Admittedly the animation rate is much smoother particularly when observing lateral transition out of the side window. Motion Reprojection manages an improved sharpness but comes with its own issues of vibration and flicker, mostly noticed around menus and detail.
For me TAA at 100 scale is still the best way to play the game, but then I like airliners and the cockpit oriented experience. If you are into fast low level flying with low attention to the cockpit and flying by visual reference then DLSS is absolutely a nice option to have.

Personally with hindsight (although with lack of experience) I might have gone for the 7900 XTX due to my preferred playstyle of TAA. Certainly if I was on a more limited budget.

I really feel that DLSS is a hack job at performance. It shouldn’t surprise anybody that by shrinking the rendered resolution and upscaling it you are going to lose something. I would be a big fan of DLSS if it had a better influence on just how much sacrifice you make for performance, but the quality setting just isn’t that high quality. It needs a setting to only drop resolution by a smaller amount for a dozen more FPS and I might find it useful.

Finally I actually feel that AMD FSR comes out better in the quality department. I don’t know if it manages as high FPS as DLSS but it boosts it enough to no longer seek better, but like DLSS it is still not quite as good as TAA. You notice both methods doing badly for example with scrolling digits on the altitude/speed, the AI clearly can’t predict the numbers scrolling into the display and so does a blurry mess instead. I should just add for clarity, AMD FSR is available for use on both cards, so that wasn’t an argument in itself to go team Red.

In my view DLSS is really something to celebrate for lower budget users who want to hit games with high settings but with lower GPU’s who will sacrifice fidelity a small amount to do so. For console manufacturers and their developers it is another win, allowing developers to fall back on DLSS to give the game optimisation needed, slowly improving the core engine allowing DLSS to be scaled back. This is afterall what has happened over time with MSFS, several performance improvements allowing users to tweak their settings upward.

1 Like

I remember the discussion about excluding glass cockpit screens from upscaling, thus fixing visuals at the expense of some of the FPS benefit, but talk of that is mostly gone.

I don’t know if that was just a wishlist request or if Asobo actually mentioned that possibility themselves.


IIRC there was an offhand comment on a dev Q&A long ago, but only speculation on the forum since then – it’s not even clear that there’s any sensible way of implementing such an exclusion.