Jump to content

Either 1060 3GB or 1060 6GB for 1080p?


Recommended Posts

Hello, I need to upgrade my gpu, and my budget is around the price of a gtx 1060 3GB, but I think I could go for the gtx 1060 6GB if it really worth it. I play just at 1080p, one monitor.

 

My other specs are:

- i5 4570 (3.2 Ghz)

- 24 GB RAM

- SSD

 

What do you think, considering DCS 2.0 is coming?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go for the most VRAM that your wallet can handle. 3GB of VRAM is really low if you assume that DCS, and other games, will expand to fill the available space, just like the excess crap in your home.

 

A year, or two, ago I might have said the 3GB would be fine but even though you are currently only running a 2MP monitor, get the card that will serve you well when you decide to increase that resolution. Remember, it's not just about what you are rendering, it is also about view distances, terrain mesh and eye candy, along with other stuff. It all consumes VRAM.


Edited by cichlidfan

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather save a bit more money and pick up the second one as a more future-proof solution. I'm in the similar situation (a single, 1200p monitor) and plan to upgrade from my 780 before the end of the year, mostly because its 3 GB of VRAM is already hopelessly not enough for current Nevada, while both updated Nevada and reworked 2.5 Caucasus map are probably going to be even more VRAM hungry.

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For any regular game I would say 3GB. But DCS is different I think, so the more VRAM the better.

 

It's a tough one though, because in most benchmarks, the difference in performance between the 3GB and 6GB card is only about 5% at worst. Yet the price is about 40% more.

 

 

I'm sure even with the 3GB you could lower some settings, and it would still be smooth though. But if it's an upgrade you might as well upgrade to a card where you can have more eye candy too :)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cockpit Spectator Mode

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a tough one though, because in most benchmarks, the difference in performance between the 3GB and 6GB card is only about 5% at worst. Yet the price is about 40% more.

 

Interesting.

 

Even if the difference is just 5% in performance, I wonder if more VRAM in gtx 1060 would prevent drop frames in some views, I mean, would it do the framerate more stable?. If it is so, maybe the price would worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting.

 

Even if the difference is just 5% in performance, I wonder if more VRAM in gtx 1060 would prevent drop frames in some views, I mean, would it do the framerate more stable?. If it is so, maybe the price would worth it.

 

I will not say that it 'will' but given that more VRAM means less time spent loading data into VRAM means better throughput. However, I am not a GPU geek so my opinion might be less useful than others.

 

The bottom line is that, if you can afford a bit more, it could provide more longevity for your rig, in general. It is pretty much a 'pay me now, or pay me later' scenario.

ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am running one monitor as well in 1080p and just upgraded to a GTX 1060 6GB from a GTX 760 2GB and highly recommend it. I now have everything maxed out (see attached image) and FPS doesn't drop below 60 over Nevada in 2.0. I thought I had DCS running pretty good with the GTX 760 but the 1060 has been a drastic increase in performance, appearance, and overall smoothness. Even my TrackIR seems to be more smooth when looking around. No stutters, micro-stutters or any of that when flying around. If you can swing the GTX 1060 6GB, do it!

1156293288_MySettings.thumb.jpg.43321ccb414402f9cb22e4bf3008aa91.jpg

i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@brianjmac

 

Really?, you never go below 60 fps with that settings?, Wow!, it sounds like the dream of any virtual pilot, moreover considering this gpu is not high end. Anyway, I guess your cpu running at 3.6GHz helps a lot. I wonder if there is a lot of difference between 3.6Ghz and 3.2Ghz, like my cpu, Could I play with the same settings and framerate with 400MHz less?. Well, I guess is difficult to foresee but, what do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, not exactly "maxed out" as he has shadows (the most resource-heavy setting) to "flat only" - anything will run 60 with shadows flat or off :D.

 

Cranking them up would really show what this config can do (although "medium" should still yield a good compromise between quality and performance).

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@brianjmac

 

Really?, you never go below 60 fps with that settings?, Wow!, it sounds like the dream of any virtual pilot, moreover considering this gpu is not high end. Anyway, I guess your cpu running at 3.6GHz helps a lot. I wonder if there is a lot of difference between 3.6Ghz and 3.2Ghz, like my cpu, Could I play with the same settings and framerate with 400MHz less?. Well, I guess is difficult to foresee but, what do you think?

 

 

I can scale my CPU from 3.4/3.8 GHz up to 5GHz and I can also do this WHILE in DCS with MSI Afterburner open so I cam immedeatly see the increase in fps.

 

Bottom line, with every 100MHz you may gain 1-2 fps, more or less depending on settings.

Granted your GPU can process the extra data generated by your higher clocked CPU.

 

Rough estimate is that I gain somewhere about 1/3+/- more fps, from 40's into the 60's for example when flying the Ka-50. It also varies A LOT what airframe you fly, a FC3 model is far far less CPU intense compared to say the Ka-50 or Mi-8, those really stress your CPU for the flight model, the rest may go into DX11 and frames. So test with a few aircraft to see the difference.

 

 

The difference beyond 4.5GHz really depends on your GPU. I dont see more than maybe 3-5fps more when I switch from 4.8 to 5 GHz. There seems to be some kind of limit that I hit, either GPU or DX11 limitation, but scaling comes to a halt somewhere around 5GHz in my findings.

 

I doubt a LN super cooled Sandy at 6GHz aka 3000+ single core benchmark would actually bring another 20 fps but one would have to try and see.

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, not exactly "maxed out" as he has shadows (the most resource-heavy setting) to "flat only" - anything will run 60 with shadows flat or off :D.

 

Cranking them up would really show what this config can do (although "medium" should still yield a good compromise between quality and performance).

 

Ah, yes...sorry about that. I have had shadows to flat for so long that I forgot about them and don't even notice anymore. That of course helps me get the the performance I am seeing. I ran a test with shadows set to medium and my FPS dropped to the high 30's at times.

 

Wallkon: You should get similiar results as well with your hardware. I see that you have an SSD which really helped boost my performance when I moved DCS to it from the HDD.


Edited by =BJM=

i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... with every 100MHz you may gain 1-2 fps, ...

 

... It also varies A LOT what airframe you fly, a FC3 model is far far less CPU intense compared to say the Ka-50 or Mi-8, those really stress your CPU for the flight model...

 

... There seems to be some kind of limit that I hit, either GPU or DX11 limitation, but scaling comes to a halt somewhere around 5GHz in my findings.

 

Very interesting facts, I'll consider them in my next cpu upgrade. Thank you :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...