Results of GTX 1080 Ti to RTX 2080 Ti upgrade

[Mars Exulte]

35% is a lot of improvement.

 

No, it's not, especially for $1000-1400.

[Gnadentod]

No, it's not, especially for $1000-1400.

It actually is, and you also get money back for selling your current GPU, which lowers the price a lot.

[Dudikoff]

The 1080Ti could be had for slightly under 800 EUR on release. The 2080Ti was at least 1400 EUR IIRC. I don't see how that price hike can be defended as a good value for that 30% increase.

 

There are obviously those who are willing to pay for it and Nvidia appreciates it, but that doesn't change the price to performance math.

Edited February 1, 2020 by Dudikoff

[panton41]

nVidia's pricing is solely due to their position as the monopoly producer of high end graphics cards. AMD is finally getting into a position to compete again and Intel's been pretty vocal about their own high end discrete card, but both will undoubtedly have a while before they're competing on nVidia's level.

 

I'll just say that I'm giving Intel the benefit of the doubt about making a decent discrete graphics card. Their integrated GPUs really aren't terrible giving the limitation they work under (sharing thermals, power and memory bandwidth with the CPU is an overwhelming problem that AMD's VPUs have shown). I think putting an improved design onto a stand-alone card, with dedicated cooling, power and proper graphics memory and letting them draw 150+ watts by themselves could improve their capabilities quite a bit. Not to mention Intel has been paying more attention to their video drivers lately, probably for this exact reason.

[BitMaster]

Not everyone needs a 2080ti or 3080ti, the money is made elsewhere, below the niche/extrem realm of ti cards.

 

Looking at that 5700XT for 400€, what a great card. If they can deliver 2080ti performance or a little below for 550-600€ many will rethink their opinion towards a 1400€ 3080ti.

 

Time will tell. I for one know that I am NOT buying any card beyond 500-600 any more, done with letting me milk just because they think they endlessly can, they cannot.

 

I neither need VR nor 4k for now. I may go 4k in a couple years when 4k cards are available in midrange sector below 600€ and 4k screens are the norm, with100Hz and Freesync kind of features.

Edited February 2, 2020 by BitMaster

[Dudikoff]

Time will tell. I for one know that I am NOT buying any card beyond 500-600 any more, done with letting me milk just because they think they endlessly can, they cannot.

 

I neither need VR nor 4k for now. I may go 4k in a couple years when 4k cards are available in midrange sector below 600€ and 4k screens are the norm, with100Hz and Freesync kind of features.

 

Yeah, I've set up a similar max limit out of principle. My only problem is that my current 32" 4K monitor is G-Sync so its VRR won't work on an AMD card (unless it's powerful enough to provide relatively constant 60+ FPS in which case I could use V-Sync, I guess). Fortunately, thanks to AMD making their VRR mainstream, Nvidia finally gave up on supporting their VRR solution exclusively so my next monitor won't have such a limitation.

 

In any case I'm not in a hurry to upgrade as for my single-player DCS flying, the current notebook 1080 (I needed portability) does surprisingly decent in 4K (it's an Alienware so I'm planning to add a desktop card via an external GPU case one day).

 

Just hope AMD cards will be good enough to bring Nvidia's price hike down so I could look at some 3070 or 3080 as a potential upgrade if they really bring a noticeable boost in performance compared with the current crop.

Edited February 2, 2020 by Dudikoff

[Wali763]

I was skeptical myself when I first read this on threads here. Thing was I had been playing at 4K60 with Vsync on when playing DCS. When I played first person shooter games on my 165Hz Gsync monitor, I didn't use Track IR.

 

TrackIR was engineered before Freesync/Gsync became a thing. As Bit mentioned it's due to the polling rate of the IR camera and probably the software running in OpenGL as well.

 

Set up a framerate/frametime graph in Afterburner and then pan around and look over your shoulders in the cockpit while flying. At 80-90ish fps it's most noticeable, the microstutters are really bad. Less so the closer you are to 60 or 120 fps. At 120+ it's not really noticeable but I was only able to sustain those framerates on single player freeflight in the TF-51. As soon as I loaded a complex mission with wingmen over Nellis in another module sustaining 120 wasn't happening.

 

Then to test, pause TrackIR and use your mouse to pan your view and there will be no issues and look smooth as Gsync is intended. One of the nice things about VR is you can get 90 fps smooth versus the 60 fps limitation of TrackIR. But when framerate is capped at 60 fps for TrackIR gameplay is very smooth.

 

I think a lot of players just get used to framerate drops and stutters and think that's normal because they have no other frame of reference. When tuned properly for a consistent 60 fps, DCS plays real nice to your eye.

 

 

Does Vsync always reduce fps to 60 fps? Ive got a 144Hz monitor and I have usually 60-80fps with dips into the 40s sometimes. And of course higher up 100+fps.

 

Panning around it usually dont feel very smooth but overall ok and not at all annoying. I think its very personal, what microstutters are, but I guess my "not very smooth" and your microstutters might be the same.

 

I tried to activate Vsync but the fps still went over 60, often like 72 or more. Maybe DCS looks, what the video-drivers says about the monitor, which in my case is 144Hz?

 

Anyway, I did not see a big difference with and without Vsync, so I kept it to off. Also with Freesync on, there is little difference for me. Maybe Ill try to pan around without TrackIR, then I can see a difference. But right now, all those panning-buttons on the numpad are used for other commands, that Ive set when I used VR. Dont want to reset them, since I already am accustomed to using them.

[Art-J]

"Traditional" Vsync reduces fps to whatever refresh rate your monitor has (IF GPU is powerful enough to render that many frames, that is). Most of average players with average budget are still on 60 Hz monitors, so you see 60 being mentioned often. Obviously, that doesn't apply to you.

Edited February 3, 2020 by Art-J

[Sn8ke_iis]

Does Vsync always reduce fps to 60 fps...

 

As the previous poster mentioned I used V-sync because my 4K panel could only take 60 Hz max at that resolution through the HDMI cable.

 

You want to cap your frame rate at 60 fps through the Nvidia Control Panel or through Riva Tuner. You may also be able to lower the refresh rate of your monitor in its own settings menu. I also maxed out the Smooth slider in TrackIR settings.

 

You want a nice flat line on the frametime graph of MSI Afterburner. It will pick up any little stutters so you don't have to rely on your eyes alone. After a couple hours of tuning graphic settings your brain can play tricks on you or graphic settings can have a placebo effect without an objective way to measure it. Here's a screenshot I have from some benchmarks I ran last month. I wasn't able to maintain that high a framerate in complex missions, only in solo free flight. Frametime for 60 fps is 16.7 ms.

 

 

Here's a quick guide to turn it on in the latest Nvidia driver:

 

https://www.ghacks.net/2020/01/06/geforce-driver-441-87-introduces-framerate-limiter/

 

This guy does some excellent test videos for framerate limiters and input lag. This one is mostly geared toward FPS games but it's a good intro to the topic. We just substitute TrackIR for the mouse to change our POV.

 

 

And here's an actual test comparing framerate limiters for input lag.

 

[Wali763]

Thx.

 

Did some testing and Im very satisfied now. Not, that Ive been not before, but its better now.

 

But to achieve those min 60fps (which I do not have 99% of the time at least in my tests), I had to reduce MSAA to 2x.

 

Did not see a visible difference but did also not look for it.

 

By maxing fps to 60 I got those constant 60fps, which felt very smooth.

But on the other hand without that maxsetting I got also quite high fps, ofter above 100 and only low on the caucasian trees a bit above 60fps.

 

Also this felt quite smooth, the difference compared to max60fps being, that when panning the frame of the cockpit does to stutter a tiny bit with no fpslimit versus no stuttering but slightly looking soft with maxfps-setting.

 

Either way its quite nice and for now, Ill leave it capped to 60fps.

Edited February 4, 2020 by Wali763

[Ramstein]

I have an RTX 2080-Ti and also had to reduce that MSAA (had no choice, as the GTX 1060 was no longer able to keep up, so I went for my last card I will ever need).

My bottleneck is my CPU i-5 6600K 3.3 GHZ 3.8GHX Turbo

In Il-2 Box series, I don't think there are any issues.

Other than age and screwed up body with health issues.

==========

 

 

Thx.

 

Did some testing and Im very satisfied now. Not, that Ive been not before, but its better now.

 

But to achieve those min 60fps (which I do not have 99% of the time at least in my tests), I had to reduce MSAA to 2x.

 

Did not see a visible difference but did also not look for it.

 

By maxing fps to 60 I got those constant 60fps, which felt very smooth.

But on the other hand without that maxsetting I got also quite high fps, ofter above 100 and only low on the caucasian trees a bit above 60fps.

 

Also this felt quite smooth, the difference compared to max60fps being, that when panning the frame of the cockpit does to stutter a tiny bit with no fpslimit versus no stuttering but slightly looking soft with maxfps-setting.

 

Either way its quite nice and for now, Ill leave it capped to 60fps.

[Aluminum Donkey]

I couldnt bring myself to buy a 2080ti at the prices especially when the experience would be no different with a ti in there - Im not dropping anywhere to levels where I might see hiccups. I play at 2k - dont have a 4k monitor - with everything maxed out and I pull over 100 frames constant in most situations and only dip to 80 -90 when down low in cities such as Las Vegas or some of the places on the hormuz map. I'm very pleased with my card and its performance. As far as 2k is concerned I think a 2080super is a sweet spot; at 4k a 2080ti might be a bit more justified, but still the prices are ludicrous.

 

I'm still using an archaic 1080 Ti. :D Seems to be about right for a 2560 x 1440 single monitor, mostly at all-high settings except for Flat shadows and SSLR turned off.

 

After flying 2.5.6 for a few missions, stuttering seems to have gone away.

 

AD

[Aluminum Donkey]

What country are you in Thor_H? Here in NZ we have consumer rights that an item must last a realistic time frame and not just the manufactures warranty i.e. 12 months warranty is basically manufactures bollocks. You should have jumped up and down harder as one month after warranty is just crap!

 

 

No kidding!! It's a graphics card for your computer. A $1200-1500 graphics card at that!

 

Should go 5+ years flat out with constant heavy gaming no problem at all.

If it fails even after 3-5 years, I'd consider it defective. These suckers are all solid state electronics and should last forever.

 

Fan bearings don't count (even though they kinda sorta should, but they're mechanical, and as such, will eventually wear out)

 

AD