Good going with uniformly setting the initial conditions to make benchmarking a “fair fight.” Otherwise the waters are so muddied that it is almost impossible to discuss. Comments on bottlenecks (CPU) were appreciated - many don’t fully understand this issue. It all looks so easy...but you’re basically running a multiprocessor supercomputer when adding a GPU. So KISS principle greatly simplifies it for the audience. Lastly, nice that you returned to the virtues of the 1070. Value is off the charts for building more “typical” rigs. You’re clearly not being paid to hype new GPU cards. Your analysis and candor are appreciated. Thank you.
Thanks for the kind words Bao. Many people didn't get the principles behind why I tested this in this way. Many saying things like I can get better fps with this and that setting etc... Showing the highest fps was clearly not the point of this video, but instead like you understand was to compare the three cards in the fairest possible manner. The 20 and even 10 series cards do hold up very well when optimizing your settings for such. Glad you enjoyed, thanks for the feedback.
Thanks for doing this and well done getting a 3090. I'm holding out for AMD's offerings before upgrading my 1660ti. We might actually see some decent competition for a change. I just hope the miners keep their hands off.
Honestly mate before you buy a 3090 graphic card and a 4K TV and all the rest of the stuff look at console unless you really got a hard-on for flight simulator
Still have the good old GTX 1070 and too be honest in a mix of High and Ultra, MSFS plays very well. I have no idea what the FPS is and don't care. It runs well enough for me lol 👍
same here. GTX 1070 with i7-6700k and it runs fine for me in MSFS, even with my 3440x1440 display, so much so that I have no problem delaying purchase of a new system until there is good availability of 5000 series Zen3 CPUs+B550 mobo's and nVidia RTX 3000 / AMD RX 6000 series GPUs. I have the impression that my decision to go for 32GB of DDR4 SDRAM, which seemed overkill back in 2016, has benefited me a lot with MSFS 2020.
I was very impressed with my 1070 Ti's performance. At 1080 or 1440 It's plenty of card to enjoy this game. The 10 series were beasts in their day. Its only at 4k native they can't keep up, but with that said neither can the 3090 right now.
Great video! I'm stuck on 1080ti waiting on a 3090. Try turning down the building details to high at 4k, might help the 3090. Based on comparison videos, there's virtually no difference between high and ultra. Especially at 1000ft +
dude i know what you mean i got a 2080 super and i gotta go turn the fans on my evga cooler up to 100 and the fans on my asus 2080 to 100percent and all my case fans up to high rpms
Great video, I’m in the process to upgrade my 6 years old pc. What I find interesting to test, is to set FS2020 to 35 FPS, at a set resolution and play with the settings so all GPUs can keep the FPS and see what we miss with each type
Great video, thank you for putting this together. I have a GTX1070Ti with a i7 8th. gen (8700k) Intel chip with 32GB of ram, and yes Iam impressed with how MSFS 2020 runs on my system.
Fantastic video! Thanks for making this, as it helps me out tremendously and is very much appreciated. Also, I'm eager to see what a high-end 5000 series Ryzen (i.e. a 5900X or 5950X) paired with either your RTX 3090 or RX 6900XT will be like at 4K, especially after the update to utilize DX12 is in the sim. Great comparison and work as always!
This video made me so happy and wealthier. The performance of my Asus Tuf 3080 beats the 3090? What make of 3090 is it in the video? His high FPS are my lows! I have a MSI 3090 "X" Trio still in the box wrapped in plastic. I had the 3080 for couple of months and of course having expendable income and being a MSFS 2020 fanboy I thought to get the 3090, any make I could find and enjoy the sim even more, eventually selling the 3080. Now that I see 3090 is a slouch and I still have a few days to return the 3090 and get back my 2029.00 USD + TAX + Tariffs!!! Thanks NOTAM I'm subd.
I have an MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio [non-Ti] slightly overclocked [I have a great deal of experience with safe overclocking over the past 3 decades]. I have been gaming at 1440p with settings at Ultra except water waves which is High. AA set to TAA, AF is 16X, Texture Supersampling 6x6, Lens Flair: Off, Glass Cockpit Refresh Rate: Medium, Render Scale 100, Terrain Vector Data 100, Objects Level of Detail 200. [All settings individually set by me.] I get about about 48 to 50 FPS average. I have never tried 4K because I do not consider my graphics card to be up to the task, however, I will bump it up to 4K and set everything to High and see what I get in FPS. I paused your video and made two flights in the Cessna Citation Longitude with Global Rendering Quality set to High-End one at 4K and again at 1440p [2K]. Results: 4K, 35 FPS average, 32 FPS 1% Low using almost 8GB VRAM - - 1440p [2K], Average 58 FPS, 1% Low 33 FPS, 6GB VRAM usage. I suspect that I need more VRAM at 4K to get more FPS and smooth game play at 4K. If you could, run MSI Afterburner and let us know how much VRAM was used at 4K with Global Rendering Quality set to High-End on the RTS 3090. My computer spec: Intel i9 9900KS MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio [during game Memory Clock: 8202 MHz, Core: 2010 MHz @ 4K & 2025 @ 2K] 32GB of 3600 RAM CAS 16 Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master TrackIR 5 Screen: Samsung Q80T 55" Thank you, great video.
Great VID!!!! Cannot wait for Ryzen 5000 test. I wonder if 5000 with RX6900xt will give a better performance than 5000 with rtx3090 in MSFS. Really excited to see the comparison! I am also glad that you use both the high-end and ultra settings, not just ultra like most YT channels that do any sort of MSFS performance testing.
I dont think it will at higher resolutions, at least not something noticiable enough. They've said that they will boost FPS if working together, but i'd take that with a grain of salt. Besides, FS 2020 hates AMD cards right now. I can stand withing 10%, up or down, of FPS against a 2070 Super in most games with my 5700XT, but it FS 2020 i'm like 30% under it. This comes from an AMD fanboy, BTW, haha. The 5000 series will boost FPS at 1080p, but i dont think that's really neccesary, and besides, if you have this kind of grunt on your computer, it's unlikely that you have a 1080p monitor, QHD and UHD are getting more and more common, thankfully.
I love AMD, and I want them to succeed with their 6000's as much as any consumer that will benefit from that war. As a Canadian (AMD Graphics formerly ATI based in Canada) I also want to see these things succeed. Unfortunately I'll believe it when I see it. AMD is great at hype, and even if they get a good fps compared to nvidia with some games, Nvidia dominates in proprietary tech like dlss or creative AI stuff. I've owned hundreds of both of these brands of cards and have leaned Nvidia for a very long time. That said, AMD has converted me to their CPU's this round, so anything's possible. All I know for sure is that we will all win (the consumer) in the end, so that's nice.
This is an interesting topic and one I have done a lot of research on. First, my system is i7-7700k (not over clocked) and I am running 64gb 3200 RAM, SSD, and a GTX 1080ti FTW3. I am using a Dell 43" 4K display. On "HIGH" preset, I am getting solid mid 40's FPS everywhere, except NYC where it does dip around 30fps. But, still just fine. EVERYWHERE else, it's literally above 40's. This is using 100% render scaling, as anything less and you really see the difference at 4K. So, for me.. I can't even say it's worth upgrading anything lol. But, the real thing I wanted to mention and I want everyone to know.. is that buying the 3090 over a 3080 is not a good idea for MSFS 2020. The net gain is almost nothing and this is a really bad investment of the money to be paid. Just something to think about. There are other channels that have gone into detail to compare both the 3090 / 3080 in MSFS 2020 and the results are not what most people would think. However, the availability of a 3080 is tricky, lol. So, I understand why some people jump to the 3090. So, in the end.. even with a 1080ti, it really comes down to the rest of the system I guess. If you sit here and see my performance with that card, on my PC it's shocking how well it all looks and runs at 4K. Flipping back and forth from high to ultra shows almost no "real" difference in most cases (I have done this countless times) and after awhile I feel like I am in the fragrance section at Macys trying on aftershave. I just cant smell the difference anymore LOL.
Hey Travis, yeah very interesting results so far. It's really disappointing to have a monster card and be so CPU limited. Hoping the 5950x will give me an extra 15% or more. I don't know how well the 3080 performs comparatively to the 3090 but I sure like it when exporting from Adobe premiere. Most likely not worth the extra $$$ for a casual user or gaming only.
@@NOTAM1 Yeah, the 3090 was really made for production use, and the 3080 for gaming. In almost all of the tests I have seen online from the tech channels, MSFS2020 with the 3080 vs 3090 there is basically no difference in most cases. So, this is where it wont make sense for 99% of people. I feel that you are in a good position to educate your subs on that point too. Help them save money etc. All of the people watching may feel like they need a 3090, and this is far from the case. I get this too on my channel with photography. People think they need a $8K camera and 10K lighting system to take the type of photos I do, lol. It's silly. So, I have to educate everyone on the reality etc and help them save some money. Another interesting thing on this topic, is that different CPUS seem to be utilized differently. For example, my i7 will be around 80 - 85%.. and my GPU will be around 90, which is great! However, my assistant has an i9, and he does not as good of performance, which you would think would not be the case, but it is. Strange. Seems MSFS responds differently depending on the CPU type, and for some the "latest" are not showing the best results. Maybe will be sorted in time, but very interesting for sure. There are some topics on this on the Forums etc.
In context to what I was saying, low fps at 4k is much worse than low fps at 1080p for instance. Size of screen (larger amplifies the feeling) also matters and how close it is to you. Its why people get sick in VR if the fps is too low.
It would be good to run the same tests when new patches are released, as the developers of the product are continually optimising the graphical performance. Great test comparison video BTW! :-)
I'm waiting for the VR Version of MSFS 2020. This will be the new generation of flight sim!!! I have a Pimax 8 kx with native 4 k per eye (Nviia Founder edition RTX 3090).
The RTX 2080 Ti is still an excellent choice for Microsoft FS 2020. In fact it is a great gaming card !.It just falls behind the 3090 with a small margin it seems depending on screen resolution and of course settings adjustments within the program. You don’t really need to spend thousands of pounds to get a good experience in this Flight Simulator. I certainly in my opinion would not advise my friends to save up and go buy a 3090 just to use this Simulator program. But thank you for a very informative and interesting comparison of the top and medium hardware that can give different results in this Flight Simulator.
Nice video, really enjoyed it, relaxed and informative nice. ..learned a lot not only from the video but the chat too ...nice thanks But... one thing i will say is ..How impressed i am that you took the time to answer all the posts here ..respect sir respect
Nice. I have the 2080ti and with my settings in 4k ultrawide I get pretty solid 35-50 fps. I'm at ultrawide though so 3840x1600. This sim is so variable though. I flew in the western suburbs of Chicago where I grew up, and with thousands and thousands of houses rendered 360 degrees to the horizon and flying at a low level, I went down to 15 fps. But in Colorado flying around the mountains, I'm getting in the 50s. But I'm always tweaking. I have an i9-9980XE at 3GHz-4.5GHz
Great video NOTAM, enjoyed this. Still have my 2080Ti. I'm pinning my hopes on Update 6 so I can be ready for VR - I know that will improve the limited by main thread issues. I can get around 60 fps in Toronto at 1440p (High settings, some Ultra but AI and some CPU based settings turned down) which is ok, I do have my 9900K overclocked to 4.7Ghz so that helps. Reverb G2 should also arrive before the end of the month. I don't know if you are into VR but if you haven't tried it you are in for a treat.
My G2 is on order :). I feel like a kid before Christmas. Still trying to figure out how I might relay that experience through a review for people. I'm hoping to have the 5950x CPU by then also to help with the mainthread limitations I'm hitting with the 3900x. Also figure I'll upgrade the M/B and water cool it so I can overclock it. Never been much of an overclocker in the past, but I've never tried to run such a demanding game either. Will be interesting to see but yeah, I can't wait for VR.
Hi Joshua, sorry for breaking in, but I run a 1060 and got it to run at acceptable framerates (30+) disabling the AI Traffic and (of course) V-Sync. Unfortunately these will be our limitations until Asobo is able to balance Fs a little better. Happy landings ;-)
Appreciate the feedback, I think more than likely the CPU is definitely a bottleneck. I have a 3700x on order and upgraded my ram to 32 gigabytes, we will have to see if that makes a noticeable difference.
Great video -seems like everybody is asking the same questions. I'm planning a new system in the coming months and I was thinking about going all AMD this time. 32 GB of 3600 at CL-16 (I've seen that the sim gets choppy with less), one of those 5800Xs, maybe a Radeon 6800X, and 2 1T sticks of the PCIe 4.0 NVMe on an X570 mobo. I'd like to be looking at all this thru an HP Reverb G2. If I can get all the parts. The big thing for me is AI traffic - I like having all the airlines, military traffic, and general aviation traffic all around me. On my old rig, one of the original Core 2 Duos, I could only get 12-20 fps in the SoCal area. I haven't seen folks maxing out AI on MSFS 2020 yet, but I bet it'll be a killer. Hopefully they'll have ironed out all the bugs, produced a full SDK, and the HW parts are available when I start my build.
I could be a millionaire tomorrow and still wouldn't be tempted to assemble something where spending 1/2 as much would only lose me 1% performance. I guess if you have cash to burn on proven pointless parts then power to you.
Very close to the eventual specs of the PC I will be doing the final comparisons on, but can't promise a timeline for this as parts availability is difficult for many of these items. I'm hoping to do this in Dec. when the 6900 xt's are available, but with low supply and X-Mas orders I'm not holding my breath. cpu 5950x (5800x may be better for MSFS as it has a higher clock) 64GB 4000 RAM (AMD said the 5000 series were designed for 4000 ram) MSI Meg X570 Unify Motherboard Arctic Cooling AI water CPU cooler Gen 4 NVMe 3090 vs 6900 xt (we'll see which one comes out on top)
@@NOTAM1 I'd have thought the 5900x would have been a better choice, and under water It's likely the clocks will rival the 5800x and is better value. I'd ditch the Gen 4 NVME as outside of benchmarking non are yet to deliver a measurable real world benefit. I get the vibe everyone here has too much money and has not done enough research to see what hardware ACTUALLY DELIVERS a good experience, and is instead just eetting the best 'nametag' of everything. 1 Clear example in your comment.. "Gen 4 NVMEe".... no make or model specified, no reason why, you've just said 'Gen 4 NVMe' Actual testing have shown they're insanely expensive and deliver no benefit, not even a single second off load times in real world use. In fact many have been outperformed by Gen 3 devices as well as quite a few also having controllers that are immature and have issues.
@@virtual812 The 5800x has a higher core clock and will perform (as tested) better in MSFS than either the 5900 or 5950. Why would one ditch a piece of hardware they already own? You are making a lot of incorrect assumptions here about both my knowledge, my finances, my hardware and NVMe 4x4 ssd's. Not sure why your assumption is that I purchased a Gen 4 NVMe to reduce load times? Not sure why you assumed I haven't done any research or that I'm just eating nametags. I don't mind having hardware or choice based discussions with people, but I don't find you wanting to discuss anything. In fact I only find you arrogant at this point.
I have the MSI 3080RTX gaming trio and it's amazing! Working perfectly with FS2020 on Ultra settings. I get 55 to 60 fps consistently with the FPS locked at a max of 60 for the sim. Using the latest Nvidia drivers.
Yes, I have no doubt the 3090 will push 60 fps when I optimize my settings. Too many settings are CPU dependent and turning just those ones down to high makes a huge improvement.
what is your montior setup. i have 2080Ti but my CPU is only a 6800K , I get poor frames a lot of times but I'm CPU limited at 4GHz, whereas you are screaming in comparison with that i9 monster. Im using a 21:9 34" alienware monitor. it's a pretty hungry monitor, lots of pixel density
@@harpoon_bakery162 I have a 50" Samsung TV that looks great in 4K if I make sure it's using Game Mode and 60Hz. I don't have much cash and am close to retiring so it will do.
@@aikidoshi007 I bet it's awesome. I'd like to know what it looks like if you turn Storms on and fly into LOWI and then turn the jet back around and fly right back into the storm system you just came out of. The volumetric clouds are unbelievable there and will test your monitor and at the same time give you some heart-stopping drama.
Excellent video, I don't expect to get my hands on a 3090 till early next year, have a MSI-1070 and a EVGA 2080Ti (both installed for rendering ETC) but now love the fact I can see what a 3090 will do with MSFS... thanks
@@The70s80scollection Agreed, many ask why I would use the 3090 over a 6900 xt as I've stated previously even before testing it, and my answer is nvidia drivers and ai tech and so much more. I'm not knocking AMD, but they're no Nvidia when it comes to creative.
Thanks for the review! Out of curiosity, what temperatures did your 3090 get up to in your set up at 4K ultra settings? And do you find 64 GB RAM compared to 32 GB RAM helps significantly or is the 64 GB more for future proofing and maybe just an incremental performance gain at the moment?
Great vid, thanks. I got my 3090 this weekend, slotted it in (with my 5900x) and was a little disappointed by the FPS. Did you manage get a new CPU yet? If so I'd be keep to know how our numbers compare. I find a 'good' way to stress test a GPU in MSFS is to head to a busy airport and just taxi around, often just in circles. Doing this, I'm getting 35-40 FPS on my super-ultra-wide 5120x1440 - which I treat as 4k for the purposes of comparing to other people's benchmarks. On my old machine which had a 2070 super, I was getting just under the FPS as your 2080ti, although that REALLY suffered on the ground at some busy airports, sometimes as low as 10-12 FPS.
Having the rendering to 50 or 70 has an impact on graphics quality? I have 2080ti on mostly ultra and some high settings. And I get 30fps inside cockpit in airliners and GAs.
Great video Dave. Nice comparison as all of your videos are good looking despite the card upgrades. Running a water cooled STRIX 2070 for the moment it does a good job. I agree with mid 30's FPS being the lowest desired. I'm bottle necked on my CPU 17-7700k.
@@NOTAM1 I would love to upgrade but the wolverine er I mean wife fights me on too much spending in that department. MSFS still runs great enough to enjoy.
All flight sims are cpu hungry than video card. Even the old FS, like FS2004 and FSX. All 3 need a very powerful cpu to then a good video card depending on which resolutions you're going to fly with. Just to point out something, apparently AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and i7-12700k might be the best cpu's for FS2020 as of summer 2022.
The 3900X and other processors (CPUs) are going to be utilized more in an upcoming #6 patch for MSFS2020, hopefully within November. Btw, you're extremely lucky to obtain the 3090, very hard to purchase.
Thanks for the comparison, very helpfull! Can you help me out with this strange behavior: After running the FS2020 and when reaching the main Menue, my GPU runs at 100% Power (Windows Taskmanager). And that did't stop, even when I felt asleep in the meaintime. Windows 10 pro, CPU: I5 9600, GPU RTX 3080. Any idea? Cheers Alex
Good video but I beg to differ - I have a 2080 super - I can play a mixture of high and ultra settings at 2K, and I get easily above 35 frames per second over high density cities. 40+ elsewhere. 160 terrain level of detail, buildings trees to ultra . Etc. You have to go into Nvidia panel and adjust some of the settings there first. Also dedicate MSFS high priority and set Nvidia card to overclock. Can easily get 40 flying over New York with the 2080 super and 2K. Good video, but it might be not entirely fair. 48 g + ram needed.
Yes, the 20 and even 10 series cards can get much better performance than shown here. This wasn't so much a guide to the performance you could expect from each of these generations, but more a comparison between them with equal settings. The setup in this video has 64GB Ram for reference.
@@NOTAM1 Would love your recommended settings for a 2080 card, i9, lots of ram! I'm a graphic quality guy, but obviously need > 35 FPS! You are right about that.
So is AMD the go to CPU for MSFS2020 or all other FLTSIM's like P3D4-5, I'm asking because I just upgraded last Jan to I9-9900, GTX 2080Ti, 1TB M.2(MSFS)?
Given my limited budget I am now first going for a cpu upgrade from 9700k to 5900x. I would not have felt the need for that if MSFS 2020 hadn't been released so early. The 9700k is still more than fine in all my favourite RPG games. Upgrading the processor first will give me time to learn more about the gains and losses between 3080 and 6800xt. I am still considering a 6900xt too, given the fact that it's relatively cheap in comparison to the 3090 but it would have to show its worth in MSFS 2020 because for any other game I am sure I'd be quite happy with a 3080 or 6800xt as well. I am seriously considering switching back to AMD after quite a few Nvidia years...it will all depend on reviews and research. Either way, I'm not complaining even now because with my type of flying, which quite often finds me in more remote areas, I still get around 35 fps on average, mostly ultra settings with a 2070S at 3840x1200. Exciting times, hardware wise! Thanks for the comparisons and I'm curious to see the gain from Zen 2 to 3.
Keep an eye on the MSFS Direct X 12 release date also as it may alleviate the need for a CPU upgrade. Right now this Sim absolutely crushes the fastest of CPU's, but if multi-core in DX12 is implemented properly in this game it will quickly switch to being GPU limited I'm guessing.
2080 Ti is the best balance at the moment IMO. The 3900x CPU can't really do the 3090 justice at the moment. I'm guessing the 3090 does better in less CPU intensive games like First person shooters etc.
Another amazing video, many thanks! I built an intel system planning to use a 3080, but because it was impossible to get I went with the 2070s. As you point out, if you play with the settings, you can get acceptable frame rates (playable) while retaining good (believable) detail. I am curious about how directx 12 will work with non-3000 series cards, which I suppose is a question of where cpu limitations occur.
U build an intel system now? Not a good idea, u mybe should wait until the ryzen 5000er series cpus come. They beat intel in any scenario with less power consumption...
@@deadeyeduncan5022 hm really? Its long time ago since i had an Amd....sitting on a i7 10700k now but i kinda regret it. Should have gone for the ryzen 3900X...
Do not need 3000 series cards for DX12, so no worries there. DX12 support goes way back (not sure how far), but my 1070 Ti and AMD 580's both had DX12 support.
I've never had a CPU die/fry unless I specifically initiated it. (Ran a few without heat sinks for the fun of it). I've owned everything from budget desktop to Server grade XEON's in all types of environments and never had a single failure over probably close to a thousand CPU's. I prefer Intel in my racks, but AMD lately has owned my personal computer space.
And another thing concerning the processors, do you think it is a big difference between 5800X - 5900X - 5950X? In addition there is still the question how big this difference will be on DX11 and later on DX12...
Yes, I definitely will be comparing the two. I'm trying to find a 5950x right now, but with your other question here, it looks like out of the box the 5800x may be better performing than the 5900 or 5950 as the base clock is higher in the 5800 than the other two. Where the other two excel is in things like adobe premiere or other multi-core operations. MSFS and its mainthread limitation would be best served with the 5800 at the moment. Hopefully DX12 will resolve some of these.
Dave, were you running nvidia gsync during the tests? I just got my new system with a 3090 and am going to do some fps tests on settings that are like yours for comparison. Thanks Mark
I also thought that gysnc matched the monitor refresh rate with the fps the game is using, so even if the frame rate is lower than the monitor refresh rate, it is potentially doing something. I've not noticed it, but on the nvidia forums there is a good bit of discussion of why you would have gysync on for games playing below the monitor refresh rate. I'm not an expert, but would be curious to know what Dave had on his tests.
@Truth Serum Hi, as I said, I am not an expert, but I have read in several places that gsync will alter the monitor refresh rate to match the gpu fps if they are lower or higher, not just slow the GPU to match a lower monitor refresh rate. I'll do some more research in the nvidia forums and see if I can find an authoritative source (you of course may be one, so my apologies if that is the case).Thanks for your replies on this.
@@MarkManner Turn off GSync. If FPS is below your monitor refresh rate there should be no problem. I started working in the computer field in 1986, been at it a long time.
only thing that got me higher frames with my 3080 was adding my 5900x, it jumped me 20+fps. Easy solid 60 locked in 2k. Never drops. Almost max settings, just turned down a few that you wont notice. I'm not sure what CPU you are using but im getting more frames than you with a 3080. Maybe upgrade your cpu? Edit, oh I see you have a 3900x and a case that has horrid airflow. I see your issues now.
I see at 0:20 of the video you have dual 32" Samsung 4K monitors. Are you using both of the monitors to fly with or is one of them dedicated to running gauges?
At 4k 60fps yes, I believe you are correct. Will be interesting to see the 5950x which may get close to 40% increase in MSFS according to the few tests I've seen of it in FS.
@@NOTAM1 The most common tool used is MSI's Afterburner. If you download it, the statistics tool RivaTuner comes with it. In Afterburner you can set everything you want to show in the left upper side of MSFS
Great video. Could you check how much VRAM the 3090 uses when you are flying over NYC in 4k? That might be a good point to help anybody who is thinking to get a new GPU with 10gb or more.
i would really like to see what the 2080 and 3090 can do in VR with the Quest 2 and HP G2.. Can you really get 4K working in VR????? Quest 2 always seems to be in 1080P mode even after I change the Oculus Developer settings! Hmmmm Thanks for a great video.
Excellent video. I’m patiently waiting for my RTX3090 to be delivered. Sold my RTX2080 Ti to help fund it. Only running a 2K monitor at present but when my HP Reverb G2 arrives this month (assuming the sim will be VR ready by then) I will see the advantage of the 3090 as the G2 is 4K. Really looking forward to the follow up video to this one. By the way can you say which settings are more CPU dependant please.
Hey BB, also waiting on the HP G2 which is why I got this setup. Will do a follow up video regarding CPU dependent settings and optimizing the 3090. I'm guessing with a little optimization I can get 60 fps on the 3090 at native 4k as I could get way better fps from the 1070 Ti than this video shows.
Just wondering which settings you've found to affect CPU the most? Been trying to tune my 3700X/2080 Super (planning a 5950X and later a 3080 of some kind) and with all the improvements to the A320 Neo with the a320nx project I'm solidly into the low 30's now at 3440x1440 when in the cockpit and Mainthread limited from the mod. Nothing I do seems to make much difference manually but changing the presets to med or low from the defaulted High seems to help. I can't nail down which setting(s) it is though as most seem to be GPU related.
About to put out a video that answers exactly this. Basically your biggest CPU offenders are AI Traffic then Terrain slider then objects slider then buildings. All others have minimal impact from my testing.
@@NOTAM1 I did some more testing last night. This is specific to using the A320NX project, but I found buildings did nothing and the Terrain LOD slider only maybe netted 1fps when reduced even to 50. I did find oddly that increasing the render scaling helped as far as it made the FPS more stable and GPU limited, but didn't increase it. The real fix seems to be setting Glass Cockpit refresh to Low for this addon. Then I have to decide is the smoothness loss on the gauges worth going to 37-38fps from 32-33fps avg on the ground (in air is mid-high 30's on Medium). Of course moving to the 5900/5950 and/or the DX12 implementation might fix all of this so who knows
@@NOTAM1 I forgot to mention in my original reply that I don't use AI Traffic. I do however use Live Traffic which seems to perform differently. It seems to have a very minimal effect on FPS for me. when I was testing it I'd constantly drop 4-5FPS with AI set to around 15 for GA and commercial. When I swapped to Live I got a LOT more traffic in the sim, but with maybe 1fps loss. I don't have an explanation for it other than there must be some pretty big differences between the sim using real world routes and generating its own traffic on the fly.
@@flyinion Found out a lot tonight and last night re: 3090 and CPU. Swapped the 2080 Ti back in and its always GPU limited, I can put LOD's way up and its still GPU limited. As soon as I put in the 3090, CPU limited always. Even CPU limited with LODs down to 50. Will release a video, but the extra frames that the 3090 can render push the CPU past its ability to send draw calls for those frames. The 2080 and the 3900x was a bit of a sweet spot. It seems the 3090 needs more CPU to be able to use it. :( Now I'm trying to find a 5950x and hoping DX12 will fix some of this also.
@@NOTAM1 Thx. It seems that at the moment, because of cpu limitations, those with mid range systems on 1080p are the winners. I run a Ryzen 2600 + Nvidia gtx 1060 6g, and typically get between 30 - 40 fps with a mix of ultra and high settings. With this config, I am gpu limited, as my cpu is not topping out but the gpu is. It took a bit of system and windows optimisation to get there, but it shows it can be done on a moderate system. All things considered I am very happy with it.
@@brin57 I had similar results with my 1070 Ti and was very happy considering its age. Once you start pushing higher resolutions the CPU really starts to get taxed at the moment. DX12 should fix this.
Anysotropic and anti-aliasing are really usefull with a 4k resolution? Same with texture sampling with next GC with 16Go, does it manage better the big texture without the need to hyper sample it? Can we save like this a lot of fps for VR use by example ....quite a shame that the most expensive GC aren't not able to manage this game...
anostropic and AA are still useful... but just. In things like buildings in the foreground you don't need AA, but things in the distance you can notice much more. I may disable AA in MSFS and have the nvidia driver do the work instead at a lower setting. The biggest Issue I have right now is CPU limitations with the 3900X. Need better single core performance which I'm hoping the 5950x will offer.
Probably really bad. I did do it when I was testing, and to my surprise it does look a lot better, especially things in the distance, but it takes a huge performance hit and becomes unplayable. (low 20 fps)
Very interesting video buddy. Thanks 👍 I have a GTX 1080 for now and a 1080p 35" Ultrawide Curved monitor. So I should keep my Render Scaling at 50 because anything else wouldn't be right for my monitor?
Thanks Chris... render 50 only makes 4k 1080p. If you have a 1080p monitor then 100 scaling is 1080p. 100 basically means the native resolution of your monitor whatever that is. If you are 1920x1080 then 100 is exactly that. 50 in this case would then mean 960 x 540. 50 in 4k is 1920x1080. Hope that made sense. It allows someone to run their native resolution, in my case 4k but make the graphics card render less resolution to get more fps. The problem with 4k monitors and many monitors is that changing the actual resolution to 1080p look horrible. Instead you keep the resolution at 4k, but only render 1080p frames to it. Not sure if I was very clear there. May touch on this in the follow up video.
@@NOTAM1 Thanks for the explanation lol. I think a follow up video would be very welcoming, as monitor resolution is a dark art, and a very important factor when considering what resolution to run your simulator, what GPU to buy and whether to upgrade your monitor or not, depending on what GPU you currently own. My texture resolution is 2560x1080 (sorry should have mentioned this in my first post) and as far as I know it would be pointless me upgrading to a 30 series RTX as my monitor wouldn't get the best performance from it? See this is a can of worms lol. I don't even know if this is fact. A video would go a long way to explain things 😁 So with me having a 2560x1080 monitor (144Hz) what should the render scaling be set at? Its currently at 100. Once again, thank you so much for everything you do for our hobby 👍
@@MrBillUp If you keep it at 100, you'll get a true 2560x1080 render for each frame which is your native resolution. If you set it to 50, you'll have 1280x540 renders in the graphics card which will be upsampled to your native 2560x1080 resolution. 90 render scaling would give you 90% of the width and height of 2560x1080 or 2304x972 which wouldn't be that noticeable on screen, but will be easier for your graphics card to render. I think the next video will be on MSFS settings.
@@NOTAM1 Perfect. Thank you Sir. After reading your first post, and then the second, numerous times, It started to make sense to me. I'll play around between 90 and 100 and see if I notice any performance gains, or drop in quality. I agree with you about the 10 series GTX's as well. My card is nearly 4 years old, and it still performs extremely well with MSFS2020. You have to give Microsoft/Asobo a lot of credit for this as well. After a shaky start, they have started to really nail the performance. And as always, I look forward to your next video. Whatever that may be 😊
Hi NOTAM, thanks again for also posting this video on the MSFS-forum. I recon you've also heard rumors about the RTX3070- and 3060TI versions? Might be worth a little more patience from my end.
Either the 3070 or the AMD 6000 series may be great offerings this time around. It looks like there may be more value in the AMD's although if you play other games, the DLSS with nvidia cards is a game changer IMO.
Good stuff! In agreement with many reviews. Getting mid to high 30’s in the cities with my 2080ti (Intel core i9) on my 5K LG monitor for MSFS and higher numbers for X-Plane. If my screen capture for my video production is smooth, I’m a happy camper. Cheers and blue skies!
@@NOTAM1 Thanks! Really enjoying the video production. Dipping my hands into something that has interested me for years - The Schneider Trophy Races (1913-1931)
I have a i9-10900k rtx3090, just ordered my 4K monitor. Can’t wait to play with the settings on Friday and see what the 3090 do. Also, can you please try making a video like this but with the A320?
The i9 is your best bet right now, I find that with the 2080 Ti my 3900x is no the bottleneck, but as soon as I put the 3090 in, the 3900x can no longer feed the 3090 :(. Waiting for the 5950x to re-test this and get some better frames.
@@bravocharlie24 I know my 3900x isn't so I'm guessing you'd be just a slight bit better. That said I think you have much more room for overclocking than me at the moment, plus the 3900x latency is nasty. the i9 is still the best bet for now until the 5000 series i think. Its a sobering day when these CPU's are getting owned.
@@NOTAM1 is there any way I can overclock it using one of the default overclocks in the bio? I’m asking because I don’t know how to overclock it manually
@@bravocharlie24 all about cooling, but yeah the default overclocks are good places to start. Just keep bumping it up little by little until it becomes unstable, then dial it back a notch :)
Kinda strange seeing how the 2080ti did in these test. It's almost like as if it's all over the place when I look at this setup vs. my setup I personally have. I use 1440p @ 100 render scaling, all but SuperSampling and render distance at max(SS is @ 6x6 on my settings and Render Distance is set to High) and I get 50-60 fps with next to no issues and that's with having other things in the background running as well. CPU seems to be a large and above determining factor in games, esp with FS2020 anymore. I forget which CPU this video said it was using, but my rig has a EVGA 2080 XC Ultra, a i7-10700k in it (not currently OC'd), 32gb of RAM, and the game itself being on a NVMe SSD for those wondering my full setup.
I'm running a 3900x w/64GB ram and Gen 4 NVMe, but 1440p is not near as demanding as 4k on either the GPU or the CPU. Once you bump to 4k, the CPU has to make many more draw calls and the GPU has to render many more pixels per frame. It really is a large difference. 1440p @100 is close to this setup at 70, so use that as a reference. Plus to compare apples to apples you'd have to have all the settings maxed. This will give you your baseline compared to this video. Hope that helps.
@@NOTAM1 oh yea i realize that; It's one of the main reasons why I don't the world is juust quite there yet for 4k gaming to be a regular thing. People are more interested in a smooth framerate of performance than the way something looks, or at best, want a balance of the two. Don't think I've ever heard anyone ever say "Oh I don't mind the 15-30fps I get because look how AMAZING it looks!" 🤣
@@SlipKnot7866 Agree, I find the best resolution at the moment is 2k. 4k (and I know someone will jump on me about this) is not really obtainable right now. Lets change that to easily obtainable.
Hi, I was just wondering if you got my last email about my CNC3 Brampton Airport scenery you wanted to review, or maybe it just went to spam... Let me know...
Flight Simulator 2020 is CPU heavy...but only one Core. The Main thread runs on 1 Core and that Core is mostly running at 100%, and most of the other Cores are close to idle. Main Thread can't feed the GPU fast enough.
MSFS does use multiple cores, it's just that the mainthread like you mentioned (as most games) that make all the draw calls runs on a single core. This isn't much different than other games as you can't easily split these calls to multi-cores. Flight sims just have many more draw calls in their very nature than most games. This will be fixed with direct access to GPU's and bypassing the CPU for these calls in the future.
what is the differnce between resolution settings of a alienware 21:9 34" (wide screen) vs. 4K I would assume its the same resolution of 4K. I'm guessing a 21:9 is like 3440 x 1440p or something like that but cant remember, that's the same almost as 4K, right?
@@urbanimusic3319 ---- Oh that's awesome....that means that I will be able to use the 21:9 with much better frame-rates. It's hard to believe that 4K is almost twice as much pixel density as a 21:9, I mean not quite twice but significantly higher than the wide-screen. I'm hoping to be able to get good frame rates once I go from a 2080Ti on a 6800K CPU to 2080Ti on a Rocket-Lake or the new AMD stuff. AMD's top of line CPU might give me a few more frames than the 6800K which is running at 3.9999 GHz
Urbani is correct. Regardless of width or pixels for instance, 4k or 2k or HD is the second number in the resolution, so you could have any width x 2160 and this would be considered 4k or any width x 1080p would be HD. Yes there are more pixels with more width, but the image wouldn't be any clearer if that makes sense.
Nice video, but I feel like the real limiting factor here is not your 3900X or my 3800X, it is DirectX11. I actually have very rearly high GPU Usage. And since the second last update it is worse. I cannot understand why they even startet with DX11.
@@caribbaviator7058 Yes, I also think they started before 2014, but as DX and MSFS both coming from Microsoft, it seems a bit lame as an excuse. I actually don't know how complex it is to change a game/sim from DX11 to 12, but developing a flight sim with DX11 which are especially very CPU demanding, sounds not well thought out.
Just so you know, the Windows 10 Task Manager GPU performance scale is broken. It's well known issue that it way under reports how much GPU is really being used. For real numbers, use GPU-Z.
I don't think it matters what aircraft is used in the end, as long as they are consistent across all of the tests. Its more of a comparison between cards all things equal than it is "this card can perform like this". Just my 2 cents.
1070ti here running at 2560 x 1600 and 100% rendering all ultra for 30 fps avg. AMD 3600, 32 gigs at 3600 ram. No reason to update gpu for this game. Maybe for future game with good ray tracing? But it's not a pressing issue.
I have the I9-9900 Cpu with a RTX 2070 running ultra settings on a 43" ultrawide 3840x1200 and I average mid 40s to low 50s in dense city runs.. Flying really low at building top level drops my frame rate to the high twenties However I noticed somewhat of a decline in image quality since the last update... Did notice a slight bump in performance..
Love video, since I have 1070ti but I would love to see same settings on 1080 resolution, since I belove lot of people still uses older monitors like me. And well, I find it just ok. Anyway. If you find time... :)
4k 50 render scaling is essentially 1080p. Its difficult to do 1080p videos at native resolution as most 4k screens do not downscale nicely which is exactly why MSFS has the render scaling option.
@@BrljoMrljo Just to be clear, the problem with downscaling 4k to 1080p resolution in native resolutions isn't a MSFS problem and just the nature of screens and scaling. All games look bad when doing this.
Can i suggest to record a video-benchmark like this on Landing Epic experience on New York? The scenary its very heavy, and the condition are always the same. Ofter i use to benchmark my graphic driver and change. Check it out mate. Good work! ^_^
too many videos out here doing benchmarks they always seems to jump right over the 1080ti like it dont exist lol they skip striaght to the 1070ti why is that ?
Good going with uniformly setting the initial conditions to make benchmarking a “fair fight.” Otherwise the waters are so muddied that it is almost impossible to discuss.
Comments on bottlenecks (CPU) were appreciated - many don’t fully understand this issue. It all looks so easy...but you’re basically running a multiprocessor supercomputer when adding a GPU. So KISS principle greatly simplifies it for the audience.
Lastly, nice that you returned to the virtues of the 1070. Value is off the charts for building more “typical” rigs. You’re clearly not being paid to hype new GPU cards. Your analysis and candor are appreciated. Thank you.
Thanks for the kind words Bao. Many people didn't get the principles behind why I tested this in this way. Many saying things like I can get better fps with this and that setting etc... Showing the highest fps was clearly not the point of this video, but instead like you understand was to compare the three cards in the fairest possible manner. The 20 and even 10 series cards do hold up very well when optimizing your settings for such. Glad you enjoyed, thanks for the feedback.
Thanks for doing this and well done getting a 3090. I'm holding out for AMD's offerings before upgrading my 1660ti. We might actually see some decent competition for a change. I just hope the miners keep their hands off.
Honestly mate before you buy a 3090 graphic card and a 4K TV and all the rest of the stuff look at console unless you really got a hard-on for flight simulator
@@jasondavies6220 I'll probably be going AMD. And nope, not into consoles these days.
I run 2080TI and its a tank.. definitely something special with that card run all kinds of settings and runs pancake and vr like a dream
Still have the good old GTX 1070 and too be honest in a mix of High and Ultra, MSFS plays very well. I have no idea what the FPS is and don't care. It runs well enough for me lol 👍
same here. GTX 1070 with i7-6700k and it runs fine for me in MSFS, even with my 3440x1440 display, so much so that I have no problem delaying purchase of a new system until there is good availability of 5000 series Zen3 CPUs+B550 mobo's and nVidia RTX 3000 / AMD RX 6000 series GPUs.
I have the impression that my decision to go for 32GB of DDR4 SDRAM, which seemed overkill back in 2016, has benefited me a lot with MSFS 2020.
I was very impressed with my 1070 Ti's performance. At 1080 or 1440 It's plenty of card to enjoy this game. The 10 series were beasts in their day. Its only at 4k native they can't keep up, but with that said neither can the 3090 right now.
Great video! I'm stuck on 1080ti waiting on a 3090. Try turning down the building details to high at 4k, might help the 3090. Based on comparison videos, there's virtually no difference between high and ultra. Especially at 1000ft +
I have a 2080 Ti and when I play this game the fans in my computer speed up to mach 3. sounds like my own aircraft engine.
dude i know what you mean i got a 2080 super and i gotta go turn the fans on my evga cooler up to 100 and the fans on my asus 2080 to 100percent and all my case fans up to high rpms
Same here dude! Mine go mach 5 haha its a beast card man
Great video, I’m in the process to upgrade my 6 years old pc. What I find interesting to test, is to set FS2020 to 35 FPS, at a set resolution and play with the settings so all GPUs can keep the FPS and see what we miss with each type
I agree. 30 is not smooth enough but 35 is really fine without pauses and stutter.
Great video, thank you for putting this together. I have a GTX1070Ti with a i7 8th. gen (8700k) Intel chip with 32GB of ram, and yes Iam impressed with how MSFS 2020 runs on my system.
Fantastic video! Thanks for making this, as it helps me out tremendously and is very much appreciated. Also, I'm eager to see what a high-end 5000 series Ryzen (i.e. a 5900X or 5950X) paired with either your RTX 3090 or RX 6900XT will be like at 4K, especially after the update to utilize DX12 is in the sim. Great comparison and work as always!
Where are you at these days? I enjoy your vids. Would love to see more.
This video made me so happy and wealthier. The performance of my Asus Tuf 3080 beats the 3090? What make of 3090 is it in the video? His high FPS are my lows! I have a MSI 3090 "X" Trio still in the box wrapped in plastic. I had the 3080 for couple of months and of course having expendable income and being a MSFS 2020 fanboy I thought to get the 3090, any make I could find and enjoy the sim even more, eventually selling the 3080. Now that I see 3090 is a slouch and I still have a few days to return the 3090 and get back my 2029.00 USD + TAX + Tariffs!!! Thanks NOTAM I'm subd.
Glad you didn't skip the CPU part of this as it paints a much better picture than just the GPU workload.
With more testing recently I've realized how important the CPU is to this equation. Definitely the limiting factor here.
I have an MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio [non-Ti] slightly overclocked [I have a great deal of experience with safe overclocking over the past 3 decades]. I have been gaming at 1440p with settings at Ultra except water waves which is High. AA set to TAA, AF is 16X, Texture Supersampling 6x6, Lens Flair: Off, Glass Cockpit Refresh Rate: Medium, Render Scale 100, Terrain Vector Data 100, Objects Level of Detail 200. [All settings individually set by me.] I get about about 48 to 50 FPS average.
I have never tried 4K because I do not consider my graphics card to be up to the task, however, I will bump it up to 4K and set everything to High and see what I get in FPS.
I paused your video and made two flights in the Cessna Citation Longitude with Global Rendering Quality set to High-End one at 4K and again at 1440p [2K]. Results: 4K, 35 FPS average, 32 FPS 1% Low using almost 8GB VRAM - - 1440p [2K], Average 58 FPS, 1% Low 33 FPS, 6GB VRAM usage. I suspect that I need more VRAM at 4K to get more FPS and smooth game play at 4K.
If you could, run MSI Afterburner and let us know how much VRAM was used at 4K with Global Rendering Quality set to High-End on the RTS 3090.
My computer spec:
Intel i9 9900KS
MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio [during game Memory Clock: 8202 MHz, Core: 2010 MHz @ 4K & 2025 @ 2K]
32GB of 3600 RAM CAS 16
Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
TrackIR 5
Screen: Samsung Q80T 55"
Thank you, great video.
Great VID!!!! Cannot wait for Ryzen 5000 test. I wonder if 5000 with RX6900xt will give a better performance than 5000 with rtx3090 in MSFS. Really excited to see the comparison! I am also glad that you use both the high-end and ultra settings, not just ultra like most YT channels that do any sort of MSFS performance testing.
I dont think it will at higher resolutions, at least not something noticiable enough. They've said that they will boost FPS if working together, but i'd take that with a grain of salt. Besides, FS 2020 hates AMD cards right now. I can stand withing 10%, up or down, of FPS against a 2070 Super in most games with my 5700XT, but it FS 2020 i'm like 30% under it.
This comes from an AMD fanboy, BTW, haha.
The 5000 series will boost FPS at 1080p, but i dont think that's really neccesary, and besides, if you have this kind of grunt on your computer, it's unlikely that you have a 1080p monitor, QHD and UHD are getting more and more common, thankfully.
I love AMD, and I want them to succeed with their 6000's as much as any consumer that will benefit from that war. As a Canadian (AMD Graphics formerly ATI based in Canada) I also want to see these things succeed. Unfortunately I'll believe it when I see it. AMD is great at hype, and even if they get a good fps compared to nvidia with some games, Nvidia dominates in proprietary tech like dlss or creative AI stuff. I've owned hundreds of both of these brands of cards and have leaned Nvidia for a very long time. That said, AMD has converted me to their CPU's this round, so anything's possible. All I know for sure is that we will all win (the consumer) in the end, so that's nice.
This is an interesting topic and one I have done a lot of research on. First, my system is i7-7700k (not over clocked) and I am running 64gb 3200 RAM, SSD, and a GTX 1080ti FTW3. I am using a Dell 43" 4K display. On "HIGH" preset, I am getting solid mid 40's FPS everywhere, except NYC where it does dip around 30fps. But, still just fine. EVERYWHERE else, it's literally above 40's. This is using 100% render scaling, as anything less and you really see the difference at 4K. So, for me.. I can't even say it's worth upgrading anything lol. But, the real thing I wanted to mention and I want everyone to know.. is that buying the 3090 over a 3080 is not a good idea for MSFS 2020. The net gain is almost nothing and this is a really bad investment of the money to be paid. Just something to think about. There are other channels that have gone into detail to compare both the 3090 / 3080 in MSFS 2020 and the results are not what most people would think. However, the availability of a 3080 is tricky, lol. So, I understand why some people jump to the 3090. So, in the end.. even with a 1080ti, it really comes down to the rest of the system I guess. If you sit here and see my performance with that card, on my PC it's shocking how well it all looks and runs at 4K. Flipping back and forth from high to ultra shows almost no "real" difference in most cases (I have done this countless times) and after awhile I feel like I am in the fragrance section at Macys trying on aftershave. I just cant smell the difference anymore LOL.
Hey Travis, yeah very interesting results so far. It's really disappointing to have a monster card and be so CPU limited. Hoping the 5950x will give me an extra 15% or more. I don't know how well the 3080 performs comparatively to the 3090 but I sure like it when exporting from Adobe premiere. Most likely not worth the extra $$$ for a casual user or gaming only.
@@NOTAM1 Yeah, the 3090 was really made for production use, and the 3080 for gaming. In almost all of the tests I have seen online from the tech channels, MSFS2020 with the 3080 vs 3090 there is basically no difference in most cases. So, this is where it wont make sense for 99% of people. I feel that you are in a good position to educate your subs on that point too. Help them save money etc. All of the people watching may feel like they need a 3090, and this is far from the case. I get this too on my channel with photography. People think they need a $8K camera and 10K lighting system to take the type of photos I do, lol. It's silly. So, I have to educate everyone on the reality etc and help them save some money. Another interesting thing on this topic, is that different CPUS seem to be utilized differently. For example, my i7 will be around 80 - 85%.. and my GPU will be around 90, which is great! However, my assistant has an i9, and he does not as good of performance, which you would think would not be the case, but it is. Strange. Seems MSFS responds differently depending on the CPU type, and for some the "latest" are not showing the best results. Maybe will be sorted in time, but very interesting for sure. There are some topics on this on the Forums etc.
"I dont find anything under 30fps playable" LOL If i get 19, im ecstatic!
In context to what I was saying, low fps at 4k is much worse than low fps at 1080p for instance. Size of screen (larger amplifies the feeling) also matters and how close it is to you. Its why people get sick in VR if the fps is too low.
@@NOTAM1 yeah i have 1080 , on max settings I get around 20 fps 1440p on mfs
Which is actually not bad at all too me
Can't wait to see your future reviews! Great job, this was very well done so I just had to sub!
It would be good to run the same tests when new patches are released, as the developers of the product are continually optimising the graphical performance. Great test comparison video BTW! :-)
I'm waiting for the VR Version of MSFS 2020. This will be the new generation of flight sim!!!
I have a Pimax 8 kx with native 4 k per eye (Nviia Founder edition RTX 3090).
The RTX 2080 Ti is still an excellent choice for Microsoft FS 2020. In fact it is a great gaming card !.It just falls behind the 3090 with a small margin it seems depending on screen resolution and of course settings adjustments within the program. You don’t really need to spend thousands of pounds to get a good experience in this Flight Simulator. I certainly in my opinion would not advise my friends to save up and go buy a 3090 just to use this Simulator program. But thank you for a very informative and interesting comparison of the top and medium hardware that can give different results in this Flight Simulator.
Nice video, really enjoyed it, relaxed and informative nice. ..learned a lot not only from the video but the chat too ...nice thanks
But... one thing i will say is ..How impressed i am that you took the time to answer all the posts here ..respect sir respect
Thanks Centurion, appreciate the feedback. A little overwhelmed lately with the amount of comments, but I try to get back to everyone.
Nice. I have the 2080ti and with my settings in 4k ultrawide I get pretty solid 35-50 fps. I'm at ultrawide though so 3840x1600. This sim is so variable though. I flew in the western suburbs of Chicago where I grew up, and with thousands and thousands of houses rendered 360 degrees to the horizon and flying at a low level, I went down to 15 fps. But in Colorado flying around the mountains, I'm getting in the 50s. But I'm always tweaking. I have an i9-9980XE at 3GHz-4.5GHz
Great video NOTAM, enjoyed this. Still have my 2080Ti. I'm pinning my hopes on Update 6 so I can be ready for VR - I know that will improve the limited by main thread issues. I can get around 60 fps in Toronto at 1440p (High settings, some Ultra but AI and some CPU based settings turned down) which is ok, I do have my 9900K overclocked to 4.7Ghz so that helps. Reverb G2 should also arrive before the end of the month. I don't know if you are into VR but if you haven't tried it you are in for a treat.
My G2 is on order :). I feel like a kid before Christmas. Still trying to figure out how I might relay that experience through a review for people. I'm hoping to have the 5950x CPU by then also to help with the mainthread limitations I'm hitting with the 3900x. Also figure I'll upgrade the M/B and water cool it so I can overclock it. Never been much of an overclocker in the past, but I've never tried to run such a demanding game either. Will be interesting to see but yeah, I can't wait for VR.
Very interesting to see the performance you were getting with a 1070ti. I struggle to get a playable framerate.
Disable AI Traffic and V-Sync if you haven't. Most likely you are CPU limited and the 1070 isn't working as hard as it should.
Hi Joshua, sorry for breaking in, but I run a 1060 and got it to run at acceptable framerates (30+) disabling the AI Traffic and (of course) V-Sync. Unfortunately these will be our limitations until Asobo is able to balance Fs a little better. Happy landings ;-)
Appreciate the feedback, I think more than likely the CPU is definitely a bottleneck. I have a 3700x on order and upgraded my ram to 32 gigabytes, we will have to see if that makes a noticeable difference.
Great video -seems like everybody is asking the same questions. I'm planning a new system in the coming months and I was thinking about going all AMD this time. 32 GB of 3600 at CL-16 (I've seen that the sim gets choppy with less), one of those 5800Xs, maybe a Radeon 6800X, and 2 1T sticks of the PCIe 4.0 NVMe on an X570 mobo. I'd like to be looking at all this thru an HP Reverb G2. If I can get all the parts.
The big thing for me is AI traffic - I like having all the airlines, military traffic, and general aviation traffic all around me. On my old rig, one of the original Core 2 Duos, I could only get 12-20 fps in the SoCal area. I haven't seen folks maxing out AI on MSFS 2020 yet, but I bet it'll be a killer. Hopefully they'll have ironed out all the bugs, produced a full SDK, and the HW parts are available when I start my build.
I could be a millionaire tomorrow and still wouldn't be tempted to assemble something where spending 1/2 as much would only lose me 1% performance.
I guess if you have cash to burn on proven pointless parts then power to you.
Very close to the eventual specs of the PC I will be doing the final comparisons on, but can't promise a timeline for this as parts availability is difficult for many of these items. I'm hoping to do this in Dec. when the 6900 xt's are available, but with low supply and X-Mas orders I'm not holding my breath.
cpu 5950x (5800x may be better for MSFS as it has a higher clock)
64GB 4000 RAM (AMD said the 5000 series were designed for 4000 ram)
MSI Meg X570 Unify Motherboard
Arctic Cooling AI water CPU cooler
Gen 4 NVMe
3090 vs 6900 xt (we'll see which one comes out on top)
@@NOTAM1 I'd have thought the 5900x would have been a better choice, and under water It's likely the clocks will rival the 5800x and is better value.
I'd ditch the Gen 4 NVME as outside of benchmarking non are yet to deliver a measurable real world benefit.
I get the vibe everyone here has too much money and has not done enough research to see what hardware ACTUALLY DELIVERS a good experience, and is instead just eetting the best 'nametag' of everything.
1 Clear example in your comment.. "Gen 4 NVMEe".... no make or model specified, no reason why, you've just said 'Gen 4 NVMe'
Actual testing have shown they're insanely expensive and deliver no benefit, not even a single second off load times in real world use.
In fact many have been outperformed by Gen 3 devices as well as quite a few also having controllers that are immature and have issues.
@@virtual812 The 5800x has a higher core clock and will perform (as tested) better in MSFS than either the 5900 or 5950.
Why would one ditch a piece of hardware they already own?
You are making a lot of incorrect assumptions here about both my knowledge, my finances, my hardware and NVMe 4x4 ssd's. Not sure why your assumption is that I purchased a Gen 4 NVMe to reduce load times? Not sure why you assumed I haven't done any research or that I'm just eating nametags.
I don't mind having hardware or choice based discussions with people, but I don't find you wanting to discuss anything. In fact I only find you arrogant at this point.
@@NOTAM1 1) The higher clock on the 5800x provides a marginal (always
You're setting a standard for flight sim review videos. Thanks.
Very useful and informative - thanks!
I have the MSI 3080RTX gaming trio and it's amazing! Working perfectly with FS2020 on Ultra settings. I get 55 to 60 fps consistently with the FPS locked at a max of 60 for the sim. Using the latest Nvidia drivers.
Yes, I have no doubt the 3090 will push 60 fps when I optimize my settings. Too many settings are CPU dependent and turning just those ones down to high makes a huge improvement.
Thanks for that! I'm running a 2080ti with an i9 CPU and it's awesome, but eventually I'll need to trade up :-(
what is your montior setup. i have 2080Ti but my CPU is only a 6800K , I get poor frames a lot of times but I'm CPU limited at 4GHz, whereas you are screaming in comparison with that i9 monster. Im using a 21:9 34" alienware monitor. it's a pretty hungry monitor, lots of pixel density
@@harpoon_bakery162 I have a 50" Samsung TV that looks great in 4K if I make sure it's using Game Mode and 60Hz. I don't have much cash and am close to retiring so it will do.
@@aikidoshi007 I bet it's awesome. I'd like to know what it looks like if you turn Storms on and fly into LOWI and then turn the jet back around and fly right back into the storm system you just came out of. The volumetric clouds are unbelievable there and will test your monitor and at the same time give you some heart-stopping drama.
Excellent video, I don't expect to get my hands on a 3090 till early next year, have a MSI-1070 and a EVGA 2080Ti (both installed for rendering ETC) but now love the fact I can see what a 3090 will do with MSFS... thanks
If you are waiting anyways, I will be doing a 6900 xt comparison to see which one comes out on top. Hopefully I can get one in December.
@@NOTAM1 Cheers, it's definitely a 3090 I'm after my main use is Blender and Resolve studio rendering, these make better use of Nvidia's cards...
@@The70s80scollection Agreed, many ask why I would use the 3090 over a 6900 xt as I've stated previously even before testing it, and my answer is nvidia drivers and ai tech and so much more. I'm not knocking AMD, but they're no Nvidia when it comes to creative.
Excellent comparison. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks ActiveX
Thanks for the review! Out of curiosity, what temperatures did your 3090 get up to in your set up at 4K ultra settings? And do you find 64 GB RAM compared to 32 GB RAM helps significantly or is the 64 GB more for future proofing and maybe just an incremental performance gain at the moment?
32GB of system memory [RAM] is plenty. I have 32GB and the game is using about 16GB.
Great video - thank you. How did you go after using the 3090 for a bit longer? Any insights?
Great video. Looking forward to the 3090 vs 6900xt with 5950.
Thanks Deep, me Too! Now if I can only find them for sale somewhere.
Subbed looking forward to the AMD comparison
Great vid, thanks. I got my 3090 this weekend, slotted it in (with my 5900x) and was a little disappointed by the FPS. Did you manage get a new CPU yet? If so I'd be keep to know how our numbers compare. I find a 'good' way to stress test a GPU in MSFS is to head to a busy airport and just taxi around, often just in circles. Doing this, I'm getting 35-40 FPS on my super-ultra-wide 5120x1440 - which I treat as 4k for the purposes of comparing to other people's benchmarks. On my old machine which had a 2070 super, I was getting just under the FPS as your 2080ti, although that REALLY suffered on the ground at some busy airports, sometimes as low as 10-12 FPS.
Great video! I have been using an NVIDIA 1080 ti Founders Edition with 11 Gbs. In your opinion, is it time to upgrade?
Depends upon your screen resolution. If you have a 1080p there is no need to upgrade.
Having the rendering to 50 or 70 has an impact on graphics quality? I have 2080ti on mostly ultra and some high settings. And I get 30fps inside cockpit in airliners and GAs.
30 fps seems low...
@@maddawgzzzz I know. Dunno what else to do
Great video Dave. Nice comparison as all of your videos are good looking despite the card upgrades. Running a water cooled STRIX 2070 for the moment it does a good job. I agree with mid 30's FPS being the lowest desired. I'm bottle necked on my CPU 17-7700k.
Yeah this game absolutely wrecks CPU's. Almost every other game you'd probably have no problem. Hoping DX12 fixes this.
@@NOTAM1 I would love to upgrade but the wolverine er I mean wife fights me on too much spending in that department. MSFS still runs great enough to enjoy.
@@natedogg7376 lol.
All flight sims are cpu hungry than video card. Even the old FS, like FS2004 and FSX. All 3 need a very powerful cpu to then a good video card depending on which resolutions you're going to fly with. Just to point out something, apparently AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D and i7-12700k might be the best cpu's for FS2020 as of summer 2022.
The 3900X and other processors (CPUs) are going to be utilized more in an upcoming #6 patch for MSFS2020, hopefully within November.
Btw, you're extremely lucky to obtain the 3090, very hard to purchase.
I sure hope so. I find I'm extremely limited by CPU right now. Would love to see an update that helps with this.
Thanks for doing an in depth comparison of these 3 video cards! Do you know how much vram the 3090 was using throughout your testing?
Never more than 10GB surprisingly. Usually around 9.8GB.
I get 15 - 20fps with everything maxed out (200 render scaling) on 3070. They really need to optimise this game
With the extra memory with the 3090 have you tried manually cache scenery?
What settings are actually CPU bottlenecking in FS2020?
Thanks for the comparison, very helpfull! Can you help me out with this strange behavior: After running the FS2020 and when reaching the main Menue, my GPU runs at 100% Power (Windows Taskmanager). And that did't stop, even when I felt asleep in the meaintime. Windows 10 pro, CPU: I5 9600, GPU RTX 3080. Any idea? Cheers Alex
Good video but I beg to differ - I have a 2080 super - I can play a mixture of high and ultra settings at 2K, and I get easily above 35 frames per second over high density cities. 40+ elsewhere. 160 terrain level of detail, buildings trees to ultra . Etc.
You have to go into Nvidia panel and adjust some of the settings there first. Also dedicate MSFS high priority and set Nvidia card to overclock. Can easily get 40 flying over New York with the 2080 super and 2K. Good video, but it might be not entirely fair. 48 g + ram needed.
Yes, the 20 and even 10 series cards can get much better performance than shown here. This wasn't so much a guide to the performance you could expect from each of these generations, but more a comparison between them with equal settings. The setup in this video has 64GB Ram for reference.
@@NOTAM1 Would love your recommended settings for a 2080 card, i9, lots of ram! I'm a graphic quality guy, but obviously need > 35 FPS! You are right about that.
@@mark_lhr3 About to do a vid on how I max the CPU out first and then the GPU.
So is AMD the go to CPU for MSFS2020 or all other FLTSIM's like P3D4-5, I'm asking because I just upgraded last Jan to I9-9900, GTX 2080Ti, 1TB M.2(MSFS)?
I noted that the City is completely dead of moving vehicles on all cards, or did I miss 1?
@@IsaacSpurlock lol
Given my limited budget I am now first going for a cpu upgrade from 9700k to 5900x. I would not have felt the need for that if MSFS 2020 hadn't been released so early. The 9700k is still more than fine in all my favourite RPG games.
Upgrading the processor first will give me time to learn more about the gains and losses between 3080 and 6800xt. I am still considering a 6900xt too, given the fact that it's relatively cheap in comparison to the 3090 but it would have to show its worth in MSFS 2020 because for any other game I am sure I'd be quite happy with a 3080 or 6800xt as well. I am seriously considering switching back to AMD after quite a few Nvidia years...it will all depend on reviews and research.
Either way, I'm not complaining even now because with my type of flying, which quite often finds me in more remote areas, I still get around 35 fps on average, mostly ultra settings with a 2070S at 3840x1200.
Exciting times, hardware wise! Thanks for the comparisons and I'm curious to see the gain from Zen 2 to 3.
Keep an eye on the MSFS Direct X 12 release date also as it may alleviate the need for a CPU upgrade. Right now this Sim absolutely crushes the fastest of CPU's, but if multi-core in DX12 is implemented properly in this game it will quickly switch to being GPU limited I'm guessing.
Yeah true. I guess I'm feeling a bit nostalgic now that there are great AMD processors on the market again and possibly great GPU's as well. ;)
Awesome. I too have the 2080ti. Looking too upgrade in future.
2080 Ti is the best balance at the moment IMO. The 3900x CPU can't really do the 3090 justice at the moment. I'm guessing the 3090 does better in less CPU intensive games like First person shooters etc.
@@NOTAM1 Would you say this applies to the 2080 super too?
@@mark_lhr3 I think so. I've never used one but its still a beast.
Hi. How many screens do you use? How many ouputs of the GC do you use?
Regards
love to see 6900xt vs 3090 , in Australia is A$1500 difference in cost for these cards 3090 Over 3k
Another amazing video, many thanks! I built an intel system planning to use a 3080, but because it was impossible to get I went with the 2070s. As you point out, if you play with the settings, you can get acceptable frame rates (playable) while retaining good (believable) detail. I am curious about how directx 12 will work with non-3000 series cards, which I suppose is a question of where cpu limitations occur.
U build an intel system now? Not a good idea, u mybe should wait until the ryzen 5000er series cpus come. They beat intel in any scenario with less power consumption...
@@manonmars82 I don't often see cpu's commit suicide, but when I do, they're AMD.
@@deadeyeduncan5022 hm really? Its long time ago since i had an Amd....sitting on a i7 10700k now but i kinda regret it. Should have gone for the ryzen 3900X...
Do not need 3000 series cards for DX12, so no worries there. DX12 support goes way back (not sure how far), but my 1070 Ti and AMD 580's both had DX12 support.
I've never had a CPU die/fry unless I specifically initiated it. (Ran a few without heat sinks for the fun of it). I've owned everything from budget desktop to Server grade XEON's in all types of environments and never had a single failure over probably close to a thousand CPU's. I prefer Intel in my racks, but AMD lately has owned my personal computer space.
If you plan to go for the 5000 Series Ryzen, a video comparing the performance impact of the different CPUs would be very interesting!
And another thing concerning the processors, do you think it is a big difference between 5800X - 5900X - 5950X? In addition there is still the question how big this difference will be on DX11 and later on DX12...
Yes, I definitely will be comparing the two. I'm trying to find a 5950x right now, but with your other question here, it looks like out of the box the 5800x may be better performing than the 5900 or 5950 as the base clock is higher in the 5800 than the other two. Where the other two excel is in things like adobe premiere or other multi-core operations. MSFS and its mainthread limitation would be best served with the 5800 at the moment. Hopefully DX12 will resolve some of these.
I have a 5950x and 3090... they perform up to par with benchmarks on geekbench, so why do I get the same fps as you on 1080p ultra?
Dave, were you running nvidia gsync during the tests? I just got my new system with a 3090 and am going to do some fps tests on settings that are like yours for comparison.
Thanks
Mark
I was more interested in his settings so I could reproduce them as close as possible.
I also thought that gysnc matched the monitor refresh rate with the fps the game is using, so even if the frame rate is lower than the monitor refresh rate, it is potentially doing something. I've not noticed it, but on the nvidia forums there is a good bit of discussion of why you would have gysync on for games playing below the monitor refresh rate. I'm not an expert, but would be curious to know what Dave had on his tests.
@Truth Serum Hi, as I said, I am not an expert, but I have read in several places that gsync will alter the monitor refresh rate to match the gpu fps if they are lower or higher, not just slow the GPU to match a lower monitor refresh rate. I'll do some more research in the nvidia forums and see if I can find an authoritative source (you of course may be one, so my apologies if that is the case).Thanks for your replies on this.
@@MarkManner Turn off GSync. If FPS is below your monitor refresh rate there should be no problem. I started working in the computer field in 1986, been at it a long time.
@@ZZstaff Thanks everyone, M.
only thing that got me higher frames with my 3080 was adding my 5900x, it jumped me 20+fps. Easy solid 60 locked in 2k. Never drops. Almost max settings, just turned down a few that you wont notice. I'm not sure what CPU you are using but im getting more frames than you with a 3080. Maybe upgrade your cpu? Edit, oh I see you have a 3900x and a case that has horrid airflow. I see your issues now.
wow!!! 3090 is monster lol very good bench!!! thank you sir NOTAM
Thanks SJ, hoping to get a CPU that will do it justice soon.
I see at 0:20 of the video you have dual 32" Samsung 4K monitors. Are you using both of the monitors to fly with or is one of them dedicated to running gauges?
Only 4k on main monitor, second monitor usually has navigraph for charts.
Thanks for the quick reply!
Is it safe to say that current available hardware at any price is unable to run MSFS 2020 @ 60 fps?
At 4k 60fps yes, I believe you are correct. Will be interesting to see the 5950x which may get close to 40% increase in MSFS according to the few tests I've seen of it in FS.
Exactly what i searched for... thx! Would be nice if you could point out the cpu usage in future videos. Have fun with your 3090!
Thanks Ra Kon. Trying to figure out a reliable program/method to show this information on screen at the moment.
@@NOTAM1 The most common tool used is MSI's Afterburner. If you download it, the statistics tool RivaTuner comes with it. In Afterburner you can set everything you want to show in the left upper side of MSFS
@@rakon8496 Thanks Ra Kon, will have a look.
Cant wait to see the 6800XT and the 6900XT
Me too! Wondering how hard they are going to be to find.
Great video. Could you check how much VRAM the 3090 uses when you are flying over NYC in 4k?
That might be a good point to help anybody who is thinking to get a new GPU with 10gb or more.
I'll check and post some results in an upcoming video. So far over Toronto I've never seen over 9.9GB.
@@NOTAM1 thank you
i would really like to see what the 2080 and 3090 can do in VR with the Quest 2 and HP G2.. Can you really get 4K working in VR????? Quest 2 always seems to be in 1080P mode even after I change the Oculus Developer settings! Hmmmm Thanks for a great video.
Yikes at 50% res scaling in 4K high I can easily get 60fps all day over Toronto. Looks like an oc’d 9900ks is still the best cpu for sims
You are right. Ryzen is not for this game. I bet a 10300 can match those numbers
Very good video thank you. Hope you do a update once 5950x launches tomorrow. Any idea on VR performance?
Trying to get my hands on a 5950x right now, No idea about VR until my HP G2 arrives. This is sort of what I'm building this pc for.
Excellent video. I’m patiently waiting for my RTX3090 to be delivered. Sold my RTX2080 Ti to help fund it. Only running a 2K monitor at present but when my HP Reverb G2 arrives this month (assuming the sim will be VR ready by then) I will see the advantage of the 3090 as the G2 is 4K. Really looking forward to the follow up video to this one. By the way can you say which settings are more CPU dependant please.
Sounds like you’re set up for an excellent rig. My 2080, i7, and HP Reverb is awesome. Your new set up will probably be incredible. 👍
Let us know!
Hey BB, also waiting on the HP G2 which is why I got this setup. Will do a follow up video regarding CPU dependent settings and optimizing the 3090. I'm guessing with a little optimization I can get 60 fps on the 3090 at native 4k as I could get way better fps from the 1070 Ti than this video shows.
Hi really a nice Comp
What are your thought playing it with intel extreme 10980xe ? And NVIDIA 30 series card
Hi, the system I just got has an i9-10980XE, that I have overclocked to 4.7 GHz, and a 3090. I'm testing now and will report FWIW.
Just wondering which settings you've found to affect CPU the most? Been trying to tune my 3700X/2080 Super (planning a 5950X and later a 3080 of some kind) and with all the improvements to the A320 Neo with the a320nx project I'm solidly into the low 30's now at 3440x1440 when in the cockpit and Mainthread limited from the mod. Nothing I do seems to make much difference manually but changing the presets to med or low from the defaulted High seems to help. I can't nail down which setting(s) it is though as most seem to be GPU related.
About to put out a video that answers exactly this. Basically your biggest CPU offenders are AI Traffic then Terrain slider then objects slider then buildings. All others have minimal impact from my testing.
@@NOTAM1 I did some more testing last night. This is specific to using the A320NX project, but I found buildings did nothing and the Terrain LOD slider only maybe netted 1fps when reduced even to 50. I did find oddly that increasing the render scaling helped as far as it made the FPS more stable and GPU limited, but didn't increase it. The real fix seems to be setting Glass Cockpit refresh to Low for this addon. Then I have to decide is the smoothness loss on the gauges worth going to 37-38fps from 32-33fps avg on the ground (in air is mid-high 30's on Medium). Of course moving to the 5900/5950 and/or the DX12 implementation might fix all of this so who knows
@@NOTAM1 I forgot to mention in my original reply that I don't use AI Traffic. I do however use Live Traffic which seems to perform differently. It seems to have a very minimal effect on FPS for me. when I was testing it I'd constantly drop 4-5FPS with AI set to around 15 for GA and commercial. When I swapped to Live I got a LOT more traffic in the sim, but with maybe 1fps loss. I don't have an explanation for it other than there must be some pretty big differences between the sim using real world routes and generating its own traffic on the fly.
@@flyinion Will have to test this as AI Traffic is the major factor for CPU limitations.
@@flyinion Found out a lot tonight and last night re: 3090 and CPU. Swapped the 2080 Ti back in and its always GPU limited, I can put LOD's way up and its still GPU limited. As soon as I put in the 3090, CPU limited always. Even CPU limited with LODs down to 50. Will release a video, but the extra frames that the 3090 can render push the CPU past its ability to send draw calls for those frames. The 2080 and the 3900x was a bit of a sweet spot. It seems the 3090 needs more CPU to be able to use it. :( Now I'm trying to find a 5950x and hoping DX12 will fix some of this also.
Cool video. Question - is 50% scaling 50% dimensionally or 50% of the pixel count? Because is if it is pixel count, then 1080p would be 25% not 50%.
Dimensionally. 50% W and 50% H.
@@NOTAM1 Thx. It seems that at the moment, because of cpu limitations, those with mid range systems on 1080p are the winners. I run a Ryzen 2600 + Nvidia gtx 1060 6g, and typically get between 30 - 40 fps with a mix of ultra and high settings. With this config, I am gpu limited, as my cpu is not topping out but the gpu is. It took a bit of system and windows optimisation to get there, but it shows it can be done on a moderate system. All things considered I am very happy with it.
@@brin57 I had similar results with my 1070 Ti and was very happy considering its age. Once you start pushing higher resolutions the CPU really starts to get taxed at the moment. DX12 should fix this.
Anysotropic and anti-aliasing are really usefull with a 4k resolution? Same with texture sampling with next GC with 16Go, does it manage better the big texture without the need to hyper sample it?
Can we save like this a lot of fps for VR use by example ....quite a shame that the most expensive GC aren't not able to manage this game...
anostropic and AA are still useful... but just. In things like buildings in the foreground you don't need AA, but things in the distance you can notice much more. I may disable AA in MSFS and have the nvidia driver do the work instead at a lower setting. The biggest Issue I have right now is CPU limitations with the 3900X. Need better single core performance which I'm hoping the 5950x will offer.
Would you be able to show the frame rate with the 200% scaling you mentioned? Thanks
Probably really bad. I did do it when I was testing, and to my surprise it does look a lot better, especially things in the distance, but it takes a huge performance hit and becomes unplayable. (low 20 fps)
Want to build a rig but may have to settle for prebuilt with a 3090 in with parts being not available
Very interesting video buddy. Thanks 👍
I have a GTX 1080 for now and a 1080p 35" Ultrawide Curved monitor. So I should keep my Render Scaling at 50 because anything else wouldn't be right for my monitor?
Thanks Chris... render 50 only makes 4k 1080p. If you have a 1080p monitor then 100 scaling is 1080p. 100 basically means the native resolution of your monitor whatever that is. If you are 1920x1080 then 100 is exactly that. 50 in this case would then mean 960 x 540. 50 in 4k is 1920x1080. Hope that made sense. It allows someone to run their native resolution, in my case 4k but make the graphics card render less resolution to get more fps. The problem with 4k monitors and many monitors is that changing the actual resolution to 1080p look horrible. Instead you keep the resolution at 4k, but only render 1080p frames to it. Not sure if I was very clear there. May touch on this in the follow up video.
@@NOTAM1 Thanks for the explanation lol. I think a follow up video would be very welcoming, as monitor resolution is a dark art, and a very important factor when considering what resolution to run your simulator, what GPU to buy and whether to upgrade your monitor or not, depending on what GPU you currently own.
My texture resolution is 2560x1080 (sorry should have mentioned this in my first post) and as far as I know it would be pointless me upgrading to a 30 series RTX as my monitor wouldn't get the best performance from it? See this is a can of worms lol. I don't even know if this is fact. A video would go a long way to explain things 😁
So with me having a 2560x1080 monitor (144Hz) what should the render scaling be set at? Its currently at 100.
Once again, thank you so much for everything you do for our hobby 👍
@@MrBillUp If you keep it at 100, you'll get a true 2560x1080 render for each frame which is your native resolution. If you set it to 50, you'll have 1280x540 renders in the graphics card which will be upsampled to your native 2560x1080 resolution. 90 render scaling would give you 90% of the width and height of 2560x1080 or 2304x972 which wouldn't be that noticeable on screen, but will be easier for your graphics card to render. I think the next video will be on MSFS settings.
@@NOTAM1 Perfect. Thank you Sir. After reading your first post, and then the second, numerous times, It started to make sense to me. I'll play around between 90 and 100 and see if I notice any performance gains, or drop in quality.
I agree with you about the 10 series GTX's as well. My card is nearly 4 years old, and it still performs extremely well with MSFS2020. You have to give Microsoft/Asobo a lot of credit for this as well. After a shaky start, they have started to really nail the performance.
And as always, I look forward to your next video. Whatever that may be 😊
2080Ti is still HOLDING IT DOWN!!!
3090 would be far faster if he wasn't horrendously CPU bottlenecked with the 3900x
Hi NOTAM, thanks again for also posting this video on the MSFS-forum. I recon you've also heard rumors about the RTX3070- and 3060TI versions? Might be worth a little more patience from my end.
Either the 3070 or the AMD 6000 series may be great offerings this time around. It looks like there may be more value in the AMD's although if you play other games, the DLSS with nvidia cards is a game changer IMO.
Good stuff! In agreement with many reviews. Getting mid to high 30’s in the cities with my 2080ti (Intel core i9) on my 5K LG monitor for MSFS and higher numbers for X-Plane. If my screen capture for my video production is smooth, I’m a happy camper. Cheers and blue skies!
Yeah the Nvidia cards own screen capture IMO. The built in encoders are butter smooth. Also nice channel, been subscribed for a while.
@@NOTAM1 Thanks! Really enjoying the video production. Dipping my hands into something that has interested me for years - The Schneider Trophy Races (1913-1931)
The current patch claims to improve CPU limits. Do you see a difference?
Haven't tested that yet, will be interesting to see.
I have a i9-10900k rtx3090, just ordered my 4K monitor. Can’t wait to play with the settings on Friday and see what the 3090 do.
Also, can you please try making a video like this but with the A320?
The i9 is your best bet right now, I find that with the 2080 Ti my 3900x is no the bottleneck, but as soon as I put the 3090 in, the 3900x can no longer feed the 3090 :(. Waiting for the 5950x to re-test this and get some better frames.
@@NOTAM1 I’m seeing stutters everywhere. I don’t think the i9-10900k is strong enough for the 3090
@@bravocharlie24 I know my 3900x isn't so I'm guessing you'd be just a slight bit better. That said I think you have much more room for overclocking than me at the moment, plus the 3900x latency is nasty. the i9 is still the best bet for now until the 5000 series i think. Its a sobering day when these CPU's are getting owned.
@@NOTAM1 is there any way I can overclock it using one of the default overclocks in the bio? I’m asking because I don’t know how to overclock it manually
@@bravocharlie24 all about cooling, but yeah the default overclocks are good places to start. Just keep bumping it up little by little until it becomes unstable, then dial it back a notch :)
will the i9 10900K be alternative the Ryzen 5000 series ?
Super review
Looking forward to this run with new AMD offerings
me too :)
Kinda strange seeing how the 2080ti did in these test. It's almost like as if it's all over the place when I look at this setup vs. my setup I personally have. I use 1440p @ 100 render scaling, all but SuperSampling and render distance at max(SS is @ 6x6 on my settings and Render Distance is set to High) and I get 50-60 fps with next to no issues and that's with having other things in the background running as well. CPU seems to be a large and above determining factor in games, esp with FS2020 anymore.
I forget which CPU this video said it was using, but my rig has a EVGA 2080 XC Ultra, a i7-10700k in it (not currently OC'd), 32gb of RAM, and the game itself being on a NVMe SSD for those wondering my full setup.
I'm running a 3900x w/64GB ram and Gen 4 NVMe, but 1440p is not near as demanding as 4k on either the GPU or the CPU. Once you bump to 4k, the CPU has to make many more draw calls and the GPU has to render many more pixels per frame. It really is a large difference. 1440p @100 is close to this setup at 70, so use that as a reference. Plus to compare apples to apples you'd have to have all the settings maxed. This will give you your baseline compared to this video. Hope that helps.
@@NOTAM1 oh yea i realize that; It's one of the main reasons why I don't the world is juust quite there yet for 4k gaming to be a regular thing. People are more interested in a smooth framerate of performance than the way something looks, or at best, want a balance of the two. Don't think I've ever heard anyone ever say "Oh I don't mind the 15-30fps I get because look how AMAZING it looks!" 🤣
@@SlipKnot7866 Agree, I find the best resolution at the moment is 2k. 4k (and I know someone will jump on me about this) is not really obtainable right now. Lets change that to easily obtainable.
Hi, I was just wondering if you got my last email about my CNC3 Brampton Airport scenery you wanted to review, or maybe it just went to spam... Let me know...
Flight Simulator 2020 is CPU heavy...but only one Core. The Main thread runs on 1 Core and that Core is mostly running at 100%, and most of the other Cores are close to idle. Main Thread can't feed the GPU fast enough.
MSFS does use multiple cores, it's just that the mainthread like you mentioned (as most games) that make all the draw calls runs on a single core. This isn't much different than other games as you can't easily split these calls to multi-cores. Flight sims just have many more draw calls in their very nature than most games. This will be fixed with direct access to GPU's and bypassing the CPU for these calls in the future.
what is the differnce between resolution settings of a alienware 21:9 34" (wide screen) vs. 4K I would assume its the same resolution of 4K. I'm guessing a 21:9 is like 3440 x 1440p or something like that but cant remember, that's the same almost as 4K, right?
3840 x 2160 (4k) = 8,294,400 pixels
3440 x 1440 = 4,953,600 pixels
So no, not quite the same
@@urbanimusic3319 ---- Oh that's awesome....that means that I will be able to use the 21:9 with much better frame-rates. It's hard to believe that 4K is almost twice as much pixel density as a 21:9, I mean not quite twice but significantly higher than the wide-screen. I'm hoping to be able to get good frame rates once I go from a 2080Ti on a 6800K CPU to 2080Ti on a Rocket-Lake or the new AMD stuff. AMD's top of line CPU might give me a few more frames than the 6800K which is running at 3.9999 GHz
Urbani is correct. Regardless of width or pixels for instance, 4k or 2k or HD is the second number in the resolution, so you could have any width x 2160 and this would be considered 4k or any width x 1080p would be HD. Yes there are more pixels with more width, but the image wouldn't be any clearer if that makes sense.
@@NOTAM1 yes, that makes complete sense and thanks
Nice video, but I feel like the real limiting factor here is not your 3900X or my 3800X, it is DirectX11. I actually have very rearly high GPU Usage. And since the second last update it is worse.
I cannot understand why they even startet with DX11.
Because they started working on this project before DX12 was released so I heard
@@caribbaviator7058 Yes, I also think they started before 2014, but as DX and MSFS both coming from Microsoft, it seems a bit lame as an excuse. I actually don't know how complex it is to change a game/sim from DX11 to 12, but developing a flight sim with DX11 which are especially very CPU demanding, sounds not
well thought out.
Just so you know, the Windows 10 Task Manager GPU performance scale is broken. It's well known issue that it way under reports how much GPU is really being used. For real numbers, use GPU-Z.
That has been fixed. GPU-Z and TM are almost identical on my machine as long as you know the few caveats that are not specific to TM.
@@NOTAM1 Cool. Had no idea.
Why didn’t you try on the aircrafts that are FPS heavy, like 747 or 787? That would’ve been a better representation.
I don't think it matters what aircraft is used in the end, as long as they are consistent across all of the tests. Its more of a comparison between cards all things equal than it is "this card can perform like this". Just my 2 cents.
1070ti here running at 2560 x 1600 and 100% rendering all ultra for 30 fps avg. AMD 3600, 32 gigs at 3600 ram. No reason to update gpu for this game. Maybe for future game with good ray tracing? But it's not a pressing issue.
The 10 series Nvidias were beasts in their day and still hold up very well.
I have the I9-9900 Cpu with a RTX 2070 running ultra settings on a 43" ultrawide 3840x1200 and I average mid 40s to low 50s in dense city runs..
Flying really low at building top level drops my frame rate to the high twenties
However I noticed somewhat of a decline in image quality since the last update...
Did notice a slight bump in performance..
Nice, the 20 series hold up very well. The jump to 4k really puts a strain on CPU in my experience though.
I noticed that too. There is lots of info here:
forums.flightsimulator.com/t/my-2070-super-4k-settings-and-suggestions-episode-2/272854/114
Excellent!
Thanks Andy.
Stop moving your cameras so much, we just cannot watch your video !
Love video, since I have 1070ti but I would love to see same settings on 1080 resolution, since I belove lot of people still uses older monitors like me. And well, I find it just ok. Anyway. If you find time... :)
4k 50 render scaling is essentially 1080p. Its difficult to do 1080p videos at native resolution as most 4k screens do not downscale nicely which is exactly why MSFS has the render scaling option.
@@NOTAM1 Well, I guess I'll pass MSFS for now untill they do much more game polishing.
@@BrljoMrljo Just to be clear, the problem with downscaling 4k to 1080p resolution in native resolutions isn't a MSFS problem and just the nature of screens and scaling. All games look bad when doing this.
Can i suggest to record a video-benchmark like this on Landing Epic experience on New York?
The scenary its very heavy, and the condition are always the same. Ofter i use to benchmark my graphic driver and change.
Check it out mate.
Good work! ^_^
Good suggestion, will look at this on my follow up video.
Who is responsible for game optimization? Microsoft ? Graphics card manufacturer ? User ?
Waiting for radeon 6900xt rdna2 paired with zen3
Can you do this is VR??? With 4K!
微软在发售前声称2020是支持光追特效的，为什么我一点都没看出来？云层在海面完全没有反射，整个城市的建筑物黑漆漆的，对阳光的反射只是最基本的，建筑物的玻璃面完全没有效果。
too many videos out here doing benchmarks they always seems to jump right over the 1080ti like it dont exist lol they skip striaght to the 1070ti why is that ?
I would guess they are testing what GPU's they have.
@johnny641 has it right, I don't own a 1080 ti so I wasn't about to purchase one for this test.