GTX 1080Ti max framerate?

[357th_Esco]

I am thinking about updating my graphics card. Before I commit I would like to know how many frames per sec the Ti is pushing at 1080, 2k and 4K on maximum settings on a widescreen monitor? This info will help me choose what monitor to upgrade as well. I would like my monitor to be able to support the max framerates dependent on what resolution I decide from the results. If you play DCS I would also like to know the same info as well. Thanks

Edited August 2, 2017 by Esco

[SCG_Tzigy]

110-120s at 4k, all maxed out except SSAO/HDR

 

Just tried DCS Normandy 2 days ago, new rig, sucks bad FPS and stutters when maxed out, still tweaking

[Jade_Monkey]

On a 3440x1440 monitor im getting 200+ fps with everything on ultra except a few effects that i just dont like visually.

Edited August 2, 2017 by Jade_Monkey

[357th_Esco]

Great info. Thank you

[BeastyBaiter]

Minimum framerate at 1440p at absolute max detail using balapan track from VR benchmark thread, 91 with HUD on, 110 with HUD off. I didn't pay any attention to averages or maximums cause, yeah, 90+ fps minimums. For comparison, the RX 480 8GB got 60-ish fps minimums with HUD on with the same settings. This is on an EVGA 1080 TI SC2 ICX, I haven't overclocked it yet. The RX 480 was an MSI Gaming X with a hefty overclock (1380 MHz core, 2025 mem).

 

I have not tested DCS outside of VR yet, VR results for that are mixed. NTTR runs 45 fps all the time at medium-high settings and I think I can bump the settings up further since it's ASW restricting it to that (V-sync for VR basically and an absolute nightmare to turn off). The RX 480 gave low 20's in the same mission in the same area (Ka-50 dodging cars on the strip). DCS 1.5 is barely playable around Batumi with a framerate of about 30, the RX 480 got under 20 fps in that area. Better performing areas yield 90 fps pretty much all the time. The RX 480 normally hit the ASW wall at 45 fps in the other parts of the map. I'll do some 1440p testing later in DCS 1.5 and 2.0, will update post or make another then.

 

Incidentally, I suppose that RX 480 is for sale.

 

Edit: 1440p, high detail preset except 2x AA, high shadows, default terrain shadows (higher detail than high preset). Batumi area gets about 50 fps on the deck, 40% gpu usage, 100% cpu usage on a single core (heavy cpu bottleneck). Looking away from the torture test area yielded FPS as high as an R5 1600x running at 4.0 GHz would allow. I didn't try 2.0, but I promise it's well over 60 fps all the time no matter what. It's still a badly made engine that will CPU bottleneck, but it isn't as bad as 1.5. This is all in a Ka-50 dodging trees in a modest sized mission.

 

Full system specs are:

CPU: R5 1600x

RAM: 16GB DDR4 @ 2667 MHz

GPU: GTX 1080 TI

OS: Win 10 home

Mobo: MSI B350 Tomahawk

Edited August 4, 2017 by BeastyBaiter

[BeastyBaiter]

Update regarding DCS 2, I was curious as to what it would do in NTTR with absolute maximum detail settings possible at 1440p, so I tested it. Flying either the Huey or the Mirage down the main road through the strip gave a minimum fps of 45 and typically ran between 53 and 70. There was some noticeable jittering as it was bouncing above and below 60 fps, but it was certainly playable. This is with mirrors on and active in a non empty mission. My R5 1600x had 95-100% usage on 1 thread + 50% on a second for DCS. The 1080 TI at stock overclock was also around 95-100% usage the whole time, so no bottlenecks, both were fully utilized. I have to say, I didn't realize just how incredibly beautiful that map is until just now when I tested it. Truly breath taking when cranking things all the way to stupid. Dropping AA down slightly would likely smooth the experience out without any noticeable loss quality. The specific 1080 Ti I ran was also both quiet and relatively cool. It never went above 70C and I couldn't hear it over the case fans, which are barely audible. Hope this helps!

[357th_Esco]

Great! Thanks for all that detailed info.

[SharpeXB]

In situations with many objects, in both sims, your CPU will be the limiting factor. The 1080 Ti does perform very well at max setting in these sims and at 4K. It outperforms the 2x Titan X cards I had previously. Runs much cooler, the Titans ran well but really got their fans going.

[Snarf]

On a 3440x1440 monitor im getting 200+ fps with everything on ultra except a few effects that i just dont like visually.

 

OK I'm running pretty much the same hardware you are but I seldom crack 80 fps.  Any Nvidia setting tweaks or game tweaks you can share?  I'm running Ultra with everything maxed out and my frames bounce between mid 50's and 70's.  Not sure what gives.  1080GTX, i7 7700k, SSD drives, 32GB corsair RAM pretty much top spec everything.  

[Snarf]

OK I'm running pretty much the same hardware you are but I seldom crack 80 fps.  Any Nvidia setting tweaks or game tweaks you can share?  I'm running Ultra with everything maxed out and my frames bounce between mid 50's and 70's.  Not sure what gives.  1080GTX, i7 7700k, SSD drives, 32GB corsair RAM pretty much top spec everything.  

 

So to answer my own question in case it helps someone else... I changed from "Ultra" to "High" and was getting 200FPS.  Switched back from "High" to "Ultra" and am still running 100-144 FPS online now.  No idea whatsoever what changed but I am now running on Ultra settings, everything maxed out and well over 100FPS so I'm happy.