1080ti not worth it?

[JonRedcorn]

About to buy a 1080ti going from a 1070, I have a 8700k at 4,8 ghz, so I am pretty much maxed on cpu, I can only play on balanced with medium shadows and most settings lowered to get a pretty steady 90fps online. I read the performance thread and one guy says not worth it, the other says its worth it. My gpu is maxed out even at 132% steamvr SS. I want to be able to get close to 90fps with ultra or high, and shadows on ultra. Just not sure if the 1080ti will be worth it. Cheapest one I can find is a bit under 700 right now. I don't need a steady 90fps all the time I found anything over 70 gives me clean performance which means no lagging streaking planes or lagging ground if you look right or left and roll.

[dburne]

It will get you closer, but certainly as you say you will not have a constant 90 fps at all times.

I would think you could do better than balanced settings though and still have reasonably good performance.

 

If you can wait a month or so, I would think there would be several for sale on Ebay from folks buying the 2080 cards, unless you just want a new one and nothing wrong with that either.

 

On my rig ( specs in sig), I  run the game on high settings and high shadows and get a very smooth overall experience with my 1080 Ti.

And yes I even saw a nice benefit going from a 1080 to a 1080 Ti about a year ago.

Whether the gains are worth it to you for the money you lay out only you will be able to answer.

Edited August 27, 2018 by dburne

[JonRedcorn]

1 hour ago, dburne said:

It will get you closer, but certainly as you say you will not have a constant 90 fps at all times.

I would think you could do better than balanced settings though and still have reasonably good performance.

 

If you can wait a month or so, I would think there would be several for sale on Ebay from folks buying the 2080 cards, unless you just want a new one and nothing wrong with that either.

 

On my rig ( specs in sig), I  run the game on high settings and high shadows and get a very smooth overall experience with my 1080 Ti.

And yes I even saw a nice benefit going from a 1080 to a 1080 Ti about a year ago.

Whether the gains are worth it to you for the money you lay out only you will be able to answer.

You have an older cpu though, I am hoping I see a bigger gain, I bought a EVGA 1080ti Black edition gaming, was 670 overnight shipped. Gunna sell my 1070 for about 300 and will have only spent 350 bucks for the upgrade.

Edited August 27, 2018 by 15th_JonRedcorn

[Artunius]

What are your current settings in VR to get 70+? I've tried tweaking, but I can't seem to get over 50. It's probably my CPU holding me back, but i'm waiting for 9th gen Intel to pair with the 2080Ti. The EVGA 980Ti Classified is still quite decent for any other non-VR/VR game.

[dburne]

1 hour ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

You have an older cpu though, I am hoping I see a bigger gain, I bought a EVGA 1080ti Black edition gaming, was 670 overnight shipped. Gunna sell my 1070 for about 300 and will have only spent 350 bucks for the upgrade.

 

 

Good choice of card! I have been a big fan of EVGA graphic cards for many years.

 

[JonRedcorn]

1 hour ago, Artunius said:

What are your current settings in VR to get 70+? I've tried tweaking, but I can't seem to get over 50. It's probably my CPU holding me back, but i'm waiting for 9th gen Intel to pair with the 2080Ti. The EVGA 980Ti Classified is still quite decent for any other non-VR/VR game.

Using balanced, medium shadows, simple mirrors, 130km distance, 3x landscape detail, um, hdr, ssao, 4k textures, running 132% in steam ss settings, that's all I can think of right now, bought the 1080ti with hopes of hitting at least high and maybe ultra. My gpu is maxed out at 100% at these settings.

1 hour ago, dburne said:

 

 

Good choice of card! I have been a big fan of EVGA graphic cards for many years.

 

They are pretty solid, my current 1070 is a evga, their warranty service is excellent. Their build quality isn't the best out of everyone but the warranty makes up for it.

[Artunius]

7 minutes ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

Using balanced, medium shadows, simple mirrors, 130km distance, 3x landscape detail, um, hdr, ssao, 4k textures, running 132% in steam ss settings, that's all I can think of right now, bought the 1080ti with hopes of hitting at least high and maybe ultra. My gpu is maxed out at 100% at these settings.

They are pretty solid, my current 1070 is a evga, their warranty service is excellent. Their build quality isn't the best out of everyone but the warranty makes up for it.

 

Yeah, no clue what I'm doing wrong. I have basically the same settings, blurry landscape, hdr and ssao are off, 4k textures, 136% SS. I'm going to try maybe a low preset when I get off work later. Or perhaps turn off shadows entirely. I can't live without high quality clouds because they look like ass on low/medium. Can't wait to hear how that 1080Ti works out for you.

[Wulfen]

2 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

You have an older cpu though, I am hoping I see a bigger gain, I bought a EVGA 1080ti Black edition gaming, was 670 overnight shipped. Gunna sell my 1070 for about 300 and will have only spent 350 bucks for the upgrade.

I am thinking along the same lines as I sold a 970 to pick up the new 1070 when they came on stream. I am waiting for the reliable benchmarks to release in the 20* gen cards before making the switch. If the leap isn`t decent then I`ll wait to pick up a well priced 1080ti. Then again the CV2 will land in the next year or so and likely use this new VR link connection only found on the new gen GPU`s, so that`s another factor.

[JonRedcorn]

5 minutes ago, Artunius said:

 

Yeah, no clue what I'm doing wrong. I have basically the same settings, blurry landscape, hdr and ssao are off, 4k textures, 136% SS. I'm going to try maybe a low preset when I get off work later. Or perhaps turn off shadows entirely. I can't live without high quality clouds because they look like ass on low/medium. Can't wait to hear how that 1080Ti works out for you.

Oh yeah , have clouds on high, blurry landscape for spotting as well. What cpu do you have?

1 minute ago, Wulfen said:

I am thinking along the same lines as I sold a 970 to pick up the new 1070 when they came on stream. I am waiting for the reliable benchmarks to release in the 20* gen cards before making the switch. If the leap isn`t decent then I`ll wait to pick up a well priced 1080ti. Then again the CV2 will land in the next year or so and likely use this new VR link connection only found on the new gen GPU`s, so that`s another factor.

I am highly doubting the new headsets will be completely proprietary and only use the new usb C connector. They'd be disqualifying every single person that isn't on a new gen 20xx card. That would be a terrible business decision, will they support it? Yes, will they support the old hdmi cable? Yes.

 

If you look at pricing, the 2080 is probably as fast or slightly faster than a 1080ti, the 2070 will be much slower. They have a massive stock of 10xx cards still and they priced the new cards accordingly. The 2080ti is obviously going to be the best card you can get, that's why its 1000 or 1200 dollars. The 2080 is probably close to the 1080ti in regular non rtx games, and the 2070 is obviously slower priced at 500. They aren't even releasing the 2070 till much later so they can still get rid of pascal stock. This stuff is obvious to me anyways. Nvidia are the sole hardware company in the top end right now, so if they priced out their current cards they'd be stupid, especially when they have recently stated their stock is stupid high.

 

The prices of 1080ti's has been fluctuating wildly. I could of grabbed a zotac 1080ti amp edition for 526 the other day off amazon, no tax, since it wasn't sold by amazon. I got sketched out and passed on it, in hindsight I could of saved almost 150 bucks. But I'd do some research I think you will come to the same conclusion. Also the lack of real world gaming benchmarks released by nvidia is particularly odd. If the new cards were so much better they would have showed it like every single other release. The only thing they showed was how much better they are at ray tracing. No shit, the pascal cards weren't made for it. I dunno about you but I don't see Il2 adding ray tracing tech any time soon.

Edited August 28, 2018 by 15th_JonRedcorn

[Wulfen]

2 minutes ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

 

I am highly doubting the new headsets will be completely proprietary and only use the new usb C connector. They'd be disqualifying every single person that isn't on a new gen 20xx card. That would be a terrible business decision, will they support it? Yes, will they support the old hdmi cable? Yes.

Who knows, the new connection will have better latency. That seems to be the whole point of it. The next iteration rift could be a big leap over the first gen. Foveated rendering will be supported on the 20* GPU`s providing a big boost in performance if the HMD can deliver on it.

Fools rush in where angels fear to thread, those pre-ordering are a tad silly at this stage. 

[JonRedcorn]

Just now, Wulfen said:

Who knows, the new connection will have better latency. That seems to be the whole point of it. The next iteration rift could be a big leap over the first gen. Foveated rendering will be supported on the 20* GPU`s providing a big boost in performance if the HMD can deliver on it.

Fools rush in where angels fear to thread, those pre-ordering are a tad silly at this stage. 

I just don't see an already niche market cutting out a huge portion of their user base. It'd be company suicide. Latency over hdmi hasn't even been an issue.

Edited August 28, 2018 by 15th_JonRedcorn

[Wulfen]

Likelihood is that if the next gen rift is a big leap in res and field of view, with foveated rendering, varifocal and eye tracking which kind to have to come as a package. Then there will be a clamor for it from those of us already hooked on VR and new entrants. CV1`s will be 10 a penny.

[Artunius]

Setting the shadows to off seems to have given me the biggest performance boost. Now hitting 80-90 FPS. Probably a few more tweaks I can do, if I could settle perhaps for low clouds things would be a bit better.

[chiliwili69]

11 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

I read the performance thread and one guy says not worth it, the other says its worth it. My gpu is maxed out even at 132% steamvr SS

 

I suppose I am the guy who said no gain at all. the post was this: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29322-measuring-rig-performance-common-baseline-for-il-2-v3/?do=findComment&comment=571792

 

It is very strange that your 1070 GPU is at 100% load with only 132% supersampling. Have you verified with Oculus mirror HUD that your actual Rift resolution is really 132%? Do you use OTT or just STeamVR for SS?

 

My 1070 with some OC was not fully loaded with my settings and 170% SS. That´s why when I upgraded I saw no difference.

Now my 1080Ti is typically at 50-65& load during play time with SS at 180% and setting very similar to the bechmark

 

You can run the performance test before and after the upgrade, just for comparison.

[HunDread]

2 hours ago, Artunius said:

Setting the shadows to off seems to have given me the biggest performance boost. Now hitting 80-90 FPS. Probably a few more tweaks I can do, if I could settle perhaps for low clouds things would be a bit better.

 

Yeah, shadows on is FPS killer and they don't give that much difference in experience. They are not worth it for me. They are turned off for quite some time.

 

Clouds on the other hand are not that FPS hungry as far as I remember but I'm curious to hear your experience on that.

Edited August 28, 2018 by -[HRAF]Black_Sab

[JonRedcorn]

1 hour ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

I suppose I am the guy who said no gain at all. the post was this: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29322-measuring-rig-performance-common-baseline-for-il-2-v3/?do=findComment&comment=571792

 

It is very strange that your 1070 GPU is at 100% load with only 132% supersampling. Have you verified with Oculus mirror HUD that your actual Rift resolution is really 132%? Do you use OTT or just STeamVR for SS?

 

My 1070 with some OC was not fully loaded with my settings and 170% SS. That´s why when I upgraded I saw no difference.

Now my 1080Ti is typically at 50-65& load during play time with SS at 180% and setting very similar to the bechmark

 

You can run the performance test before and after the upgrade, just for comparison.

I was using msi afterburner and had it polling the card for usage and whatnot, that was before I realized it was giving me tracking stutters, but anyways yes the card was being used at 100% or 99% while playing, you could play, close the game and go look at the chart and see it was maxed out.

3 minutes ago, -[HRAF]Black_Sab said:

 

Yeah, shadows on is FPS killer and they don't give that much difference in experience. They are not worth it for me. They are turned off for quite some time.

The shadows add a huge immersion factor to flying in the headset. Seeing the shadows streak across the cockpit makes a big difference to me. Not only that but with the setting on ultra you get crazy far shadows on the ground from planes flying around which can help you spot.

Edited August 28, 2018 by 15th_JonRedcorn

[skline00]

15th_JonRedcorn, enjoy the new card.

[AuburnAlumni]

I run a 1080ti with an 8700k.  I have ultra settings and run Oculus tray tool at 1.7.  I get at or near 90 FPS for the vast majority of my missions...excluding small moments of heavy activity but it's barely noticeable.

 

I went from a 970 to a 1080ti and a 4670k to the 8700k.  No clue what the difference would be from 1070 to 1080ti but I get great performance out of them as expected.

 

Draw distance is a big factor IMO.  Once I tweaked those it got even smoother.

[JonRedcorn]

Should be here in about 2 and a half hours, or before 8pm est time. The wait is killing me I haven't even fired up BoX yet today, don't even want to play till I can get that sucker in the computer.

[dburne]

38 minutes ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

Should be here in about 2 and a half hours, or before 8pm est time. The wait is killing me I haven't even fired up BoX yet today, don't even want to play till I can get that sucker in the computer.

 

 

Good things come to those who wait.

Have fun!

[JonRedcorn]

4 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

 

Good things come to those who wait.

Have fun!

Should do some co-op pwcg campaign flying!

[JonRedcorn]

So I am definitely a little disappointed with the performance, was expecting a bit more. Funny thing I noticed though, when you are viewing the world outside of the plane the framerate skyrockets but back in cockpit view it nearly halves. I wonder what's so resource heavy in the cockpit, I know it's extremely high poly that could be it.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

Have you setup a new profile for the new card..

With nvidia pretty much all games require their own profile to turn off things like power saving
Limit pre frames and make sure shader cache is on ad if you did the first test flight might be slightly choppy at first till it caches it all.

oh here bit old but same for all GTX 10XX cards really incase you want it.


Edit: Sorry just saw this VR thread probably wont do anything..
 

Edited August 30, 2018 by =TBAS=Sshadow14

[HunDread]

7 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

So I am definitely a little disappointed with the performance, was expecting a bit more. Funny thing I noticed though, when you are viewing the world outside of the plane the framerate skyrockets but back in cockpit view it nearly halves. I wonder what's so resource heavy in the cockpit, I know it's extremely high poly that could be it.

 

Yeah cocpits take up quite a lot of the performance. This is why we have much worse FPS in Bombers than in Fighters.

[chiliwili69]

9 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

when you are viewing the world outside of the plane the framerate skyrockets but back in cockpit view it nearly halves. I wonder what's so resource heavy in the cockpit,

 

A 1080Ti is always a good investment for future VR devices.

 

In general human brain is very bad for comparisons, since it is very subjective and not able to record precise data. That´s why people use benchmarks.

 

If your previous 1070 was at 100% always, then it was clearly bottlenecking your system. So the 1080Ti should greatly help here.

 

You can just go through these checkpoints:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/34107-items-to-review-if-you-have-low-performance-in-il-2-vr-test/

 

When I am looking at the Spitfire cockpit with HIGH preset and SS at 180% in Single Player (and settings of the test), my fps is typically a 90fps. You should have that as well.

 

If not, one reason could be that you are using a more SS that you apply in SteamVR. 

Do you use Oculus Tray Tool or used it in the past?

 

You can use the "Oculus Mirror" application (explained in the link below) to effectively see the render resolution used in the Rift.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/30436-pixel-density-supersampling-at-steamvr-oculustraytool-and-oculusdebugtool/

 

That  Rift resolution should match these numbers:

 

[JonRedcorn]

8 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

A 1080Ti is always a good investment for future VR devices.

 

In general human brain is very bad for comparisons, since it is very subjective and not able to record precise data. That´s why people use benchmarks.

 

If your previous 1070 was at 100% always, then it was clearly bottlenecking your system. So the 1080Ti should greatly help here.

 

You can just go through these checkpoints:

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/34107-items-to-review-if-you-have-low-performance-in-il-2-vr-test/

 

When I am looking at the Spitfire cockpit with HIGH preset and SS at 180% in Single Player (and settings of the test), my fps is typically a 90fps. You should have that as well.

 

If not, one reason could be that you are using a more SS that you apply in SteamVR. 

Do you use Oculus Tray Tool or used it in the past?

 

You can use the "Oculus Mirror" application (explained in the link below) to effectively see the render resolution used in the Rift.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/30436-pixel-density-supersampling-at-steamvr-oculustraytool-and-oculusdebugtool/

 

That  Rift resolution should match these numbers:

 

The first time I fired it up I put the preset on ultra, shadows to high, mirrors on medium, view distance on 130k distant detail was at 3x, had 4xaa on which was unnecessary, but I was only running about 150% steamvr SS, I had the scenery option in the game options menu on unlimited, I fired up the g14 on kuban with a lagg 3 as an enemy. It was surprisingly running pretty well about 70-90 frames a second. 

 

So I hopped online and the second I got over an objective with a bunch of planes and ground targets my fps plummeted to like 45. So I've been tweaking and messing around ever since. I'm currently running high preset, 100k distance, medium shadows, simple mirrors 2xaa and lowered a few other things, I'm running only 140% steam vr SS. Getting very good playable frames out of it. But I was hoping to run higher settings. 

 

I could throw it back to my previous settings and be pegged at 90fps the whole time and it'd almost be worth it. The difference between 60 and 90 frames a second is very large. It's extremely smooth at 90fps, no streaking planes no hitching landscape as you look out and do fast maneuvers, it's really where you want to be for online play. 

 

The cards boosting to over 1900mhz think it was just below 2k, gpu usage was nearly 100%, so my 8700k at 4.8ghz is definitely feeding it decently. There just isn't any combination right now I could buy to increase my performance save for a better cooler and a delidding tool to increase my clock speeds. 

 

OH and I've been dealing with pc hardware and gaming for nearly 15 years I definitely am not a newbie when it comes to building and tweaking pc's. I was thinking about trying to increase my cpu oc or try and get my ram to 3200mhz.

[dburne]

I run with ASW disabled also, and much prefer it that way - however for me even at 60 fps I am still very smooth and do not get any streaking of planes. I really do not see any graphical issues unless I drop much below 45 fps.

But then I only do Single Player, not Online so that may be the difference.

 

[chiliwili69]

Never went online. But it seems it is a hungry beast.

I wonder why such a big difference for online vs. SP. Perhaps all those planes and bullets location and directions data is keeping even more busy the CPU. Perhaps the ethernet chips in the mobo play a role here.

As I said in another post, there is a lot of unknowns about how every graphic option is loading the CPU and/or GPU, even in single player. Too much trial and error.

Running already at 3000MHz, I don´t think setting the RAM to 3200 MHz will help a lot but who knows, it is an easy test.

[JonRedcorn]

1 hour ago, chiliwili69 said:

Never went online. But it seems it is a hungry beast.

I wonder why such a big difference for online vs. SP. Perhaps all those planes and bullets location and directions data is keeping even more busy the CPU. Perhaps the ethernet chips in the mobo play a role here.

As I said in another post, there is a lot of unknowns about how every graphic option is loading the CPU and/or GPU, even in single player. Too much trial and error.

Running already at 3000MHz, I don´t think setting the RAM to 3200 MHz will help a lot but who knows, it is an easy test.

Smoke, and other weapons related effects have a large impact on the framerate as well. Even just the tracers can impact it pretty heavily, wish there was a setting just to lower the effects. I may actually try balanced and high shadows, with the game on ultra though with high shadows it was so amazing in the headset, looked like a totally different game, the ground was extremely sharp and high res, trees, everything just looked incredible. If you really want to hammer performance go fly over that large port on kuban it will bring anything to it's knees. I am super tired though I've been working 6 days a week in the hot florida sun, wish I had more time to fiddle, next monday is labor day and I'll actually get a full weekend to test and tweak settings.

 

Here's my full userbench run. http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/10563698 I really need to get a SSD that's the next item on the list.

Edited August 31, 2018 by 15th_JonRedcorn

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Online multi-player seems to sap FPS. Even when the scene looks similarly busy as offline there still appears to be an additional penalty.

[chiliwili69]

6 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

Here's my full userbench run. http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/10563698 I really need to get a SSD that's the next item on the list.

 

Seems everything is allright in the hardware/drivers. You have a very capable nuclear submarine right now. ?

6 hours ago, 15th_JonRedcorn said:

Even just the tracers can impact it pretty heavily, wish there was a setting just to lower the effects

 

in theory the presets (low, balanced, high, ultra) influence three aspects:

 

1) number of poligons of the objects

2) render bubble diameter

3) number of particles in smoke (don´t know if also in fire or tracers)

 

The problem is that we can not decouple this three factors, they go all together.

 

I wish we could have a common test flight inside the IL-2 game who can be run by anyone having BOS, BOM, BOK, BODP, etc. So it will facilitate the graphics teawking process.

[A_radek]

I’m not so sure multiplayer is heavier than single player, in general. 

 

To some extent you can design an offline mission so that the action is centered around the player. One can also make sure never to exceed a maximum simultaneous number of units occupying the player bubble. 

 

On the other hand. In multiplayer you can very well be in a 4 aircraft engagement with a few other similar fights going on nearby and on top of that have some squad pounding the snot out of the ground troops your trying to protect.

 

It’s all subjective. But for me, the main reason I turn down shadows and other settings for multiplayer is because I absolutely can’t stand loosing the upper hand over an opponent due to him streaking and disappearing over a forest, having to zoom twice just to make sure that frame interpolated blur is an enemy or get my aim thrown off due to framedrops. Offline I just don’t feel that prestige and would rather enjoy some extra eye-candy.

 

 

Regarding cockpit taking up resources. It does. But also when looking at the dashboard you are to some externt rendering (calculating) the scenery outside and behind it. Perfectly masking the scenery would in itself be a very heavy task to calculate. 

 

Edited September 1, 2018 by SvAF/F16_radek