GTX 1660?

[MasserME262]

I have:

B85M D3H MoBo

Intel I5-4440 Processor.

Should I get a GTX 1660 if I want those beautiful and sexy graphics of IL2? 

Should I get a better Processor/MoBo together?

 

Thanks

[Voyager]

I'd recommend reading through chiliwili69's results: 

 

All that said, I'd think a 1660 Super should get you a good experience if you are running at 1080p, especially if i don't feel the need to run everything at High. 

 

How much Ram do you have? I'm thinking you probably would be happiest with 16gb.

Edited December 4, 2019 by Voyager

[MasserME262]

13 minutes ago, Voyager said:

I'd recommend reading through chiliwili69's results: 

 

All that said, I'd think a 1660 Super should get you a good experience if you are running at 1080p, especially if i don't feel the need to run everything at High. 

 

How much Ram do you have? I'm thinking you probably would be happiest with 16gb.

I have 8gb RAM, yes, I would happy with less than ultra high

[SCG_ErwinP]

Your processor will bottleneck the 1660.

I would recommend GTX 1050 TI or RX 570.

BTW What is your current Graphic Card?

[ShamrockOneFive]

2 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

I have:

B85M D3H MoBo

Intel I5-4440 Processor.

Should I get a GTX 1660 if I want those beautiful and sexy graphics of IL2? 

Should I get a better Processor/MoBo together?

 

Thanks

 

The GTX 1660 is a pretty good price for performance GPU right now so I don't think you would necessarily go wrong with it. But I would only purchase that as part of a concerted effort to perhaps make a more major upgrade.

 

Your CPU is going to bottleneck your system as will the 8GB of ram. If you want the best graphics and performance in IL-2 you'll want to jump to a 9th or 10th gen Core i5 and 16gb of RAM.

[Redwo1f]

2 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

I have:

B85M D3H MoBo

Intel I5-4440 Processor.

Should I get a GTX 1660 if I want those beautiful and sexy graphics of IL2? 

Should I get a better Processor/MoBo together?

 

Thanks

 

Here is a great site when looking for a GPU or CPU - it will let you build and compare different set ups and give you some idea of how they will perform (choose the build and compare options at the top):

 

https://www.gpucheck.com/

[Rjel]

1 hour ago, SCG_ErwinP said:

Your processor will bottleneck the 1660.

I would recommend GTX 1050 TI or RX 570.

BTW What is your current Graphic Card?

I've had both the 1050Ti and now the GTX 1660 Ti. I would stay away from the 1050. It was adequate but is definitely on the low side. Mine only had 4 gigs of RAM which is also a little light. Maybe it was specific to EVGA but it ran hot and was louder than Hell while playing. 
 

The MSI GTX 1660Ti is so much better that I'd recommend it highly. Good value to the dollar. Runs quiet and cool. Runs IL2 at 1080p very well. I can max out most settings and still maintain very good frame rates. 

[SCG_ErwinP]

@Rjel Thanks for the info!

[MasserME262]

2 hours ago, SCG_ErwinP said:

[...]

BTW What is your current Graphic Card?

GTX 1050 (not the ti).

 

29 minutes ago, Rjel said:

The MSI GTX 1660Ti is so much better that I'd recommend it highly

But Shamrock said my CPU would bottleneck it, and I guess he is right?

[Redwo1f]

27 minutes ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

GTX 1050 (not the ti).

 

But Shamrock said my CPU would bottleneck it, and I guess he is right?

 

Your CPU will bottle neck it....BUT you will still get a big jump in FPS

 

https://www.gpucheck.com/en-usd/compare/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1050-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-ti/intel-core-i5-4440-3-10ghz-vs-intel-core-i5-4440-3-10ghz/high/high/-vs-

Edited December 5, 2019 by Redwo1f
changed for gtx 1050 ti to standard 1050

[ShamrockOneFive]

2 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

GTX 1050 (not the ti).

 

But Shamrock said my CPU would bottleneck it, and I guess he is right?

 

Go for the fastest GPU you can right now if that's the priority but plan to make it part of a multi-stage upgrade plan where you swap out the CPU/mobo/RAM later. You're going to see performance improvements but they won't be fully realized until the rest of the system matches the GPU.

 

The other way to do it is CPU/mobo/RAM first and then GPU. Things are compatible enough these days that you can do it and have a decent enough experience.

[Tyberan]

I upgraded my rig 18mnths ago and went with a better cpu first.  I went with a 8700k i7, it really boosted the fps. I've got a 970gtx still and the game plays decently I just don't get the extra eye candy.

[SeaW0lf]

8 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

I have:

B85M D3H MoBo

Intel I5-4440 Processor.

Should I get a GTX 1660 if I want those beautiful and sexy graphics of IL2? 

Should I get a better Processor/MoBo together?

 

Thanks

 

The GTX 1660 Super was released costing the same price of the old GTX 1660. Be carefull when buying to don't fall in a trap and pay the same price on a GTX 1660 for a card that is inferior than the GTX 1660 Super. Also, some brands have "Super" in their regular cards (I think EVGA), so you have to check if the Super means Nvidia Super or the brand Super. Also, the 1660 Ti has the same performance of the 1660 Super and costs way more, then don't get fooled by a seller who is saying "but the Ti is a premium card". They just want to get rid of the older cards.

 

I have a GTX 1060 6GB and I'm currently playing on Ultra settings with 4AA / shadows in High on a 2560X1080p monitor (ultrawide). Horizon set at 40km to help with the visibility / spotting problems, so I imagine that the 1660 Super will run in Ultra Settings / 4AA and Ultra shadows even with the horizon at 150km in a regular 1080p monitor.

 

The CPU bottleneck is tricky, since I had an i7-3770K in the past and it run fine at high settings. Back then I thought that horizon distance affected spotting so I kept it always at 150km, but I think I would not have problems to run it with Ultra settings and 40km of horizon. Of course the I7 had more clock (3.9Ghz vs 3.3Ghz of the i5-4440), and later on I overclocked it to 4.7Ghz, but the i5-4440 is a generation above. Regarding CPU usage, my i5-9600K uses around 10/15% of my CPU playing il-2, so you can run the game even with an i3-9100F or an old i3. But the ideal scenario is to get an unlocked CPU to overclock, like the i5-9600K. This way you can buy in the future a 144hz monitor or such and play with higher fpm. The i5-9600K would also come in handy with more demanding games like DCS or the future MFS 2020.

 

But if you can't replace the CPU / RAM (newer CPUs requires DDR4) and GPU at the same time, I would go for the GPU first. Your i5 still can run the game, I'm just not sure about the fps, because these simulators are maily single threaded and clock is king.

Edited December 5, 2019 by SeaW0lf

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

I find some of the advice on this thread quite confusing.

 

On 12/4/2019 at 4:48 PM, ShamrockOneFive said:

Your CPU is going to bottleneck your system as will the 8GB of ram. If you want the best graphics and performance in IL-2 you'll want to jump to a 9th or 10th gen Core i5 and 16gb of RAM.

 

Where is this idea that you need 16 GB of RAM coming from? On my system, I struggle to measure a difference between 8 and 16 GB in Il-2, let alone find crippling performance problems. Have there been any benchmarks done on this somewhere? Although I wouldn't necessarily recommend using only 8 GB, it seems like a valid solution for those wanting to minimize costs.

 

Regarding the CPU, you'll struggle to find 10th gen Core unless you're "building" a laptop, as only mobile parts are available now. Besides, you don't really need the fastest CPU if you don't use VR. Any unlocked Intel processor since 2011 (Sandy Bridge) can perform well enough. It's only the parts with low clock speeds that cause significant problems.

 

i5 or even Intel CPUs aren't strictly necessary. i3 or Ryzen parts will also be adequate provided that the clock speeds and single thread performance are sufficiently high. "Just get an i5" was good advice until 2017. Now that we have Ryzen and higher core counts and clocks across the entire Intel product line, there are far more options for value-oriented systems.

Edited December 6, 2019 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[SeaW0lf]

The only detail about the i3 is that they are still coming with thermal paste on the die, and the 9th generation isn't unlocked as far as i know (a bit out of touch with it, since I wasn't thinking about buying one). I felt a big difference when overclocking my i7-3770K, even with the i5-9600K.

 

You could search for an unlocked 7th or 8th generation i3, clock it to 5Ghz if possible and it will probably carry Il-2 with no sweat. There were some anniversary unlocked i3 releases in the past and they were great overclockers. I don't play DCS for a couple years, so I'm not sure if you need a 8th, 9th generation i5 (six cores).

 

The only advantage of the 9th generation i5 is that it has a soldered IHS, and then you can overclock it with cheaper coolers. You could easily get to 5Ghz using a Maelstrom 240T if the chip isn't so bad in voltage. My i5 can get to 4.8Ghz with 1.22v and the temperatures are abysmal, even with an old 9900 NT, which is on par with a Thermaltake NiC L32 or Frio Silent 14 - great coolers for the price if you have the GPU on the second slot (they port 14cm fans). They are much better than the regular entry level Hyper 212.

 

And there is the Ryzen 3000 series, which have a much better cost / performance ratio (by a mile) and require cheap coolers if anything other than the OEM cooler. I know nothing about it, but people seem to be happy with them.

Edited December 5, 2019 by SeaW0lf

[Redwo1f]

On 12/4/2019 at 10:12 PM, SeaW0lf said:

 

 Also, the 1660 Ti has the same performance of the 1660 Super and costs way more, then don't get fooled by a seller who is saying "but the Ti is a premium card".

 

 

Just pointing out to anyone who stumbles upon this thread and is maybe looking at this card, that this statement is incorrect. Do your do diligence and research - the super is NOT the same performance as the Ti, it is somewhere in the middle between the standard 1660 and the Ti - but more towards the Ti than center. The Ti is, however, the superior card performance wise vs. the super.

[SeaW0lf]

25 minutes ago, Redwo1f said:

 

 

Just pointing out to anyone who stumbles upon this thread and is maybe looking at this card, that this statement is incorrect. Do your do diligence and research - the super is NOT the same performance as the Ti, it is somewhere in the middle between the standard 1660 and the Ti - but more towards the Ti than center. The Ti is, however, the superior card performance wise vs. the super.

 

The difference is negligible, with several technical draws. So it is not incorrect. Do your diligence and research. Plus you will be paying the price of a tier above with the Ti. Makes no sense, is what the whole market is saying. But hey, if you have money to spare to waste on the Ti, go ahead, although who is buying a 1660 card usually does not have money to spare.

Edited December 30, 2019 by SeaW0lf

[Redwo1f]

Forgive me, but I was not making any comment about pricing or value for money whatsoever. Just when you mentioned that the Super and the Ti were the same performance, I expected to see that. I didn't. The Ti outperforms the Super in every fps gaming benchmark I have seen - and it varies game by game of course (average being about 6% increase in framerate) - that in both 1080p and 1440p - so not huge though.

 

I completely agree with you regarding pricing - it is in general selling for more than 106% the price of the super - so not the better value there at all - however, if anyone finds a deal where the Ti is offered at the same price, grab it if that is your price range, everything else being equal.

Edited December 30, 2019 by Redwo1f