Hi all,

 

I will be moving from FSX to P3D in one or two months. After some years, it seems that I will fly an airbus with a lot of quality. For that, I am sure that I will need a new PC. Here is what I am thinking, just concerning the most important components:

- i7-8700K or i7-9700K

- Geforce GTX 1080, Geforce GTX 1070Ti or Geforce GTX 1080Ti

- SSD M.2 for OS and another SSD for P3D

- MB Asus/MSI/Gigabyte Z390 

- G. Skill DDR4 16GB (2x8) 4266MHz CL19

Is this enough to get 25 to 30 fps with the FSLabs aircraft, concerning that I also want to run AI traffic or complexed sceneries from ORBX/FlyTampa/... and weather like Active Sky or similar?

Which components to choose between those with more than one mentioned option?

 

Thanks

 

harpsi 

 

i am currently using an I7-7700K with 16GB of ram and a 1060 6gb GPU with an Asus z270-p motherboard. i can easily get 30 to to 40 fps in Amsterdam and 25 min to 40 fps in places like heathrow with active sky running and orbx global but no ai traffic. with the sim running on a dedicated SSD is a must in my opinion to decrease load times. 

1 minute ago, koen meier said:

i am currently using an I7-7700K with 16GB of ram and a 1060 6gb GPU with an Asus z270-p motherboard. i can easily get 30 to to 40 fps in Amsterdam and 25 min to 40 fps in places like heathrow with active sky running and orbx global but no ai traffic. with the sim running on a dedicated SSD is a must in my opinion to decrease load times. 

Do I need to overclock a processor like those ones I mentioned? 

And about Amsterdam or Heathrow, are you using also FlyTampa EHAM or another EGLL scenery, maybe from Aerosoft or Simwings?

1 minute ago, harpsi said:

Do I need to overclock a processor like those ones I mentioned? 

And about Amsterdam or Heathrow, are you using also FlyTampa EHAM or another EGLL scenery, maybe from Aerosoft or Simwings?

Flytampa Amsterdam and aerosoft Heathrow which is created by simwings. i don't have any overclock on it. there have been threads on overclocking and hyperthreading on this forum.

1 minute ago, koen meier said:

Flytampa Amsterdam and aerosoft Heathrow which is created by simwings. i don't have any overclock on it. there have been threads on overclocking and hyperthreading on this forum.

You don't use any AI traffic. However, many last threads about fps consuming from AI traffic are now 1 or 2 years old. Do you think the situation has changed with new processors and new GPUs? 

Thanks.

Every system is of course different and it's hard to compare FPS due to all the slight nuances but here is a list of my hardware and pertinent software - I did a similar thing to you; right before Christmas I did a full overhaul on my computer in preparation of more serious simming including running the A320.

My hardware consists of:

* Intel i7-9700K - 3.60 GHz, not overclocked
* 32 GB RAM
* NVidia GTX 1080 (not the Ti version)
* Samsung 970 EVO M.2 SSD

Software includes Prepar3D, all of Orbx base plus North America, FSLabs A320 obviously, Active Sky

I don't use AI traffic but I fly almost exclusively on VATSIM so some days are busier than others.

My average FPS are around 40 FPS but of course this includes a large portion of cruise where not much is happening scenery and complexity wise.

When I'm on the ground and taxing at FlightBeam's Seattle (KSEA), FSDT's Vancouver (CYVR) the FPS still holds 20-30 easily.

There is no reason why your hardware won't perform pretty much equally well, a few percentage points up and down to account for your addon differences and other system specs.

4 hours ago, Gerard Beekmans said:

Every system is of course different and it's hard to compare FPS due to all the slight nuances but here is a list of my hardware and pertinent software - I did a similar thing to you; right before Christmas I did a full overhaul on my computer in preparation of more serious simming including running the A320.

My hardware consists of:

* Intel i7-9700K - 3.60 GHz, not overclocked
* 32 GB RAM
* NVidia GTX 1080 (not the Ti version)
* Samsung 970 EVO M.2 SSD

Software includes Prepar3D, all of Orbx base plus North America, FSLabs A320 obviously, Active Sky

I don't use AI traffic but I fly almost exclusively on VATSIM so some days are busier than others.

My average FPS are around 40 FPS but of course this includes a large portion of cruise where not much is happening scenery and complexity wise.

When I'm on the ground and taxing at FlightBeam's Seattle (KSEA), FSDT's Vancouver (CYVR) the FPS still holds 20-30 easily.

There is no reason why your hardware won't perform pretty much equally well, a few percentage points up and down to account for your addon differences and other system specs.

Good to know. Let's see if with GSX and AI traffic it will stay like this.

Anyway even with 100 % AI traffic I am not planning to try KJFK, EGLL, LFPG, LEMD and airports like those. I prefer medium side airports.

@harpsi

One big unknown in your setup is the screen resolution that you wish to use. If this is going to be 4K, then you'd need something beefier than a GTX1070Ti or 1080. I suggest to buy cheaper RAM (those are ridiculously expensive at present) by selecting 3200 MHz, and use the money saved for a better video card.

Also 8700K and 9700K are almost same price right now if bought new. So I suggest to take the newer model.

All this will run the FSLabs A320X perfectly fine.

2 hours ago, Markus Burkhard said:

@harpsi

One big unknown in your setup is the screen resolution that you wish to use. If this is going to be 4K, then you'd need something beefier than a GTX1070Ti or 1080. I suggest to buy cheaper RAM (those are ridiculously expensive at present) by selecting 3200 MHz, and use the money saved for a better video card.

Also 8700K and 9700K are almost same price right now if bought new. So I suggest to take the newer model.

All this will run the FSLabs A320X perfectly fine.

Is 4K a big difference? If it is like when we post videos in youtube, you will see those in HD and not in 4K, right? I have a normal monitor. I am not sure if I really need a new one. Suggestions?

4k is a huge difference in terms of gpu load! This is somewhat offset by the lesser AA requirements.

For sure the image is sharper and more crisp on a 4k monitor but exactly how much is it superior to the 1080p is in the eyes of the beholder. As the poster above me said, you’ll need 1070ti/1080 and higher if you intend to go 4k.

Otherwise, your specs should be fine at med/ med-high settings + ai and the whole shabang

As someone who has been running a UHD/4K monitor for a couple of months the difference from FullHD is exceptional. Four times the resolution means every graduation in gauges is visible. Frame rates take a small hit but if you have a 1080Ti or greater performance is very good.

One can only imagine what a fully restored Concorde virtual cockpit would look like. The Airbus VC will also look good. I don’t have access to my PC but AA settings are minimal.