Ultimate space simulation software

 
User avatar
N0B0DY
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 154
Joined: 09 Dec 2016

A very PC discussion

18 May 2018 04:01

Well I don't know - I haven't done that much research as you. Thanks for the info anyway. All I know is that I only play space-related games. At the moment only two: SE and Elite:Dangerous. Both have recommended hardware specs far lower than my current rig so I am happy and pretty confident that I will be able to enjoy them for many years to come as they evolve.
 
User avatar
DoctorOfSpace
World Builder
World Builder
Topic Author
Posts: 1111
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: SpaceX Mars Colony
Contact:

A very PC discussion

18 May 2018 08:04

N0B0DY wrote:
Source of the post based on the fact that is has been around much longer compared to the previous generations.


Kind of a silly way of looking at it when you look back in time on GPUs.  

vlad01 wrote:
Source of the post the Ti does have 11GB but I still feel this is still bit low for the money and current market, considering the 4GB I max out on most old applications that hog GPU, SE being one that 100% uses up all vram.


I spent right around $750 for the 1080 Ti, including the step up fee from EVGA.  I don't see how 11GB of VRAM is low in any sense, closest I have come to using all 11GB is running things in 4k and turning off memory optimizations getting right around 9GBs in use.  11GBs of VRAM is an absurdly huge amount still.

vlad01 wrote:
Source of the post The next gen is rumored to be 16GB which I would now consider a descent for the money spent and generally good for years into the future. the 980 basically didn't have enough when it was new.


Rumored, but given what the specs suggest this is unlikely.  Currently there is a price spike in the cost of memory module chips for GPUs, means VRAM and RAM prices are going to be much higher, and given that the next series is supposedly GDDR6 this implies a newer tech which also increases price.  If the leaked MSRP of $699 is to be trusted like any of the other leaks, then most likely they will continue to be 8GB cards and still be minimal performance gains over the last series.  At best, given the 10 to 15fps higher leaks over the 1080 Ti, you can see a $700 GPU that will have 8GBs to 10GBs of VRAM, same clock speeds, and a new dye shrink still using a GT104 class GPU.

Basically, the 1080 Ti was a worthwhile upgrade from a 980 Ti for almost twice the memory and the performance of having SLI 980 Ti in one GPU, give or take a few frames.



The next series on the other hand, well the lower end cards going off the leaks, are less of a gain from a 980 Ti to a 1080 than a 980 Ti to a 1080 Ti.  So as always I will be waiting for the 1180 Ti in hopes that will offer another 50% increase in performance.



vlad01, upgrading a 980 to a 1080 would be a massive jump in performance, but going from a 980 to a 1080 Ti would also be a huge increase.

vlad01 wrote:
Source of the post So that leads me to say with this card the 1080Ti although nice, isn't as a big jump as I would like to be worth upgrading.


When it comes to computer hardware there are a few factors, the big ones being increase in performance vs price of the hardware. In 2015 I spent close to $800 on the 980 Ti, the price to performance ratio compared to my previous 760 4GB was not worth it. Last year I spent $750, less than the 980 Ti, and had over 50% gains in many programs and games on the 1080 Ti. That is in the territory of a worthwhile upgrade.
CPU: Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor - RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 - GPU: EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SC Black Edition
Quando omni flunkus, moritati
 
vlad01
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 161
Joined: 02 May 2018

A very PC discussion

19 May 2018 02:27

I'm considering the same, maybe going for the "1180 Ti".  Yeah the leaked specs are certainly just mainstream GPUs

Price generally hasn't been an issue so I get what ever gets me 80-90% of the top product in performance while not spending double or whatever the premium for best of best, eg. Titan in my eyes is a waste of cash where the Ti as good practically for way less.

I always want at least 75% -100% improvement before I buy.  My mate and also my nephew both have 1080 and I honestly noticed stuff all difference and that's with FX cpu verse skylake/kabylake on theirs so it should be more noticeable. I suppose it could be the games they play vs what I use my PC for, I don't see much of their games over 100fps, mostly around 60-70.


CPU wise yeah definitely been inching for an upgrade but I don't want to do that until the GPUs are well and truly ahead of mine.

All my previous upgrades usually saw 200+ % improvements with 4 year cycles, but the last one prior to my old PC was more like 8 years due to the lack of anything good, hardware and software wise.

I still think 11GB is only just enough in terms when it was offered and compared to the competition. Radeon were offering 8GB like 3-4 years ago. 16GB should of been a standard thing on something like the 1080 Ti by now. you can never have too much vram as it pays off later down the track, especially for the premium high end cards which stay in service a long time, a serious issue demonstrated by maxwell GPUs and their anemic vram capacity. Still a very fast capable GPU but now choked by the small vram. As soon as I had my 980 I found I was choking it only 1 year later by filling the vram 100% causing hiccups and slow texture loading .

I would hate for the same thing with the Ti. Back in the day, applications vs vram capacity rarely saw more than 25-50% usage. Now days its much closer to the ceiling.  I feel that this is only applicable to nvidia and AMD had always lead the vram capacity front, at least in the last 5-10 years anyway. Just annoying considering they have had the much faster GPU in graphics for some years now and they don't bother throwing in some extra ram.
 
User avatar
HarbingerDawn
SE Team Member
SE Team Member
Posts: 465
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: CT, USA
Contact:

A very PC discussion

19 May 2018 02:50

N0B0DY wrote:
Source of the post But I have a feeling that the 10 series was not released in 2015. Sorry I can't recall exactly when the pascal was introduced to the market.

Pascal was introduced in 2016, with the high-end cards coming out in 2017.
Ryzen 7 1700 @ 3.8 GHz, 32 GB DDR4 RAM, GTX 1080 Ti 11 GB VRAM
Posts on old forum: 8717
 
User avatar
DoctorOfSpace
World Builder
World Builder
Topic Author
Posts: 1111
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: SpaceX Mars Colony
Contact:

A very PC discussion

20 May 2018 09:40

vlad01, I do agree, we should be at around 16GBs by now.  The biggest issue currently is demand and price for those memory modules.  We'll probably see 16 and 32GB GPUs by at least 2020, hopefully.
CPU: Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor - RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 - GPU: EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SC Black Edition
Quando omni flunkus, moritati
 
vlad01
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 161
Joined: 02 May 2018

A very PC discussion

23 May 2018 04:38

Well technically they are now if you count the AMD Firepro, Radeon pro? and nVidia Quadro cards.

I had a look at some of the Quadro cards and 24 and 32GB is standard on the higher end models. Same sort of specs for Radeon Pro cards too.

Back in the day, pro and consumer versions didn't really differ in specs except pro had different drivers for rendering/productivity in mind and much higher quality GPU and memory binning for highest reliability and lower consumption.  Now days its a big divide, pro gets best, consumers get the left over scraps and failed pro parts lol.

Just take a look at Quadro GV100,  holy ***! need one of those please.  Titan V is based on this card with half the memory and lower binned (yet still high binned for consumer) silicon.

I have a what is now considered a vintage Quardo card at home to see if I could soft mod to work as a 6800 Ultra as my genuine one is faulty. I managed to make it work with full Ultra geforce specs and then some and then some again and then some again!.

dang thing overclocks like a monster!  managed to get not only the ultra OC specs but the very rare Ultra OC extreme specs and not only that, managed that on the stock quadro core voltage of 1.3 which is lower than the vanilla ultra at 1.4v and supposedly 1.5v of the OC extreme edition.

The quadro ran at 375Mhz  and 1000Mhz RAM. Now it runs rock solid at 450Mhz and 1200Mz.  20% OC on both is extremely impressive for one of these, proving the point the quadros got cream of the crop silicon.  For the price of around 2500USD when new you'd dang want to be sure it was the best quality. 

As for what I said about the older pro vs consumer. This quadro is the same as the consumer geforce but with slower clocks, some disabled shaders, lower voltage.   It featured the exact same board, GPU and memory but were the highest binned silicon, assuming for max long term reliability which I gather from the drivers 307.xx of 2013 supporting an AGP card of 2003 and also in x64 os support. That it ts self tells me nvidia planned to support these way longer than the geforce AGP variant which was dropped many years prior.
 
vlad01
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 161
Joined: 02 May 2018

A very PC discussion

15 Jun 2018 22:56

Anyone tested vega vs something like a 1080 or Ti on SE?

Just curious if the performance is compatible to get an idea of options on the current and near future releases of cards.
 
Yusuf
Observer
Observer
Posts: 2
Joined: 20 Jun 2018

A very PC discussion

20 Jun 2018 06:30

[quote="HarbingerDawn"]After 2 years of delays, I finally got around to completing my new computer. This is my second personal PC build, and my fourth build overall. CPU, mobo, and RAM are new, PSU, GPU, and system SSD I purchased for this build but have been using for a while with my old one. Everything else is carried over from my previous setup.

I'll update the list below over the coming years to keep it accurate, like I did on the old forum.

[b]Rig:[/b]
[list]
[*]Cooler Master Scout 2 Advanced ATX mid tower case
[*]ASUS Prime X370-PRO motherboard
[*]AMD Ryzen 7 1700 (OC to 3.8 GHz)
[*]Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO CPU cooler
[*]32 GB G.Skill DDR4-2400 RAM
[*]GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6144 MB VRAM
[*]250 GB Samsung 850 Evo SSD (with Windows 7)
[*]500 GB Samsung 850 Evo SSD
[*]320 GB WD Caviar Blue HDD (with Linux Mint)
[*]1 TB WD Caviar Black HDD
[*]1 TB WD Black HDD
[*]3 TB WD Blue HDD
[*]ASUS DVD-RW/DL
[*]Creative Sound Blaster Z PCIe sound card
[*]EVGA Supernova G2 650W PSU
[*]Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit (primary OS)
[*]Linux Mint 18.1 x64 Cinnamon Edition (secondary OS)[/list]
[/quote]


I have a question, how much does this PC cost? How much did you pay?
 
User avatar
HarbingerDawn
SE Team Member
SE Team Member
Posts: 465
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: CT, USA
Contact:

A very PC discussion

22 Jun 2018 13:23

Yusuf wrote:
Source of the post I have a question, how much does this PC cost? How much did you pay?

Roughly $2000
Ryzen 7 1700 @ 3.8 GHz, 32 GB DDR4 RAM, GTX 1080 Ti 11 GB VRAM
Posts on old forum: 8717
 
OWL282820
Observer
Observer
Posts: 2
Joined: 05 Aug 2018

A very PC discussion

05 Aug 2018 11:12

I was just admiring your setup and noticed you were using a Thrustmaster T.Flight Hotas. As someone who's new to Space Engine, I've been struggling to set mine up properly. Would you mind letting me have your bindings?
 
OWL282820
Observer
Observer
Posts: 2
Joined: 05 Aug 2018

A very PC discussion

05 Aug 2018 11:15

[quote="HarbingerDawn"]My current setup

[url=http://imgur.com/aTuw1om][img]http://i.imgur.com/aTuw1om.jpg[/img][/url][/quote]

I was just admiring your setup and noticed you were using a Thrustmaster T.Flight Hotas. As someone who's new to Space Engine, I've been struggling to set mine up properly. Would you mind letting me have your bindings?
 
User avatar
N0B0DY
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 154
Joined: 09 Dec 2016

A very PC discussion

17 Sep 2018 08:00

Cont'd from here (cause I think it was getting off-topic there :) ) You people are saying that the 1080 is not a high end card. Compared to what? to the Titian Xp / Titan Volta? to the upcoming Turing cards? Cause yes compared to those cards it is not "high end". But compared to the other end of the range : 1070/1060/980/780, I think it is high end enough. Now don't ask me about comparison with AMD/ATI I don't have a clue :cry: .
 
vlad01
Explorer
Explorer
Posts: 161
Joined: 02 May 2018

A very PC discussion

18 Sep 2018 00:39

It's actually easy with nvidia cards, you forget the card model number as they have shifted those to give consumers a sense of higher model than what it actually is so they can charge more money of course. The true high end is now been moved to prosumer/enterprise.

In the past the pro cards were actually gimped consumer spec cards with different drivers and better binning typically, but for sure they were slower and cut down over consumer in raw specs.

Now it is the other way around, consumers only get the scraps so to speak at inflated prices and a high model number slapped on it.

How to actually know where in the offerings your card stands is by the die number. xx100 is true highest end, xx102 is high end, xx104 is mid, xx106 is low end, xx108 is entry etc...   A 1080 is a GP104, only a Ti or Titan Xp are high end, highest is the GP100 used in quadro P6000 iirc.

Side note, Titan V based on a different architecture is a true 100 series, GV100. The one and only Volta card consumers can buy, at 3000 USD lol

The issue is nvidia moved the 100 dies to quadro/tesla and slapped the 80 designation on the 104 dies where only the 102 and up should be 80 as it was for most of their history. The 102s now are Ti and Titan.  This is how nvidia make so much money while giving as little as possible to the end user without the average noticing anything.

With AMD, there is no divide from pro and consumer at the die level. What AMD typically do is make a dual die board for pro and add massive amounts of memory as well, plus a bit slower clock for the pro for energy savings.    So for eg if you get a vega pro card vs a consumer one, same die, just more vram on pro and slower clocks as well, consumer in fact get the slightly faster card. Atm vega does not come in dual die yet.

Even then, AMD often do give consumers a dual die card sometimes alongside pro offerings.  It's very contrasting compared to what nvidia does these days.


Now all that said the interesting thing is for the Turing cards is there is no 100 series, not even in quadro. The Ti is a cut down quadro RTX8000 which is also TU102.   I am not sure when 100 is coming or if at all on 12nm as it would be massive and yields would be bad at probably 900mm2 at a guess for the full 100 chip. I suspect they are holding 100 back for the transition to 7nm
 
User avatar
DoctorOfSpace
World Builder
World Builder
Topic Author
Posts: 1111
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: SpaceX Mars Colony
Contact:

A very PC discussion

18 Sep 2018 10:51

vlad01, these are the reasons I would save money for 2 years to buy the next Ti, but with the 2080 Ti being $1200 that puts it far outside what I can afford or reasonably justify for a GPU. 
CPU: Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor - RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 - GPU: EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SC Black Edition
Quando omni flunkus, moritati
 
User avatar
DoctorOfSpace
World Builder
World Builder
Topic Author
Posts: 1111
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Location: SpaceX Mars Colony
Contact:

A very PC discussion

19 Sep 2018 10:39









Basically without the use of new features if you are sitting on a 1080 Ti the 20 series is not worth it.  2080 is worse than the 1080 Ti in standard graphical rendering, especially with a 1080 Ti OC, and the 2080 Ti is barely ahead with a difference of 20fps in 1080p and 5 to 20 fps in 2160p.
CPU: Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor - RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 - GPU: EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SC Black Edition
Quando omni flunkus, moritati

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest