Go Back   Knife Edge > RealFlight - Current Products > RF-X
Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use. | Technical Support is available from Great Planes Software Support.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-01-2016, 07:11 PM
Dave-B's Avatar
Dave-B Dave-B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canvey Island - UK
Posts: 56
How much have you spent

Just wondering how much people have spent to get an acceptable frame rate with the new RF-X, it looks like three to four hundred dollars plus the cost of the sim.

Also be nice to know what people have spent and not got an acceptable outcome..

Really want a reason to upgrade myself but cant see it right now..
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along...
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-01-2016, 07:26 PM
technoid's Avatar
technoid technoid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: North Texas
Posts: 3,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave-B View Post
Just wondering how much people have spent to get an acceptable frame rate with the new RF-X, it looks like three to four hundred dollars plus the cost of the sim.

Also be nice to know what people have spent and not got an acceptable outcome..

Really want a reason to upgrade myself but cant see it right now..
I think a good thing for you to do is post your system specs so we have an idea what doesn't work for you. From what I've seen if you have a fast processor getting a fast graphics card is what you need. I'm a bit different than the RealFlight team because I think the optimal graphics card for RF-X is a GTX 1070, but only if you have a fast enough processor so the CPU isn't the bottleneck. The way to think of 3D graphics is both sides are equally important, the CPU and GPU. And if either of them is too slow you frame rate won't be acceptable. So post your system specs and I'm sure you'll get a few pointers.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-01-2016, 07:29 PM
csgill75's Avatar
csgill75 csgill75 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florence, Alabama
Posts: 3,114
First and foremost I am a Avid PC Gamer. I do not own a Playstation or Xbox. I only play games on the PC of which I have a couple hundred. I also like to have a decent computer to play games on.

I purchased a complete new system earlier this year in anticipation of RealFlight 8/RF-X. I am glad I did because it works great on the new system as do everything else i play

Intel I7 6700k processor $309
ASUS z170 Deluxe motherboard $269
Corsair memory 16gb $89
EVGA 970 GTX video card $329 x2

i would have purchased 1070's or a 1080 but they weren't out when I built the system.


I already had a case, 1000w PSU (Seasonic), and some Samsung SSDs so it really isn't part of the cost of the build. The CPU is watercooled and the case is a HAF X I had for a previous pc I parted out. It's very quiet with large slow moving fans and video cards that have fans that don't even turn on unless under heavy loads.

It was a necessary purchase eventually anyway since my last gaming PC build was in 09 and is showing its age with the other games I play. It still runs RF-X but no where near as good as my new computer.


People, are going to have to have a decent modern day computer to run RF-X. The old PC from Windows XP, Vista and even earlier Windows 7 aren't going to run it.

Last edited by csgill75; 11-01-2016 at 07:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-01-2016, 08:04 PM
Dave-B's Avatar
Dave-B Dave-B is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canvey Island - UK
Posts: 56
I was only wondering how much people have spent and if it's worth upgrading our pc at the flying field shack.

We use RF 7.5 to practice on and allow new members to evaluate skillset before letting them loose solo at the field. We are quite lucky to have a cabin with AC and some mod cons.

We have an i5 4690 / 8gb ram / 250 ssd / NVidia 770GTX and a 24 inch monitor for RF 7.5 and does the job perfectly.

The budget for the club can stretch to the sim but would call upon donations if hardware was required...

Not sure how that would go down to be quite honest..
__________________
Nothing to see here, move along...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-01-2016, 08:27 PM
N8LBV's Avatar
N8LBV N8LBV is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ann Arbor, MI USA
Posts: 311
Dave-B Cool Avatar.
__________________
Seriously (srsly):
I feel more like I do now.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-01-2016, 08:28 PM
csgill75's Avatar
csgill75 csgill75 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florence, Alabama
Posts: 3,114
Honestly, I would keep 7.5 on it until RF-X matures. For a club, 7.5 is a great tool.

I would upgrade the video card to a 1060 or 1070 and double the memory if you are wanting to try RF-X.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-01-2016, 08:29 PM
N8LBV's Avatar
N8LBV N8LBV is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ann Arbor, MI USA
Posts: 311
I'm curious if you copied or if we just both had the same idea.
You did a cleaner job on yours.
__________________
Seriously (srsly):
I feel more like I do now.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-02-2016, 02:08 PM
RJaggers RJaggers is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 20
Angry Spent for RFX

Just spent 200 on 32 gb ram, up from 16 & 425 for GTX FE 1070 vid card, up from GTX 980.
We will see if FR at 3440x1440 Res gets over 30.
Pretty expensive upgrade if you ask me.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-02-2016, 03:24 PM
MikeJM's Avatar
MikeJM MikeJM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 6
Upgrades

I just spent 451$ on a
GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition GV-N1070D5-8GD-B.

In my wishlist I have another 900$ worth of upgrades:
Motherboard- ASRock Fatal1ty X99 Professional Gaming i7 LGA 2011-v3 Intel X99 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.1 USB 3.0 ATX Motherboards - Intel
CPU- Intel Core i7-6700K 8M Skylake Quad-Core 4.0 GHz LGA 1151 91W BX80662I76700K Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics 530
G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3300 (PC4 26400) Intel X99 Platform Desktop Memory Model32gig of ram.

Also have another 450$ in another wishlist for a new 4k monitor.

I currently have a:
64bit Windows 7
AMD FX 8350 cpu Eight Core 4.00 ghz
16GB ram
Nvidia Geforce GTX 560

I'm going to put the new Graphics card in my current system to see if I can get a semi satisfactory RF-X operation. I'll report back in a few days.

I built in 2011.

My current system barely runs RF-X

Mike

Last edited by MikeJM; 11-02-2016 at 03:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-02-2016, 04:56 PM
Boof69's Avatar
Boof69 Boof69 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Swartz Creek,Michigan
Posts: 5,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJaggers View Post
Just spent 200 on 32 gb ram, up from 16 & 425 for GTX FE 1070 vid card, up from GTX 980.
We will see if FR at 3440x1440 Res gets over 30.
Pretty expensive upgrade if you ask me.
Didn't need to upgrade seeing your old specs. 16Gb of ram is more than enough and the 980 is all you needed seeing as that's the card I'm using and I'n not experiencing any issues.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-02-2016, 05:52 PM
csgill75's Avatar
csgill75 csgill75 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florence, Alabama
Posts: 3,114
I plan on spending another $700 on the 1080ti when my Tax return comes back next year. 12gb VRam and nearly the same specs as a Pascal Titan X for half the money. Should last me a good 5-7 years.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-03-2016, 02:29 AM
kcsr kcsr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: KC
Posts: 26
Intel Core i7-6950X (overclocked to 4.2GHz) $1600
MSI Godlike Gaming Carbon X99 mobo $600
128GB of Corsair Vengeance LED DDR4-3200 $800
nVidia Titan X (Pascal) $1300
Corsair H115i CPU cooler $130
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB SSD $350
EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2 power supply $400
Corsair 900D case $350
2x Asus PB287Q 28" 4K monitors $800
Samsung U28E590D 28" 4K monitor $350
etc etc

I've also got another X99 system with an i7-6800 and 64GB of Corsair DDR4-3333 on an MSI Titanium mobo with an nVidia Titan X Maxwell, a couple of maxed out X58 systems (960 and 980X), IBM/LSI raid cards, OCZ Revodrive 3x2, etc. I work in IT for a living though, and I'm single with no kids.
__________________
RF-X w/ ILX ; RF 7.5 w/ ILE
i7-6950X w/ 40% overclock; MSI X99 Gaming Godlike Carbon; 128GB Corsair LED DDR4-3200;
Samsung 960 Pro NVMe; Corsair H115i; Corsair 900D; EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2; Titan X Pascal

i7-5820K w/ 37% overclock; MSI X99 XPower Gaming Titanium; 64GB Corsair DDR4-3333;
Intel 600p NVMe; Thermaltake Water 3.0 Riing RGB 240; Corsair Carbide 540; Corsair AX1200; Titan X Maxwell 12GB

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-06-2016, 12:28 PM
MikeJM's Avatar
MikeJM MikeJM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 6
Update

Well I have the GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition GV-N1070D5-8GD-B. installed on my system and I don't see much if any improvement in performance.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-06-2016, 03:06 PM
technoid's Avatar
technoid technoid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: North Texas
Posts: 3,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJM View Post
Well I have the GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition GV-N1070D5-8GD-B. installed on my system and I don't see much if any improvement in performance.
Do you have FRAPS? If you do you should run a CPU type benchmark on your system to see what type of frame rate you get when the graphics are turned all the way down, that will show you what frame rate your CPU can push to the graphics card. If you don't see any improvement from a 560 to a 1070 then that means something is either setup wrong or your CPU cannot process the 3D data and send it to the GPU fast enough, so you see the same frame rate from a 560 to a 1070. Some don't realize this but there are actually two frame rate measurements needed, how fast the CPU can generate frames and how fast the GPU can process those frames.

I planned to upload my second benchmark runs on one of my posts but I'll put it here so you can see what I'm talking about. I did two benchmark runs using FRAPS to record the frame rate. You start the benchmark run with the F11 key (stock) and at the end press the benchmark key (F11) again and FRAPS will save all the frame rates it stored during the run to a CSV file that you can use in Excel to chart the run. I did two runs, one at 800x600 with all the settings to the lowest value and then one at 1920x1200 with all the settings to the highest settings. Then I charted both runs on the same chart so you can see two things.

1. How fast your CPU can process the 3D data and send it to the GPU. (800x600)
2. How fast the GPU can process the data that's sent to it. (1920x1200)

I flew around the Castle field for an entire tank of fuel and landed wherever the fuel ran out in the L-39 Albatross and then charted both runs.

The top (RED) line is at 800x600 with these settings.

Resolution: 800x600
Anti-Aliasing: Off
Texture Quality: Low
Texture Filtering: Bilinear
Shader Quality: Low
Anisotrophy: Off

Bloom: Off
Ambient Occlusion: On
Depth Of Field: Off
Motion Blur: Off

The purpose of the first benchmark run is to see how fast your CPU can process the 3D data and send it to the GPU (graphics card).

The bottom (BLUE) line is at 1920x1200 with these settings.

Resolution: 1920x1200
Anti-Aliasing: Temporal
Texture Quality: Low
Texture Filtering: Anisotropic
Shader Quality: High
Anisotrophy: 16x

Bloom: Off
Ambient Occlusion: On
Depth Of Field: Off
Motion Blur: Off

This run shows you how fast your GPU can render the 3D data sent to it by your processor. The CPU has to process the 3D data for both runs but the frame rate depends on how fast the GPU can process it for the resolution and quality selections. So these two runs will give you a good picture of your system.

My take on the chart I uploaded. It shows that at 800x600 I get pretty good frame rates, but the dips in the blue line show me where the CPU is hit hard by the 3D data and I couldn't expect to get higher frame rates than the CPU can generate. So if I buy a 1070 or even a 1080 I won't get any higher frame rates than the RED line shows. But looking at the BLUE line 1920x1200 if I buy a 1070 or 1080 my frame rate will definitely go up because the graphics card or GPU will be able to render the 3D data faster. So if the GPU can keep up with the CPU the two lines would be the same. But that won't completely happen but the BLUE line will definitely go up with a Faster GPU. And I would expect a 1070 in my system to go up a lot. Will a 1070 be able to process the 3D data sent to it by the processor at the same speed (or greater) I don't know.. but the tests I've read say they should be much closer. So if you don't have FRAPS I'd get it and run these same two benchmarks and see for yourself what your CPU can do and what difference there is when you run at your normal graphics settings.

What resolution do you run RF-X at?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-06-2016, 03:12 PM
csgill75's Avatar
csgill75 csgill75 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florence, Alabama
Posts: 3,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJM View Post
Well I have the GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1070 Founders Edition GV-N1070D5-8GD-B. installed on my system and I don't see much if any improvement in performance.
It's probably the resolution you are running. Do not expect to run at your Desktop resolution with a 1070 and any AMD Processor. Try running at a 1920x1080 resolution which is what I am running with twin 970's. You should be able to get 70fps. If not, you may have a CPU bottleneck because the Video card is able to do it on another system.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:56 PM.