Railworks America

Yup, but what gets me is the power efficiency of the newer cards. It's really crazy.

It's all fine and dandy until a person realizes that the CPUs are having trouble feeding single threaded games in a meaningful way to the newest generations of GPUs.
Until most games are finally capable of multi threading, the new GPUs won't be so effective.
Either that or there is a major breakthrough in CPU speeds when in single core operation.

Ergo, while the new 1080 looks great, I'd be waiting for the 1060 or 1070.

Yea, Intel needs to step up their game.

I throw all the latest games at my GTX 980 and it basically sits there saying, "That's all you got?', and that's pushing triple monitors on some simulators. Unless you need a card now and are looking to future proof.....

Eric

It's all fine and dandy until a person realizes that the CPUs are having trouble feeding single threaded games in a meaningful way to the newest generations of GPUs.
Until most games are finally capable of multi threading, the new GPUs won't be so effective.

But that is one thread per core that are feeding simultaneously on a quad core machine and they are processed in nano seconds, and if you believe Intel that could be up to 8 threads on a quad core machine with Hyperthreading switched on. There are many posts on the web showing that one thread per core is the most efficient way to process data, and too many threads per core may result in thread collisions, eg FSX with HT enabled.. IMHO multithreading will not bring too much extra performance that's why the majority of games are still termed "single threaded". In task manager it shows the number of threads that are actually processed and I have never seen that at ONE?
AFAIK the GPU is unaffected by the number of threads processed at any one time.
Regards
pH

I wasn't talking about multi threading a single core. I was referring to multi threading physical cores. Most games still only use one physical core.
In any case, even my lowly GTX 780 needs an overclocked CPU i53750 to do a decent job of smoothing game play.
I'm wondering if they really improved the performance by that much, or if they sacrificed something to get higher framerates?

I guess the trend is super high pixel rates feeding Ultra HD monitors. Ergo you should need a lot less AA.

I don't think our sim supports high pixel counts like 4k monitors.

Eric
I can assure you that TS2016 uses all 4 physical cores on a quad core machine (core 0 is predominant).
It is definitely NOT a true multicore app - which I guess is what you are saying, but it is multicore able.
No, I agree with you TS 2016 does not support 4K monitors IMHO the biggest advance has been GSync monitors which process and display data in a totally different way - reducing lag and stuttering.
I'm not sure that even 4K monitors will reduce jaggedness or shimmer from TS2016 as that may be a function of DirectX 9.0C etc as much as anything else.
I still see Shimmer, jaggies and Moire in DTG's UE4 64-bit fishing game (Direct X 11.0) so it will be interesting to see if that can be bettered in the new TSUE4 engine.

pH

Currently running a GTX 980, works great. Will be buying a GTX 1080 in the near future as I do a lot of virtual reality gaming these days. Bring on the GTX 1080 TI