Hi folks. 

 

I'm a stalker of the avsim community for a while now. But this will be my first post. 

 

I wont beat around the bush here to avoid everyone reading a long and boring first post. 

 

I am currently in the market for a new PC.  My old machine was getting extremely slugish and was lacking in the performance department basically becoming a bit of a sad old man. 

 

I've read a few posts on here discussing new builds etc and i've also done a bit of digging around and even asked in my local flight sim community page etc.  

 

My new build budget will be around £1400 with a bit of room to menouver. 

 

my primary sim will be p3d v3 with various add ons. the usual taxi2gate, uk2000, active sky and pmdg stuff. 

 

I've pretty much sold myself on a gtx 1080 as i want to get the best life from the graphics card especially. 

 

i've found it hard to come up with good matches for new rigs in 2017 for flight sims. bearing in mind i'd also like to use this machine for other games such as planet coaster etc. 

 

 

Any suggestions from you fine folk would be most appreciated as i'm stuck on what to get right now and really don't want to waste my pennies. 

 

cheers

If you are in no particular hurry for your new build, you might want to wait and see what AMD's Rizen processor line is about.

 

It may come to nothing but within a few weeks (maybe) we'll start seeing reports from early adopters and review websites.

 

I have read where the performance to price ratio may be quite attractive. Time will tell. So, If you have the time to wait it may be so that you could get a great processor for a fraction of a Intel offering.

 

I've been strictly an Intel user for the last number of years. If I can get 8 cores with hyperthreading running at 4.0+ GHz for <$400 that may change.

I can say I'm thrilled with my recent upgrade detailed here:

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/501768-upgrade-inbound-landing-checklist/

 

This is primarily a p3dv3 rig.

 

I just added a GTX1070 tonight but haven't had a chance to try it out yet

Good detailed system tests under controlled environments using different hardware are hard to find. There are a few out there, but not a consolidated list. 

 

The old adage is both FSX and P3D tend to be very processor limited. While a number of improvements to P3D have unloaded more of the graphics to the video card it still seems to be, don't expect miracles just by using the latest video cards. One hardware provider for P3D based ATDs state that the CPU is still responsible for approximately 70-75% of the total simulation load. That statement was based on the slightly older GTX980 and Titan video cards. 

 

I think the comment, wait to see what Ryzen offers is very good advice. The i7 7700K is a great processor and would be my first choice for a build for P3D, simply because Ghz matter and the ability to push 4.5 to 5.0Ghz is very appealing. But, who knows, AMD has lead the performance war before.

 

Can you put together a decent machine for 1400 quid these days? I don't know, but I would say don't skimp on processor, memory or SSD performance to plug in a hotter video card. The system has to be balanced for great P3D performance. 

 

Then again we all have different requirements in our simming worlds. You milage may vary. 

I can say I'm thrilled with my recent upgrade detailed here:

 

http://www.avsim.com/topic/501768-upgrade-inbound-landing-checklist/

 

This is primarily a p3dv3 rig.

 

I just added a GTX1070 tonight but haven't had a chance to try it out yet

 

You should see a HELL of a difference.  My 1070 was night and day even jumping from a 970

Good detailed system tests under controlled environments using different hardware are hard to find. There are a few out there, but not a consolidated list. 

 

The old adage is both FSX and P3D tend to be very processor limited. While a number of improvements to P3D have unloaded more of the graphics to the video card it still seems to be, don't expect miracles just by using the latest video cards. One hardware provider for P3D based ATDs state that the CPU is still responsible for approximately 70-75% of the total simulation load. That statement was based on the slightly older GTX980 and Titan video cards. 

 

I think the comment, wait to see what Ryzen offers is very good advice. The i7 7700K is a great processor and would be my first choice for a build for P3D, simply because Ghz matter and the ability to push 4.5 to 5.0Ghz is very appealing. But, who knows, AMD has lead the performance war before.

 

Can you put together a decent machine for 1400 quid these days? I don't know, but I would say don't skimp on processor, memory or SSD performance to plug in a hotter video card. The system has to be balanced for great P3D performance. 

 

Then again we all have different requirements in our simming worlds. You milage may vary. 

 

 

just seen the ryzon vid on youtube.  interesting stuff. I'm pretty sure they guy said they'd be retailing for around £300 to £400. not sure if i heard him wrong. 

 

yeah i understand about balancing the system and not skimping out on a higher end processor especially for p3d.  i was looking at the i7 7700k and deffo a gtx 1070 or 1080.  Obviously it's piecing the rest of the system together.   

 

is there a release date for the ryzon yet? 

On the subject of the 1080......Nvidia is set to reveal the 1080ti in just over 6 days.....they even have a countdown website.......I would wait and see the test results, as the 980ti had Titan X (The previous one) performance for almost half the cost.

I wouldn't hang around waiting for Ryzen, myself, as AMD has disappointed with each new generation of CPUs and GPUs going back well over a decade now.  Even if the initial reports were good, I wouldn't trust an AMD processor to get past the things that have limited them for FS use in one hop.

 

There have been quite a number of hyped releases over the years...the AMD Bulldozer debacle comes immediately to mind, you can read up on the history of that overhyped, underperforming heat monster since it's not that far back.  AMD GPUs have been lagging behind for a while as well--for modern 3D games they seem to work OK, but getting them to handle the idiosyncratic niceties of AA/AF and high frame rates in FSX/P3D as well as the nVidia GeForce line does has consistently proven to be a losing proposition for a long, long time.

 

The 7700K and 1080 are a rocking combo for P3D.

 

Regards

the 1080ti looks very interesting.  

 

i'm in no rush right now. like i said in my first post i want to get this right so im prepared to take my time over it 

I'm in the same boat as you Marc - Ryzen is out on March 2nd, reviews will be out Feb 28th onwards. I'm definitely waiting for those before deciding on my CPU - my key considerations are about trying to future proof somewhat for P3D v4, which may be 64 bit. It's all guesswork though. Do I go for more cores in the hope that Lockheed Martin may optimise P3D to make use of more cores in the future? Will a CPU with more cores at a lower clock speed but running a lot of add-ons run more smoothly (not higher FPS) than a 7700k at 4.7GHz plus?

 

I unfortunately will have to pull the trigger on a decision in the next 4 weeks. That said I am definitely going to wait to see what the GTX 1080Ti is about, and may even wait for Vega information (AMD is apparently going to talk about this on 28th alongside NVidia) - I think the performance boosts from these new cards will be pretty big, especially if you are gaming alongside sim stuff. Worst case I'll transfer my current GPU across to the new system until I decide on the GPU.

 

I think that by this time next week there will be a clearer picture on the options. Or at least I hope so! I'd definitely wait a bit if you have the time. EDIT: for your budget you may need compromise somewhere - if you decided on a GTX1080Ti it could be pricey and therefore AMD and Ryzen may offer a better match for max performance for your price range with a GTX1080Ti. 

 

James

I wouldn't hang around waiting for Ryzen, myself, as AMD has disappointed with each new generation of CPUs and GPUs going back well over a decade now.  Even if the initial reports were good, I wouldn't trust an AMD processor to get past the things that have limited them for FS use in one hop.

 

There have been quite a number of hyped releases over the years...the AMD Bulldozer debacle comes immediately to mind, you can read up on the history of that overhyped, underperforming heat monster since it's not that far back.  AMD GPUs have been lagging behind for a while as well--for modern 3D games they seem to work OK, but getting them to handle the idiosyncratic niceties of AA/AF and high frame rates in FSX/P3D as well as the nVidia GeForce line does has consistently proven to be a losing proposition for a long, long time.

 

The 7700K and 1080 are a rocking combo for P3D.

 

Regards

 

 My advised for the OP is to wait and see what AMD brings us. Why pay over $500.00 more to a company that has been cheating and stealing from its customers for the past 10 years + ? 

 My advised for the OP is to wait and see what AMD brings us. Why pay over $500.00 more to a company that has been cheating and stealing from its customers for the past 10 years + ? 

 

Nonsense..

Nonsense..

 

While the language is hyperbolic the sentiment has validity.  Intel charges more money than the competition.  A lot more.  In the past they have offered significantly more performance for this higher price.  That appears to be about to change for the majority of workloads.  FSX is a special case as it was designed to run on hardware that never came to being (10GHz Pentium 4s).  I wouldn't base my view of a CPU's performance prowess solely on such an archaic application.  

Nonsense..

 

hahaha. ok 

 

 

FSX is a special case as it was designed to run on hardware that never came to being (10GHz Pentium 4s).

 

I forget the name of the ACES developer, but he posted on his Blog a long time ago it was actually 5Ghz single core CPUs that they were targeting and they did not foresee the multicore phenomena. Thus the original release of  FSX was primarily single threaded. Over the Service Packages they added some multicore capability to the software, but like DX10 is was hastily and poorly implemented. It was not limited to just FSX, allot of entertainment software from that period had very poor multithreaded optimization.