Quote

We in the sim community, don't believe we are "special," we just want to give our money for a significant improvement.

 

Then don't bash Intel "dude". It would be commercial suicide for them to cater to a small minority, to your super high frequency flight sim needs. 

No more comment from me, as a result of the valid concerns highlighted by Glynn. 

Time to start test the Ryzen 1600x with fast mems, memcontroller not good or bad.

Cooling NH-D15 one fan

https://www.dropbox.com/pri/get/public/Ryzen/ryzen 1600x-2.png?

Shall compare the 7700k with the Ryzen in P3D , run the FSXmark in P3D

Did a fast Bench FSXMark11 with Ryzen 1600x , result was not suprizing atleast for me.

same frq 4080mhz on 2133 and 3200mhz mems 4072 with the mems at 3500mhz.

cpu 4072mhz 3500mhz mem. avg 38.3fps max.52fps min.23fps.

cpu 4080mhz 3200mhz mem. avg 37.5fps max. 52fps min 23fps.

cpu 4080mhz 2133mhz mem. avg 34.1fps max. 47fps min 21fps.

You can look at the FSXMark11 tread if you want to compare the Ryzen with other CPUs

The drawback for Ryzen is it Overclock very BAD, it is hard to get over 4.1ghz.

note. using the same 980strix as a did with 6700k and 5960x

On all other FSXMark11 runs a used Win7 64 with the Ryzen Win10 pro 64

Bad pic on the Ryzen on the BenchTable 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/77ezx5ep255ljhe/Foto 2017-04-22 15 07 51.jpg?dl=0

The sim PC and workstation in the mans cave.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kwueav7cf4zuim/Foto 2017-04-22 18 38 28.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jxmnxwy23qaox98/Foto 2017-04-22 18 57 34.jpg?dl=0

Great stuff Hasse. Very informative. 

But... you definitely need to tidy up in there. 

Is that a Strix Z270I Mini ITX board I see there? Was thinking of this board for my daughters rig.

Yes but when you test its parts all over the Place,,

The 270 is a Maximus Apex atx board

2 hours ago, westman said:

Yes but when you test its parts all over the Place,,

 

 Just kidding.

8 hours ago, martin-w said:

 Just kidding.

it had been lot worse..

Fast mems large impact?? for sim use it have the same impact as Intel , you ar cpu bound and in that case fast mems have a impact.

its a balance between speed and latency, 3700mhz cl18 ar not faster then 3400mhz cl15 AMD or Intel.

for the Ryzen 3200mhz c14-15 is a easy target with good performance, c18 3600mhz no real benefit but nice to test what the memcontroller can handle.

memcontroller of my 1600x handle up to 3700mhz with loose timings.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/z1twtac59cxvbmy/Ryzen fast mems.png?dl=0

 

did some more optimations , change cooling  to customwater , pretty fast Ryzen system very pleased you can check the rewievs on the 1600x overclocked on sites as overclockNet and the guys on youtube, the Cinebench R15 single and multitread result ar good, cant go any furter with this chip.

For the Sim they have a long way to go before catching Intel , it can happen in the future 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fdcthaoo1ulpuug/ryzen4230.png?dl=0

 

Next week a shall compare the 7700k and Ryzen 1600x in P3D v3.4 , run 1920x1080 and 4K with same gpus 2x Asus 1080 SLI 

 

On 23/04/2017 at 8:31 AM, westman said:

 

Next week a shall compare the 7700k and Ryzen 1600x in P3D v3.4 , run 1920x1080 and 4K with same gpus 2x Asus 1080 SLI 

 

 

Now that will be very interesting Hasse. While you are doing that I will be attempting to jam all the components I've bought into my daughters super small Lian Li Mini ITX case. 

In my opinion, comparing processors under FSX has some caveeats if it's not the same FSX environment.

So, some months ago, I tried to find out where my framerate goes. I renamed fsx.cfg and while FSX rebuild it, I denied every plugin. In the end, fsx.cfg had three plugin entries that can't be deactivated. After starting FSX, I was surprised about the massive framerate hit.

Then I renamed again and accepted one plugin after the other: each additional one costs frames, some more than the other.

So my experience is: if you don't run a nearly identical FSX configuration (scenery, plugins, screen resolution, graphics card), you can't compare FSX systems.

In FSXmark11 you run a vanilla fsx with same settings, look at the tread.

Have done a test in p3d v.3 show the same as fsx.

The 1920x1080 is ready, no need for more then 1060 980 cards.

4k , ready with 980 , 1080, 180Sli, waiting for a 1080ti strix 

On 29.4.2017 at 7:48 AM, westman said:

In FSXmark11 you run a vanilla fsx with same settings, look at the tread.

But what about operating system tweaks ? Core parking, energy saving settings... ? Are they allowed ? And fsx.cfg modifications ? Maybe some of them prefer AMD over INTEL and vice versa ?

20 hours ago, QuaxTheSnoopie said:

But what about operating system tweaks ? Core parking, energy saving settings... ? Are they allowed ? And fsx.cfg modifications ? Maybe some of them prefer AMD over INTEL and vice versa ?

 

You are missing the point. Westman is comparing diferent ram, CPU's Etc on the same rig... His rig. So all varables are the same.

You can then conclude  that if Westman observes an increase in performance , for example, comparing faster RAM with slower RAM, then Bob in the US and Mike in the UK, should also observe an icrease. The variables you mention impact "the observed framerate" rather than whether an increase occurs or not.

Nobody is saying that if you use certain hardware that you will definately see a given framerate only that there should be an increase.

 

Thanks for posting Ryzen numbers in FSXMark, Hasse!  Those are the first I've seen, and very helpful (though disappointing).  It's amazing how much faster a highly-clocked 7700k with fast RAM can be in comparison, albeit only to this degree in Flight Sim really as other applications tend to scale better with thread/core count.  

i would tell anyone looking to upgrade, wait until the end of june, the intel i9 is releasing next month and it's gonna bury amd once and for all.don't throw your money away on ryzen garbage, they will never be able to compete with intel.

http://wccftech.com/intel-skylake-x-core-i9-7920x-7900x-7820x-7800x-x299-leaked/