4 minutes ago, wiler said:

I took off in zibo 737 7R mr x and flew hdg 070 left turn over downtown 35-50fps smooth.  Its the real deal trust me. Xp is using 2 cores mainly but all 16 threads are working. 

I never doubted your results, I was merely discussing benchmarking techniques... 

Upgrading a 4790K doesn't make sense at the moment, as it handles X-Plane with maximum objects pretty well - and there are more performance improvements incoming. But in a year or two, maybe it becomes reasonable (i.e. the performance difference and what it can do in X-Plane is convincing) - then I'll def. will have a look at Ryzen.

2 hours ago, Colonel X said:

I never doubted your results, I was merely discussing benchmarking techniques... 

Upgrading a 4790K doesn't make sense at the moment, as it handles X-Plane with maximum objects pretty well - and there are more performance improvements incoming. But in a year or two, maybe it becomes reasonable (i.e. the performance difference and what it can do in X-Plane is convincing) - then I'll def. will have a look at Ryzen.

I want to break that notion that ryzen sucks at games and its not as good as intel.... its is right up there in xp11 (will also try p3dv4 + tfdi717) for a much cheaper cost. But like I said, I think everyone wins when AMD is competitive as more competition is always the best for the consumer. 

On ‎8‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 8:59 AM, wiler said:

I want to break that notion that ryzen sucks at games and its not as good as intel.... its is right up there in xp11 (will also try p3dv4 + tfdi717) for a much cheaper cost. But like I said, I think everyone wins when AMD is competitive as more competition is always the best for the consumer. 

Just built a Machine with 1700 on an ASUS VI Extreme board. Used GSkill FlareX  and it has NO trouble running at 3200. I updated the BIOS to ver. 1701.

Went into BIOS and chose "Gaming" option. It one of four easy overclocking options available in the drop down menu.  The BIOS said 4.00 GHz. In the memory section I picked 3200 frequency. The machine is running at those speeds and passes the stress test I threw at it. Downloaded AMD Master and it confirmed what the BIOS reported regarding frequencies and temps. The new BIOS's and  3200 memory speeds are easily possible with the correct memory sticks. I think I have won the silicon lottery as far as this particular CPU is concerned. don't really know I do know a lot of outdated info is online, best to check the dates.  Many problems with some newer Intel motherboards and chipsets I'm told? I get over 35-40 FPS at JFK. My AMD Bulldozer CPU gave me half of that running at 4.4GHz. I fly my PMDG airliners very comfortably know with the 1700 and the extra 8 GB for a total of 16 than I did before. When you get away from big areas like JFK. LAX. and the like the FPS's are way up in the 50-60's. Anyone who claims AMD's new Gaming setup suck needs to talk to a doctor!

Best

BaldyB

i am using an 1800x at 4.1 ghz and 32 gb of ddr4 at 3200mhz, yes p3d runs well, x-plane 11 runs amazing, i thing the 20mb of L3 cache helps alot, you just can't get that on intel. with that said, i plan on buying an 8700k to compare, whichever runs the worst will become my media home server.people think that just because the ryzen won't run over 4-4.1 ghz they are no good, x-plane and p3d are becoming more gpu bound, the cpu is starting to make less and less difference in gaming. everything is being dumped on my 1080ti. 

12 hours ago, Patriot3810 said:

the cpu is starting to make less and less difference in gaming. everything is being dumped on my 1080ti.

In gaming generally, yes. In simming, no - the CPU is still the most important component. The GPU is certainly doing more than it previously did and is worked harder at the higher screen resolutions but you still need a good CPU with a high clock speed for best overall performance at present.

i 100 percent agree with you in p3d 4,i took a 7700k and my 1800x and ran them side by side, in x-plane 11 i came out with higher framerates, in p3d 4 it was 10-15 fps difference. p3d v4 is perfectly playable on a ryzen 1700 and a 1080ti. i also ran fsx, it ran like complete garbage on the ryzen and ran like a top on the 7700k. lockheed has come futher than we give them credit for. in x-plane i have everything on high or max and keep 30-60 fps, on the 7700k i was holding 30-60 fps, i was also using process lasso for both.i raised the settings until it wouldn't drop below 30 and also used nvidia shadow play.here is p3d 4.0 and x-plane 11.05, the single thread performance argument is falling apart as time goes on.

 

Your benchmarks are worthless unless you take it to areas like Los Angeles or New York. Rural areas - any mediocre PC can handle them.

ummm ortho xp is not mediocre  and i get the same results above 30 in both sims at large airports, xplane 11 i can have world traffic 3 maxed out and still hold the 35 fps mark, its a flat out fact that flight sims are moving to become more gpu bound.my pc is far from mediocre regardless of what you say. Colonel X why don't you have your pc specs listed so we can see your magnificent computer.what you just said is pointless.

On 21.10.2017 at 6:10 PM, Patriot3810 said:

ummm ortho xp is not mediocre  and i get the same results above 30 in both sims at large airports, xplane 11 i can have world traffic 3 maxed out and still hold the 35 fps mark, its a flat out fact that flight sims are moving to become more gpu bound.my pc is far from mediocre regardless of what you say. Colonel X why don't you have your pc specs listed so we can see your magnificent computer.what you just said is pointless.

I was not referring to your computer when I said a mediocre PC can handle rural areas, I was just stating a fact. After reading the rest of your post, I decided to back off and just carry on with life.