4 minutes ago, westman said:

singlecore is equal with same frq , can i get the 7920x to 5ghz with HT off it gone perform as the 7900X in singlecore and close to a 7900x with ht on , you only get approx 25% each core with HT.

example a 8600k 6core no HT on this cpu, gone be faster then a 7700k ( like a 5 core cpu) with HT on multitread apps.

another thing is that you lose a little single tread performance with HT on approx 0.5-0,8% not much but its there.

7920x is just more (16%) expensive than 7900x . 

When testing I would guess HT on these CPUs won't bring anything to P3Dv4, except for higher temperatures. 10 or 12 threads on the main cores alone should be quite enough.

 

Thanks,

2 minutes ago, Dirk98 said:

7920x is just more (16%) expensive than 7900x . 

When testing I would guess HT on these CPUs won't bring anything to P3Dv4, except for higher temperatures. 10 or 12 threads on the main cores alone should be quite enough.

 

Thanks,

Think ta good 7820X would be good price/performance HEDT , consumer 8600k

offtopic, testing P3D is kind of hard cpus you need to bee cpu bound.

did some tests in 4k with a 1080 in singlecard and SLI with 7700k as you see in single card you can say OC the CPU give nothing ,and in SLI gone be worse then single card , both can be true or false depending on cpu overclocking or GPU

test was with latest P3D V3 when 1080ti was close to release.

7700k 1080 single 1080SLI

4.7ghz  47.5fps      45.5fps

5.0ghz  49.5fps      52fps

5.3ghz  49.5fps      54fps

maybe that explains why my ryzen 1800x and my 1080ti runs x-plane and p3d 4 so well, both sims are becoming more gpu bound,i have considered buying the 8700k, but it's up in the air right now.

HT at the moment, for my 7900X does not help too much, and yes, the heat goes higher with HT ON.

Especially at 4K, the tasks go higher for the GPU. 

Also using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 is using more the GPU.

 

Maybe Intel should stop messing about with lakes, and start delivering a few seas

On 10/11/2017 at 1:29 PM, SpiritFlyer said:

I thought that the 8700K having the (more or less) same speeds, if slightly improved, as the 7700K but with 50% more cores would be a no-brainer leap forward for FS, but it seems that what matters to P3D is so less clear than that.

I am ready for a jump, a real jump, but at this point, with the limited Coffee Lake information at hand, I don't see anything worth risking a complete new system on yet.

 

My Sandy Bridge 2700K still runs 4+4 threads of P3D effortlessly at near 5.0 that fully utilizes the overclocked GTX1080 at + or - 100%.

Change for hardly noticeable change sake alone is not worth it.

 

But still ready to jump, if there is something worth landing on that I won't regret a few months down the road.

Indecision, indecision, indecision...

Kind regards, 

Are you saying that going from your 2700k to a 8700k will net you no discernible difference in performance for p3d?

 

I'm serioisly curios because I'm buying parts for a whole new build this Christmas and have gotten quite excited for at least a 7700k. I'm nervous for spending all this money to see the same performance as my 6 yr old processor.

2 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

Are you saying that going from your 2700k to a 8700k will net you no discernible difference in performance for p3d?

 

I'm serioisly curios because I'm buying parts for a whole new build this Christmas and have gotten quite excited for at least a 7700k. I'm nervous for spending all this money to see the same performance as my 6 yr old processor.

No, of course not, not really,

but kind of...

 

There have been claimed small (single digit) incremental increases in output at any particular speed and certain efficiencies in each generation of Intel CPUs up to and including the 7700K and 8700K.

In fact, I helped a friend overclock his brand new 7700K rig today so I know how good the new chips and boards  are! I would trade him in a heart beat!

 

However the 2700K, (or exceptional 2600K) if you have a good one, which I do, is very, very fast and with fast ram (mine is 16GB at 2133) can keep a good overclocked (using MSI Afterburner) GTX 1080 working at +or- 100%.

I run 4+4 threads at or near 5.0Ghz depending on ambient household temperature under 70C, at slightly under 1.4v without a moments worry. Many have enjoyed that particular design better and longer that ever expected.

 

In P3Dv4 I have almost all sliders to the right and frames with advanced pay-ware scenery is like a bat out of H.E. double hockey sticks on a 4K 55inch curved Samsung.

Mind you, I really know how to set this thing up in the bios and lucked out in the silicone lottery.

Even still a good Sandy Bridge was miles and years ahead at the time and Intel has really struggled to climb out of the "quicksand", so to speak! 

 

However, to answer your question: I intended to get the 8700K, which is better, faster and more advanced than Sandy Bridge, but at speed for speed, card for card, and likely FPS by FPS, not overwhelmingly so (in P3D), and I am typing on the proof of that right in my face. However I want to buy a worthy successor, but like you said, it is a lot of money and it has to be the right product, an am not sure the 8700K is it - to me right now.

I want to be sold, but so far I'm not. 

 

Like I said:

Indecision, indecision, indecision!

Kind regards,

 

2 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

Are you saying that going from your 2700k to a 8700k will net you no discernible difference in performance for p3d? ...I'm buying parts for a whole new build this Christmas...

 

I wanted to hesitate, equivocate, wiggle and squirm out from under the question, for as crazy as it sounds that's about it... Sorry for my lack of clarity and muddled muddleness. Merry Christmas

On 11/10/2017 at 7:29 PM, SpiritFlyer said:

I thought that the 8700K having the (more or less) same speeds, if slightly improved, as the 7700K but with 50% more cores would be a no-brainer leap forward for FS, but it seems that what matters to P3D is so less clear than that.

I am ready for a jump, a real jump, but at this point, with the limited Coffee Lake information at hand, I don't see anything worth risking a complete new system on yet.

 

My Sandy Bridge 2700K still runs 4+4 threads of P3D effortlessly at near 5.0 that fully utilizes the overclocked GTX1080 at + or - 100%.

Change for hardly noticeable change sake alone is not worth it.

 

But still ready to jump, if there is something worth landing on that I won't regret a few months down the road.

Indecision, indecision, indecision...

Kind regards, 

 

 

2700K to 7700K/8700K, both at 5GHz is about a 20% increase in single core performance  7700K/8700K has a much better IPC.

 

According to my (often dodgy) calculations.  

 

There are other advantages the platform brings too of course, other than just IPC.

 

8 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

 

2700K to 7700K/8700K, both at 5GHz is about a 20% increase in single core performance  7700K/8700K has a much better IPC.

 

According to my (often dodgy) calculations.  

 

There are other advantages the platform brings too of course, other than just IPC.

 

 

21 hours ago, SpiritFlyer said:

No, of course not, not really,

but kind of...

 

There have been claimed small (single digit) incremental increases in output at any particular speed and certain efficiencies in each generation of Intel CPUs up to and including the 7700K and 8700K.

In fact, I helped a friend overclock his brand new 7700K rig today so I know how good the new chips and boards  are! I would trade him in a heart beat!

 

However the 2700K, (or exceptional 2600K) if you have a good one, which I do, is very, very fast and with fast ram (mine is 16GB at 2133) can keep a good overclocked (using MSI Afterburner) GTX 1080 working at +or- 100%.

I run 4+4 threads at or near 5.0Ghz depending on ambient household temperature under 70C, at slightly under 1.4v without a moments worry. Many have enjoyed that particular design better and longer that ever expected.

 

In P3Dv4 I have almost all sliders to the right and frames with advanced pay-ware scenery is like a bat out of H.E. double hockey sticks on a 4K 55inch curved Samsung.

Mind you, I really know how to set this thing up in the bios and lucked out in the silicone lottery.

Even still a good Sandy Bridge was miles and years ahead at the time and Intel has really struggled to climb out of the "quicksand", so to speak! 

 

However, to answer your question: I intended to get the 8700K, which is better, faster and more advanced than Sandy Bridge, but at speed for speed, card for card, and likely FPS by FPS, not overwhelmingly so (in P3D), and I am typing on the proof of that right in my face. However I want to buy a worthy successor, but like you said, it is a lot of money and it has to be the right product, an am not sure the 8700K is it - to me right now.

I want to be sold, but so far I'm not. 

 

Like I said:

Indecision, indecision, indecision!

Kind regards,

 

I'm seriously considering the 8700k right now because why not go for the extra 2 cores. I currently am using a 1080ti at 4k resolution with a 2700k at 4.6ghz. I'm only getting mid 20s at airports like the newest ksfo from flightbeam and the pmdg 747. P3d v3.4. Medium to high graphics settings.....nkt everything maxed out.

I honestly figured I woukd get at minimum 35 fps in any given situation regardless of weather with my new build and using p3d v4.x.

I guess I'm kind of deflated at the moment. Oh well.

I found this also interesting:

 

32 minutes ago, Vali said:

I found this also interesting:

 

That's it then for now! Running at 5Ghz and a really highly clocked 1080 and lots of Fast ram, I am staying put until something else comes along that earns my dollars. Looks like I might even beat that 8700K combination with the extra speed and a better card. Thank you Vali!

13 hours ago, SpiritFlyer said:

That's it then for now! Running at 5Ghz and a really highly clocked 1080 and lots of Fast ram, I am staying put until something else comes along that earns my dollars. Looks like I might even beat that 8700K combination with the extra speed and a better card. Thank you Vali!

I watched thst video today.

My question is this...

What is considered "gaming?" Is it current titles that don't really use the cpu all that much? I would assume so.

Which brings me to a more relevant question.

Since p3d v4/v3 uses the cpu more so than most current gaming titles, are the results in this video not relevant to our hobby? Meaning, can we see better gains in games like p3d which heavily rely on the cpu?

And what about the i5 8600k? Consindering the system is mainly used for P3D though

It should be overclockable to the same ammount as the i7 8700 at a much lower price and P3D cant use the 6 Threads efficiently anyway, so wouldnt that be the optimal choice?