I9 7940x worth it for P3D V4

[Mr_LoL 10]

Hi I am about to pull the trigger on this CPU for £1188. As you can see it's quite pricey. With my other upgrades I'm looking at £2600 in total. 

 

The PC in my Sig is slow especially with every slider to the right

Would I see any fps gains with 14 cores at 4.5 GHz with everything maxed out?? 

 

Thanks

[Cruachan 705]

LOL! Clearly you have plenty money to burn so why not spend it and tell us the answer. I doubt there are many in such a fortunate position as yourself.

For what it's worth I run P3D 4.1 well with 8 cores active using an Affinity Mask. I understand P3D, in it's current incarnation, seems to run best on 6-8 cores. However, you can't get around the fact that the main process still relies heavily on 1 core while the other cores are employed with multi-threaded operations such as drawing maps for gauges and texture loading. If you can o/c that core to, say, 5Ghz then, yes, you should see some benefit. However, the key hardware component currently is your 1080Ti as LM have managed to redirect significant workload onto the GPU.

You might be better served redirecting your question to Rob Ainscough.

Regards,

Mike

[Guest]

I would opt for a 8700 series CPU and good water cooling (even a water chiller) and aim for 5.2Ghz OC over 79xx series.  There is a limit to how much threading is useful to the current flight simulator platforms.  Wait for the "game" version of nVidia's next GPU (most likely based on Volta but could be "Ampere") or stick with your 1080Ti and water cool it also.

As far as maxing every slider and checking every option, that will not produce great FPS in P3D or XP11 or FSW ... but should be good for AF2.  However, you can't ignore you're add-on selection as that will be another significant determining factor in your FPS goals.

BUT most importantly, if we ever hit a point where we can max out all settings with current or near future hardware, then that will probably mean the flight simulator platforms have become dormant which would be a VERY bad sign indeed.  So my hope is FS developers (and 3rd party) will keep pushing the limits as there is so much more that could be simulated in the virtual world.

Cheers, Rob.

[Cruachan 705]

Take a look at the Passmark CPU benchmarks website:

http://m.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

There is a reason why the base core frequency is restricted as the logical core count increases - HEAT! A lot of it!  So, if you do decide to go for the 7940X with 28 logical cores, and attempt an overclock, then you will require a pretty serious cooling solution to prevent chip failure or frequency throttle back.

I could be wrong, but my own gut feeling is that Intel are marking time with these new releases, involving ever increasing core counts, until a fresh approach (if the technology exists) has had time to mature. Meantime, unless you have the cash, know that it's unlikely to be a sound investment and just enjoy the thrill of experimenting then, as Rob recommends, go for a more sensible approach and spend what you save on something else.

Again, I might be wrong, but would hazard a guess that there isn't much software out there of any interest to us that can truly exploit a running 14 cored (2 logical per) hyperthreaded processor. Nor are you likely to see much perceived difference performance-wise between the 7940X and an overclocked 8700K. 

Now, nice as they are to see, and they do give you some bragging rights, benchmark results such as listed in that link are achieved under artificial circumstances, are merely a guide and don't truly represent real world experiences. Take the i7-7700K, for example. In recent times, this chip has been one of the most popular choices yet look where it appears on the chart: ranked 135! This despite running at 4.2Ghz. However, if it is subjected to a modest overclock and married with, say, a 1080Ti then it delivers well without the production of unacceptable excessive heat.

Regards,

Mike

[Cruachan 705]

This chart puts things into better perspective:

http://m.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Note the single thread performance versus core frequency for each chip. Tells it's own story and why overclocking becomes important for processors such as mine while running sims like Prepar3D v4.x

Regards,

Mike

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

It also shows that Intel has hit a wall and can't produce the same percentage performance improvements with each new generation, at the single thread level. I look at how my present and previous CPUs compare and even an 8700 isn't worth the investment in a new mobo, RAM, etc..

It seems to me that Intel is interested in energy efficiency, budget systems and servers. Producing flagship hardware for gaming appears to be reduced in importance within their corporate vision. What's even more telling are the rumors that Intel is going to try again to market discrete video cards based on their GPUs. That's a recognition that the market has shifted from improving CPUs to GPUs.

[Mr_LoL 10]

Thanks a lot you guys for all your replies. I have a lot to ponder. I can afford a 7940X but if I can see no benefit from it as Rob says, I might as well save myself £700 and go with something like the 7820X which can clock to 4.8GHZ apparently.

 

I already have a 6 core cpu so getting another would be a sidegrade rather than an upgrade.

[Mr_LoL 10]

4 hours ago, Cruachan said:

This chart puts things into better perspective:

http://m.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Note the single thread performance versus core frequency for each chip. Tells it's own story and why overclocking becomes important for processors such as mine while running sims like Prepar3D v4.x

Regards,

Mike

Thanks for this chart. Man that 8700K is flying. It's almost 1000 points better than my 5820K at stock. Wonder what the passmark score wil be with it overclocked to 5GHz.

[henry 19]

hi everyone and happy holidays. i was just following this topic and i was wondering what i could improve in my system Intel Core i7-3770K @ 3.50GHz 4 cores, GEFORCE GSX TITAN and 16G ram. i run P3D 4.1 pretty fairly not great but i think i found a good balance . Affinity mask is set at 84 and p3d 4.1 is set on all cores and the rest on 1 core (core 0). Many people are talking about overclocking but i have never done it and dont feel confident about it. 

henry k

[Guest]

Good overclocking on the 8700 should allow for 5.2Ghz operation and this will be more important to flight sim (and most games) than having more extra cores.  Use the money saved for better cooling.

BUT, if your computer is going to be multi-purpose and you're a 3D artist and/or video editor using 3DSMax or Cinema4D or Adobe Premiere Pro, then more cores will be a benefit.  But typically a many core rendering PC doesn't make for the best flight sim/gaming PC.

Cheers, Rob.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, henry said:

Many people are talking about overclocking but i have never done it and dont feel confident about it.

I feel very confident about overclocking provided appropriate cooling good component choices for RAM and most importantly motherboard choice.  My 7900X is OC'd to 51% higher than base and that does translate directly to higher FPS.  If you are not comfortable working with PC components, then I'd recommend finding a quality vendor or person/friend that is ... just make sure you keep thermal protection enabled this will save your CPU.

Cheers, Rob.

[henry 19]

thx Rob .

[Mace 1,902]

henry...overclocking is so safe and easy these days -- most motherboard BIOS's just about have dummy switches for overclocking.  You shouldn't feel any trepidation about it, especially if you hang around this forum -- FS people are knowledgeable about overclocking, since it's become so important to flight sims. 

If you have any doubts about what hardware to buy, you can rest assured if you post the question here, you'll get lots of advice. 

 

[henry 19]

thx Mace. appreciate the advice.

[Uteman 51]

11 hours ago, Mr_LoL said:

I already have a 6 core cpu so getting another would be a sidegrade rather than an upgrade.

Couldn't agree more about sidestepping.

In regard to overclocking that is another development that with the latest generation is straightforward, most mobo's (X299) give you one click options straight out of the box based on your cooling setup.

As for the comment about the latest generation CPUs not offering much of an improvement that is a personal opinion that generalises and in my view ignores overall improvements, for example I am now running 10 cores at a 4.9 setting and using a little less energy at idle than I was with 6 cores at 4.3Ghz to produce much more performance.

I moved up from a 3930K at 4.4Ghz running a 4k monitor and now I am as happy as a pig in the proverbial. There is no doubt in my mind a 10 core Intel cpu at 4.9Ghz is better than a 6core cpu at 4.9Ghz in P3Dv4.

Robs comment about v4 add ons is particularly pertinent and often overlooked in equipment discussions.

The question often asked is can you use more than 6 cores in v4? and my answer is heck yes and you will get a good result when combined with equal graphics power. Through lots of testing and refining I identified with my setup that the extra cores help with fine tuning of scenery detail and load, plus the extra cores (through the use of things like Process Lasso) allow you too move TrackIR, ASC4,Little Navmap and any other plug ins well away from the first core, whilst also assigning  CPU and I/O priority. That helped me to minimise or eliminate any hesitation for example when adjusting scenery settings on TrackIR in the VC e.g. I found 3 scenery screens actually performs way better in my experience but I prefer the flexibility of TrackIR on a single 4k screen. 

Flying low and slow (FL50) over Socal in the A2A Skylane or the Cheyenne III at 4k using the RXP GTN750 on a tablet is an extremely smooth flight without any sign of the slightest hesitation.

A year ago all that was talked about in regard to CPUs for P3d was the 7700k - it was the CPU to use for simming and it seemingly had issues when you wanted everything in your sim to smoothly work together. Now I believe it is easier for you to achieve smooth high level detail and visuals at a high complexity level because the best thing about today is choice - you can choose 4,6,10 or more cores if you want and they will all perform depending on how you set them up.

Simply put you can get 7700k performance with 6, 8 or 10 cores and that can't be bad whatever software you run.

Cheers