If a program support N threads, it's best to use N-core product with maximum clock*IPC. 

But I don't know how much thread P3D v4 supports.
Also, it seems that P3D v4 always does most jobs on 1st thread only.

So my option is three.
1) 8700k
2) 7960x
3) 7980xe
(All AMD products are excluded because of their low clock*IPC)

If P3D v4 don't support >12 threads (well), then 8700k is the best option.
But it seems many indicate that P3D v4 utilizes 32> threads.
Since AffinityMask is 32-bit 1-bit flag variable, 7960x might be the best one.(since 7960x has more possibility to have more overclocked frequency then 7980xe)
But! If P3D v4 actually supports more than 32 threads, or the threads are distributed on physical cores first then on virtuals, 7980xe is the best one. 

So, what do you think which one is the BEST cpu for P3Dv4?

8700k

You are just pissing money away with those other CPUs, which will not overclock as well. P3D thrives on a high overclock.

+1

My 5 year old 4670K at 4.2Ghz with GTX 1070 can not even keep up with the 7700HQ in a laptop...

Did a test last week and this is the result with 3.5Ghz and a GTX 1060. This is the list of used add-ons

P3Dv3.4

AFT Global, OpenLC EU, Vector

Soft Clouds

FlyTampa EHAM

FSLabs A320

 

The 8700K. In spite of the improvements made, P3Dv4 is still basically a single-thread application and the 8700K is the fastest single-thread processor available..........Doug

14 hours ago, Maarten Otto said:

My 5 year old 4670K at 4.2Ghz with GTX 1070 can not even keep up with the 7700HQ in a laptop...

But, sim version and add-ons aside, it's not a meaningful comparrison unless the OS, motherboard, RAM (type, amount and speed), type of drive, screen resolution and non-sim background apps are all identical. You'd even have to use the same config files or you'd introduce more variables.

Without budget 7980xe , you have the money for Good cooling

8700k is a very Nice cpu overclocks well

pissing money was not the quest, dont really know if anyone here has  test both  in the sim 

On 11 February 2018 at 8:31 PM, Maarten Otto said:

 

Edited February 27, 20188 yr by Guest

The 7980 is the best because it has the most L3 cache by far.

When Rob A tried his 7900 it showed 80% more fps than the 5960 he had . The 7900 was running just 200 mhz faster , but the big difference was the L3 cache.

L3 cache is the amount of memory in your CPU that is responsable for having the CPU cores communicate with each other. The more L3 cache , the faster the CPU is compared to other CPU’s running at the same frequency , but with a lower L3 cache.

Surely , new technologie also helps but L3 cache is very important.

A fast CPU ( OC above 4.5 Ghz ) icw a high amount of L3 cache will help with performance.

More processor cores will help with faster terrain loading and extra addon programs .

Examples :

5820 ( my current CPU ) —> 15 mb

5960 —> 20 mb

6700 —> 8 mb

7700 —> 8 mb

7900 —> 13.75 mb

7980 —>  24.75 mb

8700 —>  12 mb

 

The 24.75Mb 7980 has 4.75Mb more L3 than the 20Mb 5960. Getting more cores is fine but remember that allocating memory bandwidth to more cores plays a part - the 7980 supports quad channel.

3 hours ago, SteveW said:

The 24.75Mb 7980 has 4.75Mb more L3 than the 20Mb 5960. Getting more cores is fine but remember that allocating memory bandwidth to more cores plays a part - the 7980 supports quad channel.

You are absolutely right Steve.

At this moment I am looking for an upgrade from my 6 core 5820k.

My budget is about 600 euro’s for a processor ..  

If the motherboard is getting old maybe think about saving for a little while longer and get a new one at the same time?

Here is Screenshot with FSlabs A320 , 1080TI x3, 7980XE all cores 5 HT off

https://www.dropbox.com/s/q3lavj95mcbn2z0/Line.png?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/drndc531483hxyq/Depart.png?dl=0

Edited March 3, 20188 yr by westman

There's some very good information on this thread. I too am considering my next flight-sim PC, which will be accorded a fairly generous budget. All and any advice here is gratefully received.