On 5/12/2018 at 2:15 AM, FunknNasty said:

My experience with the upgrade from the Haswell has been damn near intoxicating.

I assume that your upgrade involved a clean install of Windows? If so, that alone would probably give you a noticeable increase in performance whichever version you use.

 

On 5/12/2018 at 2:15 AM, FunknNasty said:

One final thought on the video card. The 1070 is a great card but it is wasted on the Haswell.  Take that 1070 and drop it into a high powered Coffee with the exact same p3d settings and I'll guarantee you'll think you're flying a different sim.

I would say that it depends on screen resolution. At 1920x1080, even a 1060 is unlikely to be bottlenecked by a Haswell CPU running at 4.7GHz. You might be able to use much higher levels of antialiasing and maybe get better picture quality but there's unlikely to be any noticeable performance (FPS) improvement caused solely by using the same 1070 card with a newer processor at full HD.

Double post, for some reason! Avsim seems very slow at the moment.

Edited May 13, 20188 yr by vortex681

4 hours ago, vortex681 said:

I assume that your upgrade involved a clean install of Windows? If so, that alone would probably give you a noticeable increase in performance whichever version you use.

 

I would say that it depends on screen resolution. At 1920x1080, even a 1060 is unlikely to be bottlenecked by a Haswell CPU running at 4.7GHz. You might be able to use much higher levels of antialiasing and maybe get better picture quality but there's unlikely to be any noticeable performance (FPS) improvement caused solely by using the same 1070 card with a newer processor at full HD.

Glad you asked. .

The first 2 months on my new build -I know this because I rearmed the 30 day Win7 activation period at least once, I was using the same OS (drive) that was in the Haswell.  The drives in the Haswell went straight onto the Coffee Lake .....of course I uninstalled p3d 4.2 and deactivated the PMDG stuff prior to moving the drives. Important note: No files were deleted and all other add-ons remained on the drives prior to the move, I even went as far as to backup the p3d config file for use the on the Coffee build. 

And in case your wondering: My Haswell build was only a year old. Yeah, it sat in closet for 3 years until I finally retired my Sandy Bridge last March, or around the same time PMDG released the B747.

 

....Oh, I have currently 38 process running in background, as reported Sysinternals....just like there was with my Haswell install. Yeah, I worry about crap like that.

One other note: I've been on the fresh Win7 install forr around 3 or 4 weeks now.

 

 

I guess I should add that all my claims and performance benchmarks that I've posted previously on these forums were with the drive and OS that was used on the Haswell build. ....or my Sandy build. LoL

Yeah, just for the heck of it, I plugged in the drive that I used with my sandy build into the coffee and not only did it boot right up it activated itself almost instantly. So I'm using it for all the dirty work. ...oh, it actually bench marks slightly better than my new clean install I use for the sim. 

Thanks all for the advice. I upgraded to GTX 1080 card and 16GB memory. Is there a benefit of keeping the old 2 x 4GB to have 24GB memory or does this not work?

 

 

3 hours ago, pred02 said:

Thanks all for the advice. I upgraded to GTX 1080 card and 16GB memory. Is there a benefit of keeping the old 2 x 4GB to have 24GB memory or does this not work?

 

 

Stay with 16 GB.

The extra 4 GB modules go into the cardboard box in the basement..

16 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

Stay with 16 GB.

The extra 4 GB modules go into the cardboard box in the basement..

On Facebook, we have a local recycling town group and there's also a local group that accepts computers for people in need.  I've given away some pretty old equipment that no one on ebay would buy.  If not, we have local electronics recycling days.

I just upgraded this past weekend from 4790k to 9900k and must say I'm impressed with the results.  I instantly pushed the chip to 5.2gHz without any issue and my god - P3D and XPlane are both working great.  YMMV

Good Luck

On ‎1‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 10:57 PM, Tony P said:

I just upgraded this past weekend from 4790k to 9900k and must say I'm impressed with the results.  I instantly pushed the chip to 5.2gHz without any issue and my god - P3D and XPlane are both working great.  YMMV

Good Luck

How is the fps generally compared to previous cpu like in the heaviest scenarios you fly? Something like with large airports + lots of AI + complex aircraft on final approach.

10 hours ago, him225 said:

How is the fps generally compared to previous cpu like in the heaviest scenarios you fly? Something like with large airports + lots of AI + complex aircraft on final approach.

FPS is fine.  I tested FSLabs A320 with Drzewiechki NYC and frames do not go under 30 and the sim is very smooth and stutter free.  

Hi,

I am revisiting this topic. The 1080GTX and 16GB  provided extra life, and I enjoyed performance in P3DV4 that I could never have with FSX. However, as Christmas is around the corner I can capitalize on my 1x per year trip to the States and upgrade the rest of the system - Mobo/processor/memory/cooler and maybe storage (thought I have 2 x SSD drives)

 

What processor is now the best replacement to 4790k? I am not looking top of the line, maybe just below to maximize the value of flight simming over the next several years.

Thanks

 

 

1 hour ago, pred02 said:

Hi,

I am revisiting this topic. The 1080GTX and 16GB  provided extra life, and I enjoyed performance in P3DV4 that I could never have with FSX. However, as Christmas is around the corner I can capitalize on my 1x per year trip to the States and upgrade the rest of the system - Mobo/processor/memory/cooler and maybe storage (thought I have 2 x SSD drives)

 

What processor is now the best replacement to 4790k? I am not looking top of the line, maybe just below to maximize the value of flight simming over the next several years.

Thanks

 

 

9700k

1 hour ago, Charlatan said:

9700k

I would say 9900k, or if it's available, 9900ks.  Sure one can save a bit of money with the 9700k over the 9900k or ks, but I personally wouldn't bother as the difference is on the order of $100-150, pretty minor in the grand scheme.  Now if we were comparing $100 vs. $1000 CPUs it would be a different story...

On 10/27/2019 at 5:58 PM, TechguyMaxC said:

I would say 9900k, or if it's available, 9900ks.  Sure one can save a bit of money with the 9700k over the 9900k or ks, but I personally wouldn't bother as the difference is on the order of $100-150, pretty minor in the grand scheme.  Now if we were comparing $100 vs. $1000 CPUs it would be a different story...

I know, but he said not top line

1 hour ago, Charlatan said:

I know, but he said not top line

Right, and I'm trying to convince him to spend the extra money because in the grand scheme, it's not that much of a price difference.