emko

New computer: Ryzen 5 + Rx580?

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I'm thinking of buying a new computer and I'd be delighted to hear your opinions.

Budget needs to be kept "wife-friendly" which in my case means USD 900 (it's actually 1150 but here in Europe electronics is more expensive than in the USA so 850-900 is a better baseline). Further upgrades like more RAM or another HDD are planned.

My typical mission is flying around ORBX SAK + Misty Moorings scenery or DCS Gazelle (low and slow flying helicopter) - these are the missions I would like to optimize for. For flying PMDG or Q400 I don't really care  whether I have 60 or 24 fps.

I'd like to have REX clouds, very dense scenery, detailed clouds, dynamic lighting, volumetric fog and 30fps stable at 1920x1080 resolution. HDR lighting, some autogen, water reflections and shadows would be a nice bonus.

CPU:        AMD Ryzen 5 2600 (6 core with hyper threading, 3.4-3.9GHz)
GPU:        Sapphire Radeon Nitro+ Rx580 8GB
Hard drive: ADATA XPG SX8200 M.2 NVMe 480GB
MB:         Gigabyte B450 AORUS Pro
Memory:     2x8GB ADATA XPG GAMMIX D10 (2666 MHz CL 16 Non-ECC)
PSU:        Corsair TX650M (650W, 80+ Gold)

I plan to add another at least 16GB of RAM and 1TB HDD in the future.

I saw couple of benchmarks and the Ryzen 5 CPU was on par with i5-8600 which cost twice as much (at least here). I wonder if it's worth the extra cost. Same thing with the GPU - Rx580 is roughly on par with GeForce 1060 in benchmarks and the cost is the same but has 8GB of VRAM while the NVidia has 6GB.

What are your opinions on this, please?

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hmm, I am happy to be corrected, but it was always an understanding amongst simmers that FSX always performed far better with an Intel processor and Nvidia GPU. I'm pretty sure the same applies to P3D, for obvious reasons. Because P3D, in particular V4, offers so much more in the way of processor/GPU hungry options, we all want to use them, ie, dynamic lighting, cloud shadows, volumentric fog, etc etc, therefore you need to ensure the hardware you choose is up to the job, especially in V4. I'd be happy to hear some other views. 😉

Share this post


Link to post

Hi, I’ve been using AMD again since Ryzen came out. 

I have the 1700 @3.9ghz. 32gig of fast ddr4 3200 c14. And Vega 64 graphics. 

I’m running p3d with dynamic lighting on, most settings are maxed except autogen which I keep at dense. Resolution is at 7680x1440, basically 3 1440p screens in eyefinity (they will do 4K but that really does push it)! I can keep to 30fps in most instances, but around Heathrow type areas it’s more like 15-20fps. 

So for me, it works, sure if I had 5ghz intel cpu and 1080ti, it would be faster, but not that much I think. And I sure paid a lot less for my system. It is perfectly playable like this for me. 

The key is getting your RAM as fast as possible, with Ryzen it makes a massive difference. You really should aim for at least 3200 c14 (Samsung b die preferred). With fast ram you can get close to intel power, with 2400 c16 ram you are going to be noticeably slower than the intel equivalent. 

I’m running Orbx global, vector, open lc, regions, airports. Asp4, asca, rex SF, and complicated add on planes, it will take it all! 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, djbully said:

Hi, I’ve been using AMD again since Ryzen came out. 

I have the 1700 @3.9ghz. 32gig of fast ddr4 3200 c14. And Vega 64 graphics. 

I’m running p3d with dynamic lighting on, most settings are maxed except autogen which I keep at dense. Resolution is at 7680x1440, basically 3 1440p screens in eyefinity (they will do 4K but that really does push it)! I can keep to 30fps in most instances, but around Heathrow type areas it’s more like 15-20fps. 

So for me, it works, sure if I had 5ghz intel cpu and 1080ti, it would be faster, but not that much I think. And I sure paid a lot less for my system. It is perfectly playable like this for me. 

The key is getting your RAM as fast as possible, with Ryzen it makes a massive difference. You really should aim for at least 3200 c14 (Samsung b die preferred). With fast ram you can get close to intel power, with 2400 c16 ram you are going to be noticeably slower than the intel equivalent. 

I’m running Orbx global, vector, open lc, regions, airports. Asp4, asca, rex SF, and complicated add on planes, it will take it all! 

 

I have a 1800X @4.1ghz with fast mems 3600mhz c15 and  1080TI.

The fast mem does even do difference on INTEL , my second PC.s is INTEL 8700k @5.3ghz  and I9 7920X @5.1ghz both with 2X 1080Ti SLI

i dont run the Ryzen rigg in P3D anymore it not close to the Intel riggs Single core performance way way off even an old 4770k @4.2ghz is faster.

edit : a run the intel cpus with memspeed 4x8 32gb 3800mhz c16 7920x, the 8700k 4266mhz c17 2x 8gb 

Edited by westman

Share this post


Link to post

Use an Intel Processor. Anything else is a waste of money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, westman said:

The fast mem does even do difference on INTEL , my second PC.s is INTEL 8700k @5.3ghz  and I9 7920X @5.1ghz both with 2X 1080Ti SLI

Off topic, I know:

My experience with hi-speed mem is a lil different than yours. In situations where the cpu and gpu are running nowhere near 100% and the fps (unlimited) is stable in the 20's or 30's, e.g. mid day LAX, I see a 10% pop in fps going from 3200 c14 to 4133 c17 (cpu being equal).

Edited by FunknNasty
Qualified FPS as 'unlimited'

Share this post


Link to post

No need to get a M.2 SSD, you can get a standard SSD for cheaper and put those extra funds towards something else.

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

Use an Intel Processor. Anything else is a waste of money. 

This is such a ridiculous assertion.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Greggy_D said:

This is such a ridiculous assertion.

I knew 3 simmers that got PCs over the years, with AMD chips, and wound up replacing them with Intel PC's. That's enough for me. 

Share this post


Link to post

I really can't comment on the Ryzen chip as have the Intel 6700k with gives me 4.00 w/o overclocking (FSX-Steam).

But AMD's stock market has been in the doldrums, and went down even after Ryzen was introduced.  

Not a comment on their chip  performance  - just a point of interest... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, FunknNasty said:

Off topic, I know:

My experience with hi-speed mem is a lil different than yours. In situations where the cpu and gpu are running nowhere near 100% and the fps (unlimited) is stable in the 20's or 30's, e.g. mid day LAX, I see a 10% pop in fps going from 3200 c14 to 4133 c17 (cpu being equal).

My eng is bad, you see a 10% increase with 4133 c17 is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post

I just built a new computer, for the money, my builder(Microsoft Certified) suggested to try the AMD Ryzen 8 core. I have never seen P3D run any smoother than now. Unbelievably smooth and stunning graphics!! See my specs below.

 

Cooler Master Tower.
ASUS Crosshair VI Hero Republic of Gamers Motherboard.(1TB SAMSUNG960 EVO SSD Directly connected to MB)
MSI GEFORCE GAMING GTX 1080 8GB
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Eight Core Processor
32 GB G.SKILL RIPJAWS V DDR4 Memory.

Thanks,

Mike

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

More discussions like from the OP and others in the AVSIM Hardware CPU Forum.

Share this post


Link to post

I have a slower Intel I7 but at 3.6 GHZ it handles P3DV4 and Xplane11 very well.  My weakest link is VRAM on my otherwise robust Nvidia 1060.  I would caution that a 2.6 GHZ is too slow for P3DV4--the sim is cpu centric and as also said, best had with an Nvidia GPU.  I paid $1000 for my MSI Vortex which has run hour after hour with no faults or lockups.  Slightly more than the cost of your proposed system, but it is worth it I would say and it will last until the next generation of Xplane and P3D, probably even with them.  I run the Valley benchmark with more than 115fps, whereas on my old 2.3 GHZ system it could average only 25 fps.  No Limits Coaster sim 2, which has local graphics far more intense than any other sim I have, runs so well I find the sim more realistic than a ride on a real coaster.

My full specs are in my sig....

John

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

I knew 3 simmers that got PCs over the years, with AMD chips, and wound up replacing them with Intel PC's. That's enough for me. 

Again, your assertion is ridiculous since you have zero experience with the new Ryzen chips, which is the focus of the OP.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Just be aware that If you buy an  AMD video card the AMD Crimson Softwares used to control the card (this is the equivalent to Nvidia Control Panel) is incompatible with P3D under certain circumstances as it will cause video artifacts.

These happens mostly with defects regarding the particle redraw, making things over the distance to appear deformed or delayed.

The problem happens because the AMD software wants to control the FPS and performance of the video card and it conflicts with PD3V4 target frames.

There is a way around, remove the Crimson software and drivers and let Windows 10 to download the Microsoft drivers instead.

The advice above is based on experience after 7 support tickets handled this year regarding effects particles defects experienced.

Regards,

Simbol 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Thank you for your inputs!

As djbully suggested, I decided to go with faster RAM - 1x16GB 3000MHz CL15. The 3000MHz should be the fastest Ryzen 5 2nd gen can handle, according to the spec. Or am I missing anything?

47 minutes ago, simbol said:

Just be aware that If you buy an  AMD video card the AMD Crimson Softwares used to control the card (this is the equivalent to Nvidia Control Panel) is incompatible with P3D under certain circumstances as it will cause video artifacts.

Thanks!!! I will definitely check that. TBH I am sitting on a fence whether Rx580 or 1060. I'm yet to have a good experience with an ATI card. What I like on Rx580 is just the bigger VRAM.

3 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I knew 3 simmers that got PCs over the years, with AMD chips, and wound up replacing them with Intel PC's. That's enough for me. 

What kind of CPU was that? AMD is a bit of hit and miss. I remember having two Opteron based servers at work, one Bulldozer 1st gen based and one Piledriver based. Bull was pretty bad, we jokingly said 'Paid nothing, got nothing' (compared to Xeon). Pile was pretty OK. Ryzen 2nd gen is based on Zen+ architecture (Pinnacle Ridge), they should be pretty good.

Edited by emko
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I built myself a Ryzen 5 1600x system almost one year ago to the day, after exhaustive research vs. Intel and the Ryzen 7. 

I am a happy camper: paired with a GeForce 1080, Acer Predator 2k monitor, Samsung SSD and the fastest RAM the motherboard supports I saw an easy 50 FPS with a stock P3D installation. 

I run Orbx products, ActiveSky, and a few other scenery packages. I have the frame limiter set to 35 FPS and the majority of the time I have a smooth flight experience. Most of my settings are on high/ultra/towards the right side of the slider and I avoid AI traffic, ships, etc.

I do believe Intel still has the edge on speed because of the way P3D is engineered, but I am 100% happy with my Ryzen system. 

Edited by snpower
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, exeodus said:

No need to get a M.2 SSD, you can get a standard SSD for cheaper and put those extra funds towards something else.

For his build you are correct.

But with a triple view setup even a 6Gb SSD C drive is hitting 100% in detailed scenery. Therefore I switched to a 2TB m2 1800/1800.

Adfitional : a 7900k can do around 350 and a regular SSD around 520-560. However, with lots of data a SSD like that can drop to 25% of its max performance. To be at least at 350 I needed 4X 350= 1400..,

Share this post


Link to post

Intel CPUs are optimized for 2400hz memory it`s in the spec sheet, Linus did a test on YouTube when using XMP profile when you go past 3200hz there is no gain the CPU can only crunch the data at a max speed, trying to push data in faster than the CPU can handle will not go, even de8bar has done the same test and to quote him don't waste your money better spent on a faster CPU or drive. 

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, emko said:

As djbully suggested, I decided to go with faster RAM - 1x16GB 3000MHz CL15. The 3000MHz should be the fastest Ryzen 5 2nd gen can handle, according to the spec. Or am I missing anything?

Yes, you miss the fact that using 1x16GB will not allow you to use DualChannel. Although the use of DualChannel might be not that important, I would certainly go for 2x8GB instead of 1x16GB. At least for Intel platforms, might be slightly different with AMD...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, overspeed3 said:

I really can't comment on the Ryzen chip as have the Intel 6700k with gives me 4.00 w/o overclocking (FSX-Steam).

But AMD's stock market has been in the doldrums, and went down even after Ryzen was introduced.  

Not a comment on their chip  performance  - just a point of interest... 

 

Well, now there stock was around $30 per share, risen up from below $10 a couple of years ago. Reality seems to be the opposite of your opinion.  

 

TBH, I'm really kicking my self for not chucking a couple of grand into their shares, could have tripled it by now!   😞

Edited by djbully

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, rjfry said:

Intel CPUs are optimized for 2400hz memory it`s in the spec sheet, Linus did a test on YouTube when using XMP profile when you go past 3200hz there is no gain the CPU can only crunch the data at a max speed, trying to push data in faster than the CPU can handle will not go, even de8bar has done the same test and to quote him don't waste your money better spent on a faster CPU or drive. 

Ryzen is different. It uses something called "Infinity Fabric" for inter CPU communication. The speed of "Infinity Fabric" Is tied to the memory bus speed, so the higher your memory clock, the faster your CPU. IT REALLY DOES MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. Completely different to Intel. 

Edited by djbully
Spell check!

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Yes, you miss the fact that using 1x16GB will not allow you to use DualChannel. Although the use of DualChannel might be not that important, I would certainly go for 2x8GB instead of 1x16GB. At least for Intel platforms, might be slightly different with AMD...

Yes, good advice  🙂

 

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, AnkH said:

Yes, you miss the fact that using 1x16GB will not allow you to use DualChannel. Although the use of DualChannel might be not that important, I would certainly go for 2x8GB instead of 1x16GB. At least for Intel platforms, might be slightly different with AMD...

Thanks, I am aware of that. I'm going to buy another 1x16GB later*, exactly the same as this one therefore I'll have a dual channel later. BTW How much it affects the performance in P3D? Usually it's noticeable only by overclockers who beat the dump out of their PCs. Which, clearly, I am not 🙂 .

 

* For gaming it is overkill but I'll use the computer for other tasks as well. For some, I barely fit into 32GB. (Yes, you guessed it, I code in Java 😄.)

22 minutes ago, djbully said:

Ryzen is different. It uses something called "Infinity Fabric" for inter CPU communication. The speed of "Infinity Fabric" Is tied to the memory bus speed, so the higher your memory clock, the faster your CPU. IT REALLY DOES MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. Completely different to Intel. 

Thanks! But is it able use faster RAM than specified?

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now