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!

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. 😉

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! 

 

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 October 7, 20187 yr by westman

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

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 October 7, 20187 yr by FunknNasty
Qualified FPS as 'unlimited'

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

44 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

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

This is such a ridiculous assertion.

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. 

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... 

 

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?

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

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

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

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.