Well.. Who would've thought. After so many years I can finally (finally) say that I have  found a CPU that has  tamed P3D 4.3

I just purchased the Intel 8086K and managed to Overclock this guy to 5.3Ghz, along with 16Gb of RAM at  4266 Mhz. This along with an Nvidia 2070 card (will be getting an 11Gb soon).

I will tell you, now I can fly my sim with any settings I choose and frames remain constant at 29-30 ... smooth, and clean! Sounds too good to be true but it actually is. I managed this with Hyperthreading  Off. I actually took it all the way to 

5.4Ghz but will not hold for more than 5 minutes and BSOD. No worries, I am indeed a very happy simmer. 

That's interesting. I've just ordered a new PC based on an i7-8086K. The company said they can overclock up to 5.0Ghz but I wonder if they might be able to get more. My memory is 'slower' than yours but when I asked them if 'faster' memory would help overall performance they said not so I went with G.Skill Trident Z RGB 32GB DDR4 3000MHz.

I'll report back when I get the machine in about 10 days.

I thought I read somewhere that mem speeds possibly affected sim performance significantly.  I may be wrong... often happens :p

46 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

I thought I read somewhere that mem speeds possibly affected sim performance significantly.  I may be wrong... often happens 😛

Significantly better or significantly worse? The company building mine could have suggested faster memory (for financial gain) than the 3000 but said it would not improve performance.

20 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Significantly better or significantly worse? The company building mine could have suggested faster memory (for financial gain) than the 3000 but said it would not improve performance.

Hi Ray,

Do they have much/any knowledge about P3D or our current line of Flight Sims? In alot of circumstances I would agree that RAM speed (and latency) might not make a discernible difference, but there are a number of test and threads on here to show that faster RAM will benefit P3D.

 

 

6 hours ago, joemiller said:

Well.. Who would've thought. After so many years I can finally (finally) say that I have  found a CPU that has  tamed P3D 4.3

I just purchased the Intel 8086K and managed to Overclock this guy to 5.3Ghz, along with 16Gb of RAM at  4266 Mhz. This along with an Nvidia 2070 card (will be getting an 11Gb soon).

 

I'm still tossing up the 8086k or 9700K. There doesn't seem to be much data around about how well the 9700k overclocks and I'm not particularly convinced that the 2 extra cores on the 9700K (I would disable HT on the 8086k) will make much if any difference to P3D. Given that they are essentially the same price, I'm erring on the side of going with an 8086k that might overclock slightly faster and forgo the 2 additional cores?

 

Any thoughts?

5 minutes ago, KL Oo said:

Hi Ray,

Do they have much/any knowledge about P3D or our current line of Flight Sims? In alot of circumstances I would agree that RAM speed (and latency) might not make a discernible difference, but there are a number of test and threads on here to show that faster RAM will benefit P3D.

Hi Kael,

No, they have no specific knowledge of P3D. Given the 3200 set has a "true latency" of 8.75 and the 3000 is 9.33 I asked if the difference would make a difference and they said not. The price difference is £134 for 32GB. I saw no point in throwing money away.

How does it benefit P3D specifically? I'm not aware of any memory specific tests with all other hardware the same.

7 hours ago, joemiller said:

 

I just purchased the Intel 8086K and managed to Overclock this guy to 5.3Ghz, along with 16Gb of RAM at  4266 Mhz. This along with an Nvidia 2070 card (will be getting an 11Gb soon).

 

 

Great result Joe! What sort of temps are you seeing at 5.3 GHz? Voltage? Have you delidded?

My 8700K does 5.2 GHz with HT off, it's delidded. Won't do 5.3 though. Although I haven't tried voltage at 1.5, the max Intel recommend. 

Is that 4266 Mhz Ram the XMP setting, or did you push it beyond the XMP setting? 

Edited November 1, 20187 yr by martin-w

I don't recall exactly how to do the math but the Mhz value alone tells you nothing about the speed of memory.

It always has to be considered in conjunction with the Case latency. The lower the CL value the better. so indeed 3200 mhz can be faster than 4266mhz.

There is a lot of marketing hype with memory Mhz values.

Memory did make a difference with FSX. The faster the memory the less long frame stutters you would get.

I am not sure if that still holds for P3D but I would guess that it does.

I recall Saab 340 tested RAM speed a few years ago, with FSX though not P3D. Faster RAM helped, but not by much. I recall it was just a few percent, 3 or 4 percent from 3000 to 3800, something like that. As for P3D... I have no experience of that, so no idea if the increase in performance is significant or not. I would suspect the same as FSX, a small increase in performance. 

Ray has GSkill RAM on the way, which generally overclocks above the XMP profile well, so could be nudged up in frequency. 

 

 

Edited November 1, 20187 yr by martin-w

6 minutes ago, Avidean said:

I don't recall exactly how to do the math but the Mhz value alone tells you nothing about the speed of memory.

It always has to be considered in conjunction with the Case latency. The lower the CL value the better. so indeed 3200 mhz can be faster than 4266mhz.

There is a lot of marketing hype with memory Mhz values.

Memory did make a difference with FSX. The faster the memory the less long frame stutters you would get.

I am not sure if that still holds for P3D but I would guess that it does.

The formula for determining "true latency" is:-

2000 x (CL / Tested Speed)

For a 3200 CL14 set that will be 2000 x (14 / 3200) = 8.75

For a 3000 CL14 set that will be 2000 x (14 / 3000) = 9.33

For the fastest memory - 4000 with a CL of 19 the result is 9.50

So my 3000 CL14 memory is faster than 4000 CL19. And £238 cheaper!

11 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

The formula for determining "true latency" is:-

2000 x (CL / Tested Speed)

For a 3200 CL14 set that will be 2000 x (14 / 3200) = 8.75

For a 3000 CL14 set that will be 2000 x (14 / 3000) = 9.33

For the fastest memory - 4000 with a CL of 19 the result is 9.50

So my 3000 CL14 memory is faster than 4000 CL19. And £238 cheaper!

 

 

 

Quote

 

Which is more important: speed or latency?

Based on in-depth engineering analysis and extensive testing in the Crucial Performance Lab, the answer to this classic question is speed. In general, as speeds have increased, true latencies have remained approximately the same, meaning faster speeds enable you to achieve a higher level of performance. True latencies haven't necessarily increased, just CAS latencies. And CL ratings are an inaccurate, and often misleading, indicator of true latency (and memory) performance.

 

 

 

http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency

 

 

Edited November 1, 20187 yr by martin-w

4 minutes ago, martin-w said:

 

 

Which is more important: speed or latency?

Based on in-depth engineering analysis and extensive testing in the Crucial Performance Lab, the answer to this classic question is speed. In general, as speeds have increased, true latencies have remained approximately the same, meaning faster speeds enable you to achieve a higher level of performance. True latencies haven't necessarily increased, just CAS latencies. And CL ratings are an inaccurate, and often misleading, indicator of true latency (and memory) performance.

 

http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency

Well now, they would say that wouldn't they? They are in the business after all, of selling you ever more expensive ram.......

 

If that is the case then I have been given conflicting advice here on AvSim. 🙄

24 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

Well now, they would say that wouldn't they? They are in the business after all, of selling you ever more expensive ram.......

 

Ha... yes but if they were involved in a conspiracy theory to lie to us it would be 100% transparent and obvious to every technical expert out there. So no, I don't accept that.

 

Oh god not Linus, please not Linus. 

Edited November 1, 20187 yr by martin-w