Recommended Posts

I know it's early still, but any thoughts on the value of the 9900k vs 8086k for P3D v4?  Early reports don't seem to show much overclocking room for the 9900k and temps are pretty high.  Single core, the 8086k is equal with out of the box with turbo and lower temps.  Possibly even slightly higher overclocking potential to the 5.2-5.3 GHz range. 

I almost exclusively run P3D v4 and DCS World.  So the 2 extra cores appear useless to me, and single and 2 core speeds with turbo or mild overclock appear the same.  Right now, I'm feeling the 8086k might be the better choice in this situation, but am wondering if anyone has any thoughts?  I am planning on a z390 chipset MB either way. 

Edited by ESzczesniak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

The 8700K would be even better if you ask me. The only difference to the 8086K is the single core speed of 5Ghz on the 8086K and it's a cheaper variant that will overclock the same (if it's the case).

8086K is just marketing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, ESzczesniak said:

I know it's early still, but any thoughts on the value of the 9900k vs 8086k for P3D v4?  Early reports don't seem to show much overclocking room for the 9900k and temps are pretty high.  Single core, the 8086k is equal with out of the box with turbo and lower temps.  Possibly even slightly higher overclocking potential to the 5.2-5.3 GHz range. 

I almost exclusively run P3D v4 and DCS World.  So the 2 extra cores appear useless to me, and single and 2 core speeds with turbo or mild overclock appear the same.  Right now, I'm feeling the 8086k might be the better choice in this situation, but am wondering if anyone has any thoughts?  I am planning on a z390 chipset MB either way. 

I just went through this same process. I decided to go with the 8086K even though it cost a bit more. I just felt that it was a higher Bin and stood a somewhat better chance to get a solid overclock with less heat to deal with. I am only a week or so into this new build and so far I am happy with my decision. I went with the ASUS Hero XI Z390 board also and AIO cooler. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was planning on the 9900K, but got caught out in the open with the "in stock and available for preorder" lies being told by Newegg's advertising dept.  Had an armful of parts for the new build with the return clock ticking, so decided to gamble a little and go for a $380 8086K when I found it in-stock at the local (well, sorta local) Microcenter.  My previous build was a quad-core 7700K running at 5.0 GHz.  I moved up to fast 3600 MHz CAS 15 RAM.  I also transplanted two 1080Ti eVGA FTW3 Elite GPUs from the previous build.

The 6-core 8086K brought it and then some.  I found it trivially easy to overclock to 5.3 GHz (HT off and with a good custom water loop) without delidding...it runs Prime95 (with AVX disabled) in the mid 70s at 5.3 GHz/1.40v...P3Dv4 temps are 40 to mid 50s with short excursions to the high 60s when loads peak across most/all of the cores. 

I run P3D locked to 30 fps using VSync+triple buffering and a 30Hz 4K TV, with frames set at unlimited.  The 7700K was able to hold 30 fps most of the time with some moderation on the slider settings.  The 8086K (and fast RAM) allows me to move up the autogen densities and LOD radius, and noticeably reduced the occasional stutters seen in high-density scenery areas like ORBX SoCal, and really ironed out the occasional long stutters seen when loading terrain/textures while crossing tile boundaries--the 8086K doubles the number of cores dedicated to the terrain/texture loading, and brings an additional 50% more on-die level 3 cache.  The 9900K would have tripled the number of terrain/scenery cores and doubled the L3 cache.  At the same clock speed, the 9900K would likely bring some marginal improvement to scenery loading, but there's still some doubt as to whether the chip would clock as high as the 8086K without overheating.

Would I have liked to try out that 9900K?  Yes, but I'm really happy with the 8086K,  I could still move up to the 9900K later, however out of principle I can't/won't stay on Newegg's backorder list for 3 months waiting.  Now it'll take a heapin' helpin' of reputable third-party data convincing me that the production 9900K chips will generally overclock at least as high as the 8086K and that if they do, the extra cores and cache provide more than a very trivial bump in P3D performance.  Right now both of those propositions look to be on shaky ground.

Silicon Lottery said that 100% of the 8086K chips they processed overclocked to at least 5.0 GHz.  Not so with the 8600K/8700Ks, especially after Intel started cherry-picking the best batches of 8700Ks and rebranding them as the 8086K.  The 8086K isn't a sure thing in the overclocking dept, but it's pretty darned close.  And at 5 GHz and above it's an awesome processor for P3D.  We don't know yet how the mainstream production 9900K CPUs will fare as a group.  A bird in the hand...

That's my two cents.

Regards

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too was planning on a 9900K build, but after seeing the early reviews coupled with the scarcity of the 9900K and then being offered a new 8086K for $5US over what an 8700K costs, the decision to go with the 8086K was easy.  Like Bob, I've installed the CPU in a Maximus XI Hero o/c to 5.3GHz and 16GB of GSkill C15 3600 memory.  I've not reinstalled P3Dv4 yet, but in bench marking the new system I'm seeing a 15% - 18% increase in raw performance over my previous 4790K @4.8/16 GB DDR3 @ 2600 system.  That greater processing power will allow me to add more eye candy and maintain a good working performance level in the sim.  I too believe that most 8086K's will offer better single core performance that the 9900K.

The 8086K is just a binned 8700K, so folks will have to decide for themselves if the higher retail price of the 8086K is worth it.  As to whether the 9900K is worth waiting for...  again that's a personal choice.  But for me, after spending almost 40 years working with the tech industry, I too followed Bob's "bird in the hand" philosophy rather than wait (and then possibly wait some more) and then pay a lot more for the 9900K whenever they're available in quantity.

HTH,

Greg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same boat here and appreciate the OP for starting the topic.

I've been sitting off waiting to see what happens with the 9900k/9700k fallout before making a decision on my new build. Normally it would be a no brainer for me to go with the latest processor but in this instance, all reports really seem to indicate that for P3D use alone the extra cost of the 9900k processor isn't going to produce any real tangible difference. Plus the 8086 does seem to be getting some great overclocks and 6 cores seems enough for P3D (although I note Rob A. has made some comments about 8 cores being the sweet spot).

 

For that reason I'm also 99% committed to an 8086k. For me my focus has now turned to RAM. I'm looking for something that has a 4 in front of the speed (4000MHz/4266MHz) but they're not easy to find and are very expensive so I might have to settle for something in the high 3's (38xxMHz etc). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the comments.  I found everything instock and pulled the trigger.  For the first time in my life, I'm able to afford a near or at the top-of-the line build.  I went with:

i7-8086k (hoping for a stable lower temp 5.2 GHz overclock)

Corsair H115i (first go with water cooling)

Asus Maximus XI Hero

Corsair DDR4 3200 MHz C16 32 GB RAM (not the 3800 MHz discussed, but well reviewed...and 3800 was $8-900)

ZOTAC RTX 2080ti

And the usual HDD, case, etc.  Will reuse a lot of my old SSDs.

Will be a week or two before its all here and running, but will keep everyone posted.

Edited by ESzczesniak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ESzczesniak said:

Thank you all for the comments.  I found everything instock and pulled the trigger.  For the first time in my life, I'm able to afford a near or at the top-of-the line build.  I went with:

i7-8086k (hoping for a stable lower temp 5.2 GHz overclock)

Corsair H115i (first go with water cooling)

Asus Maximus XI Hero

Corsair DDR4 3200 MHz C16 32 GB RAM (not the 3800 MHz discussed, but well reviewed...and 3800 was $8-900)

ZOTAC RTX 2080ti

And the usual HDD, case, etc.  Will reuse a lot of my old SSDs.

Will be a week or two before its all here and running, but will keep everyone posted.

You should consider adding an NVMe drive. 

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lownslo said:

You should consider adding an NVMe drive. 

Greg

I have one coming for the boot drive, but P3D will be on a separate 1 TB SATA drive. Easier to change that in the future than boot drives. 

I’m a little bit nervous getting windows on this drive. Conceptually should be about the same as anything else, but googling seems to show some people having trouble. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I continue reading topics like this and have to say. What all are you (plural) running and driving?  Would you please in addition to all the system specs discussion, continue by stating what comprises your overall sim environment.  Are you all flying exclusively the latest most sophisticated PMDG models, with 100% Orbx and/or photo real scenery? With three or four monitor setups and multiple high end graphics cards, and self fashioned cockpits with 20+ USB devices?

Discussions like this are the reason I am still on an incredibly smooth FSX platform with Megascenry v3 PerfectColor scenery, and Milviz, Carenado, A2A, and RealAir model aircraft.

Your discussions are blocking me from considering P3D, and based on a number of recent discussions I have seen, I am by far not the only one!  There is certainly an increment of difference, but do I really need to invest thousands of more dollars for just that increment?

Edited by fppilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, fppilot said:

Your discussions are blocking me from considering P3D, and based on a number of recent discussions I have seen, I am by far not the only one!  There is certainly an increment of difference, but do I really need to invest thousands of more dollars for just that increment?

No you don't, but P3D is worthy of whatever investment you choose to make.  

Edited by FunknNasty
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@fppilot I'm running P3Dv4 quite happily on a lesser spec than you, 5 years old (i5 Sandybridge 2500K@4.5 GHz, 16GB DDR3-1600, GTX980 4GB. FTX ORBX Global+Vector+OpenLC EU. FreeMeshX. REX4TD+SC. ORBX Sco. Horizon VFR X Photographic v2 Eng+Wal, UK2000 VFR Airfields v2, UK2000 Xtreme airports. Majestic Q400) with quite high settings.

The specs being discussed in this thread are pretty much the ultimate you get in hardware at the moment, for the ultimate experience and future proofing. But they are not essential to have a good time! I'm glad to be rid of OOM worries and have some nice cockpit shadowing. P3D will generally run better than FSX for the same graphics quality as it's able to utilise the graphics card more, freeing the processor up a bit.

8700k vs 8080K was interesting to read about, didn't realise Intel had started doing more precise binning of the Ks.

Edited by ckyliu
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My I9-9900K runs with 5.2Ghz (HT off) @ about 80°-90° C with the Corsair H150i. I briefly tried 5.3, which worked for about an hour, than it stopped. I updated my BIOS just yesterday and then I will try it again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ESzczesniak said:

I’m a little bit nervous getting windows on this drive. Conceptually should be about the same as anything else, but googling seems to show some people having trouble. 

When the time comes, create a streamlined Win 10 installation on a thumb drive (16GB or better), which will load Win 10 with all the updates.  See https://www.windowscentral.com/how-create-windows-10-usb-bootable-media-uefi-support  It works a lot better than the USB stick that comes with Win 10, and you avoid having to wait for Windows to download and install several year's worth of updates.

5 hours ago, Chandler said:

My I9-9900K runs with 5.2Ghz (HT off) @ about 80°-90° C with the Corsair H150i. I briefly tried 5.3, which worked for about an hour, than it stopped. I updated my BIOS just yesterday and then I will try it again. 

Too hot for me.  80 deg C is where I draw the line.

15 hours ago, fppilot said:

Your discussions are blocking me from considering P3D, and based on a number of recent discussions I have seen, I am by far not the only one!  There is certainly an increment of difference, but do I really need to invest thousands of more dollars for just that increment?

No you don't.  The point is that with P3Dv4 you CAN make that investment and scale your performance up.  Of course, past a point it is definitely not a linear relationship between price and performance.  It never is, though.  With FSX, there's a point beyond which a faster CPU/GPU, more RAM/VRAM, etc makes virtually no difference.  Put 32 GB of RAM in you FSX rig, and it still will only use 4.  If you have the resources and interest, you can pump up the hardware and really make P3D rock and roll...but going to the super high-performance end is definitely not required to enjoy the sim.  Sorta like it's fun to drive a stock '69 Corvette, but a LOT more fun with a high lift cam, a couple turbochargers, a Hurst shifter etc.

Regards

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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