Hi guys,  I currently have a 7700K that is overclocked to 4.9 with HT enabled.  I see there is some good sales right now for the 9600K 6 core processor.  Would there be any noticeable performance gain with this upgrade?  I do understand I will have to upgrade my mobo.  PC is mainly used for gaming so I don't think I would benefit from HT.  Any opinions welcome.  Thanks!  

Hey Matt-

Why don't you tell us why you made the post ....where do you need the performance?

I'm going to tell you that the 7700 is closer to the 4770 in p3d performance than a 6 or 8 core Coffee Lake, and if you run a 4k monitor at 30Hz then the Coffee Lake is probably not going to help much.

Now, if you run P3D like I do then the I'd drop the 7700 right now and get the 9600K. The difference would be like comparing night to day.

39 minutes ago, mpw8679 said:

  Any opinions welcome.  Thanks!  

 

3 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

Hey Matt-

Why don't you tell us why you made the post ....where do you need the performance?

I'm going to tell you that the 7700 is closer to the 4770 in p3d performance than a 6 or 8 core Coffee Lake, and if you run a 4k monitor at 30Hz then the Coffee Lake is probably not going to help much.

Now, if you run P3D like I do then the I'd drop the 7700 right now and get the 9600K. The difference would be like comparing night to day.

 

Originally I was just a GA flier for the most part.  But now I am getting into the heavies in very demanding scenery.  ORBX regions, FSDT KLAX, Flightbeam KSFO, and DD KSEA for example.  Aircraft I use are PMDG everything, FSLabs A320, and Maddog X.  I have 1080ti's in SLI and the eye candy cranked up.  I average around 50-75% usage per GPU.  I use a 3840x1600 ultra wide monitor ran at 30hz and a 4k monitor for other side apps.  If I could get another 3-5 FPS and improved texture loading I would be interested in an upgrade.  I just wasn't sure if going from a 4/8 to a 6/6 cpu would have a positive influence on performance.

2 hours ago, mpw8679 said:

  Any opinions welcome.  Thanks!  

The 9600 will certainly help with terrain but will not save you from the vsync pit.

17 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

The 9600 will certainly help with terrain but will not save you from the vsync pit.

I appreciate your input.  I wonder if future Intel cpu's will be 370/390 mobo compatible?  If I knew I was going to be somewhat future proof it would make my decision much easier.

43 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

The 9600 will certainly help with terrain but will not save you from the vsync pit.

The vsync pit?  Huh??

2 hours ago, mpw8679 said:

I appreciate your input.  I wonder if future Intel cpu's will be 370/390 mobo compatible?  If I knew I was going to be somewhat future proof it would make my decision much easier.

I don't think we'll be hearing from Intel for awhile. <g>

Really though, it sounds like you have an itch ....the itch is real and not going away until you scratch it. Consult Bob S., he's posted positive feedback on his 7700 vs coffee lake experience.

-Happy trails

3 hours ago, mpw8679 said:

Originally I was just a GA flier for the most part.  But now I am getting into the heavies in very demanding scenery.  ORBX regions, FSDT KLAX, Flightbeam KSFO, and DD KSEA for example.  Aircraft I use are PMDG everything, FSLabs A320, and Maddog X.  I have 1080ti's in SLI and the eye candy cranked up.  I average around 50-75% usage per GPU.  I use a 3840x1600 ultra wide monitor ran at 30hz and a 4k monitor for other side apps.  If I could get another 3-5 FPS and improved texture loading I would be interested in an upgrade.  I just wasn't sure if going from a 4/8 to a 6/6 cpu would have a positive influence on performance.

Just upgraded from a 7700K to an 8086K.  Yes, a 50% increase in the number of physical cores and L3 cache made a difference, nearly putting an end to the occasional stutters driven by terrain/texture loading.  In my previous 7700K build, P3D used cores 2-3 for texture/terrain loading, and when transitioning across scenery tiles, especially in areas with complex terrain and dense vector data, those two cores would max out, and frames would dip below the magic 30fps line where things stay super-smooth Vsynced with my 30Hz 4K monitor.  The 8086K doubles that and puts four physical cores in play for terrain/texture loading and fusion, while actually bumping up the clock speed 6% to 5.3GHz.  I also upgraded to some very fast RAM (about 20% faster than my previous build), which also plays a part in smoothing things out, especially in autogen loading.

Don't bank on a motherboard chipset being future-proof...I approach the CPU/mobo as a matched set, and truth be told, I have never once upgraded a CPU on an existing motherboard.

Regards

7 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Just upgraded from a 7700K to an 8086K.  Yes, a 50% increase in the number of physical cores and L3 cache made a difference, nearly putting an end to the occasional stutters driven by terrain/texture loading.  In my previous 7700K build, P3D used cores 2-3 for texture/terrain loading, and when transitioning across scenery tiles, especially in areas with complex terrain and dense vector data, those two cores would max out, and frames would dip below the magic 30fps line where things stay super-smooth Vsynced with my 30Hz 4K monitor.  The 8086K doubles that and puts four physical cores in play for terrain/texture loading and fusion, while actually bumping up the clock speed 6% to 5.3GHz.  I also upgraded to some very fast RAM (about 20% faster than my previous build), which also plays a part in smoothing things out, especially in autogen loading.

Don't bank on a motherboard chipset being future-proof...I approach the CPU/mobo as a matched set, and truth be told, I have never once upgraded a CPU on an existing motherboard.

Regards

The texture loading pauses and stutters is my biggest issue right now.  It happens at almost every large payware airport regardless of settings.  So theoretically if the 9600k will overclock to 5ghz along with two added cores it sounds as if it would be a good upgrade.  Do u have hyper threading enabled?  I would think the 8086K and 9600K would be similar in performance if u took HT out of the equation.  I currently have HT enabled on my 7700K and it seems to make a small noticeable improvement.  

No HT on the 8086K, but I was using it on the 7700K.

Not sure what would make the 9600K desirable over the 8086K at this point.

Another thought...if you upgrade, consider using your existing system for your side apps and get that second (4K!) display off your sim PC--every time I've tried it, multiple displays get seriously in the way of performance.  I typically upgrade my flight sim box and move the current one (or parts of it) over to my side PC, where I run ActiveSky, ATC apps like Radar Contact or VPilot, and Aivlasoft's EFB/moving map.  I don't know that running the ancillary programs networked makes a huge difference, but getting that other monitor off the computer just might.

Regards

 

7 minutes ago, w6kd said:

No HT on the 8086K, but I was using it on the 7700K.

Not sure what would make the 9600K desirable over the 8086K at this point.

Another thought...if you upgrade, consider using your existing system for your side apps and get that second (4K!) display off your sim PC--every time I've tried it, multiple displays get seriously in the way of performance.  I typically upgrade my flight sim box and move the current one (or parts of it) over to my side PC, where I run ActiveSky, ATC apps like Radar Contact or VPilot, and Aivlasoft's EFB/moving map.  I don't know that running the ancillary programs networked makes a huge difference, but getting that other monitor off the computer just might.

Regards

 

I will give it some thought. Thanks for the input.

15 minutes ago, mpw8679 said:

The texture loading pauses and stutters is my biggest issue right now.  It happens at almost every large payware airport regardless of settings. 

I don't consider that pause when first coming into range of an add-on airport as a "stutter" per se, but rather a loading delay driven by P3D trying to take the entire scenery and push it to VRAM in one gulp.  Those pauses are definitely shorter with a fast PC, but no hardware in existence will stop that from happening right now...I think that's a problem that needs to be solved programatically by L-M by somehow limiting the uptake on scenery objects in those situations.

 

18 hours ago, w6kd said:

I don't consider that pause when first coming into range of an add-on airport as a "stutter" per se, but rather a loading delay driven by P3D trying to take the entire scenery and push it to VRAM in one gulp.  Those pauses are definitely shorter with a fast PC, but no hardware in existence will stop that from happening right now...I think that's a problem that needs to be solved programatically by L-M by somehow limiting the uptake on scenery objects in those situations.

 

That makes sense.  So I’m going to for the upgrade.  I’m also looking at the 9700k as well.  I like the idea of 8 physical cores.  Would P3d take advantage of the two extra cores over the 9600k?