My experience with Ryzen 2700x & P3d v4.4

[strider1 575]

4 hours ago, westman said:

iam out , you guys is completly out in the blue or only see red, the 9900k is still the king in p3d 

its only a 25% diff betwen a fullblown ryzen and my sim cpu intel 9900k, P3d v4.5

Its the same guys as the last time when first Ryzen came out, 

Its a great cpu but if you want out all from the sim INTEL 9900k 9700k 9600k 8700k is a better.

Thanks

 

And like I said last time, post your video review! And you are assuming the only program people use is P3D? Ryzen beats Intel in price per performance. And it's neck and neck and or beats Intel in a lot of programs. Plenty of reviews online!

4 hours ago, StAgre said:

I agree though not for the same reasons. If you want pure P3D performance, an overclocked 9600K will be within 1-2% of the 9900K for less than half the price, and should still beat the 3900X as well. 

Also, it's pretty much impossible to be GPU-bound in P3D at this pricepoint. It just does not run fast enough to outmatch a GPU capable of 60FPS at 4K.

I don't use P3D, so you may be correct. But in Xplane or any other modern game, you are going to be GPU bound on a higher resolution monitor. And at lower resolutions when you have plenty of FPS to spare, then it's not going to matter. I pick price per performance and or more cores to future proof! I won't be upgrading since my 1800X is more than adequate at 4k on Xplane.    

Edited July 8, 2019 by strider1

[G-RFRY 1,712]

Real Game benchmarks show Intel still best CPU for gaming and for CPU bound games even better.

[Nagmaal 16]

10 minutes ago, rjfry said:

Real Game benchmarks show Intel still best CPU for gaming and for CPU bound games even better.

If your talking about  John Papadopoulos article don't even bother. He took thousands of results from real reviewers, Cheri picked a couple with 5% better performance and called that a conclusion.  On 99% of real results AMD is on par with Intel, at a better price point. And no problematic supply shortage and no Security issues resulting in performance loss. 

[Nagmaal 16]

Their are not a lot of reviewers as thorough as Guru 3d.

https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_7_3700x_ryzen_9_3900x_review,28.html

If your lazy just read the results pages and conclusion. 

 

[G-RFRY 1,712]

Gamers Nexus has tested AMD CPUs 3700 if you are video editing then yes AMD is the one but in game benches Intel still has a performance advantage sorry.

Far Cry CPU limited 30fps advantage Intel.

Edited July 8, 2019 by rjfry

[Samany69 41]

to me AMD is the absolute choice, why? I'm not a fan of blue or red, I just look at the right tool for my case, I have over 30 pages of chrome open all the time, CATIA and MATLAB and Adobe PS open all time running ( not rendering ) and all of em going on an i7 3610QM paired with 16 GB DDR3L and an external ROG STRIX 1070ti + 500+120SSD ... building a new PC on an X570 crosshair VIII in September with a 3950X and 2x16GB 3600MHz DDR4  +2x Nvme drives..... I'm sure my P3D v.4 will be much much happier than ever....

 

edit: that 5-10 extra fps from 9900k compared to 3900x(3950x) ? seriously ??? I don't give a **** ...

 

Best Regards

Edited July 8, 2019 by Samany69

[Greggy_D 936]

7 hours ago, rjfry said:

Far Cry CPU limited 30fps advantage Intel.

Who plays at CPU limited in Far Cry????  NO ONE.

Here's something a bit more realistic and real-world from Techspot:

[Nagmaal 16]

These benchmarks tell me a lot more about what the new Ryzen CPU is doing. And now i didn't pick the treads that showed AMD wining, its very close actually, what I am trying to show is the benchmarks that give you the results with the least external factors.

I may be a AMD CPU word not allowed but having supported them since 2003 , I know when I have the inferior product. I know when AMD was wining with and I know when they were lagging behind badly. What I am seeing know is AMD starting to dominate Intel who have been way to complacent the last couple of years. Intel has been caught with their pants down and over Clocking the word not allowed out of their existing architecture, till they can make a major jump again. (No rumors on a new architecture from them yet. Apparently 7nm is not going well).

Intel Fan Boys should be glad, this is wake up call for Intel to get their fingers out of their buts and make something great. Then all of us benefit, Competition breeds excellence and we the consumers win.

Edited July 9, 2019 by Nagmaal

[westman 257]

3 hours ago, Nagmaal said:

These benchmarks tell me a lot more about what the new Ryzen CPU is doing. And now i didn't pick the treads that showed AMD wining, its very close actually, what I am trying to show is the benchmarks that give you the results with the least external factors.

I may be a AMD CPU word not allowed but having supported them since 2003 , I know when I have the inferior product. I know when AMD was wining with and I know when they were lagging behind badly. What I am seeing know is AMD starting to dominate Intel who have been way to complacent the last couple of years. Intel has been caught with their pants down and over Clocking the word not allowed out of their existing architecture, till they can make a major jump again. (No rumors on a new architecture from them yet. Apparently 7nm is not going well).

Intel Fan Boys should be glad, this is wake up call for Intel to get their fingers out of their buts and make something great. Then all of us benefit, Competition breeds excellence and we the consumers win.

Can give some more results , must be fare with Intel and AMD they have done great on the single core performance the OC is not great 

If you dont plan to OC the Ryzen is a solid investment, if you like to OC for use in the Sim Intel is better

i did run CB R20 with the 3900X and here is my results dont favor any  CPU vendor its allout what the scores you can get, cooling AIO 280 rad on all tests.

Cinebench R20 single core results done by me:

1800X                      417points    my allday rig.

3900X                       522points   best i can get with this chip 

3900X                        508points    with locked frq ( the max frq with all cores enabled)

9900K      Std            516points     the result i get

9900K     @5.2ghz     556points     most of the chips do this in the sim with HT/Off

9900k      @5.5ghz     582points    my allday P3D- XP11 settings ( have a golden chip)

Thanks

On 7/8/2019 at 12:20 AM, Greggy_D said:

So.....no test in P3D?  I wonder why.

Dont answer any coments from you anymore, have give you the answer , come with some test done by YOU a if you have the parts to do that, feels like the answer from you is RUDE .

 

Edited July 9, 2019 by westman

[SteveW 1,792]

With SMT or HT enabled P3D and FSX do not work appropriately with no AM presented. Since the first process of the sim is sharing a core with a 40% second process load which should be moved onto the next core or it is a noob mistake. With an AM specifying '01' on the first core met the second process will avoid that first core. Unfortunately, the results of testing these simulators is flawed in 99% of cases.

[SteveW 1,792]

So we hear about single threaded performance with respect to games, and we also hear about multi-core performance with respect to, for example, rendering a full-frame movie into a mobile version.

With the movie we can make the program look at each frame in turn or better still put a process on each core that each renders a frame. The more cores we have the faster the movie is rendered.

P3D and FSX are hybrid games, they have a requirement for a high performance process, rendering the screen, but they also have a requirement to go parallel when assembling data and scenery.

So we have to protect that main process from sharing the core it arrives on as it must run in a timely fashion.

We have to allocate only as many cores as is necessary, there is an optimum depending on system.

When enabling SMT or HT the system 'sees' twice as many cores, or rather Logical Processors (LPs). With no AM the simulator programs will use them all.

With any two threads on a core they are switched over periodically to appear to run simultaneously.

With SMT or HT enabled the performance is increased between the two threads. So in this way with several hundred threads or more the system runs more sweetly with HT or SMT.

We can't just turn on HT and say, "hey look, poor performance, man-o-man" because it is obvious we will see worse performance without the appropriate AM for the sim.

 

 

Edited July 9, 2019 by SteveW

[G-RFRY 1,712]

Gamers Nexus found in test on the latest Games the 9900K was GPU bound in some games that was using a 2080ti.

[F737MAX 5,603]

4 hours ago, westman said:

i did run CB R20 with the 3900X and here is my results dont favor any  CPU vendor its allout what the scores you can get, cooling AIO 280 rad on all tests.

Cinebench R20 single core results done by me:

1800X                      417points    my allday rig.

3900X                       522points   best i can get with this chip 

3900X                        508points    with locked frq ( the max frq with all cores enabled)

9900K      Std            516points     the result i get

9900K     @5.2ghz     556points     most of the chips do this in the sim with HT/Off

9900k      @5.5ghz     582points    my allday P3D- XP11 settings ( have a golden chip)

 

I don't often do this, but I'm calling out your 'results'.

On 3 different test websites, Cinebench R20 single thread results were:

Ryzen 9 3900X: 528 / 524 / 516      (PCWorld / CGDirector / LinusTechTips)
Intel I9-9900K: 509 / 513 / 511

You are the first person I've seen on any social media that is running 5.2Ghz regularly in P3D - a handful of people are running 5.1.

Given your bias towards promoting all things Intel, your post needed a rebuttal. Every quality reviewer has stated that the 3900X wins on rendering tests, even single thread.

There is no longer an IPC advantage for Intel over AMD, the 3700X and 3900X appear to be in the performance ballpark of a 9900K, the Zen2 CPUs (except for the 3900X) are considerably better priced than their Intel counterparts, enough to buy two quality sceneries for the sim (allowing for sales taxes).

All this makes the Ryzen CPUs very worthy of consideration if anyone is considering an upgrade, especially if you sim with a Zen 1 or Zen+ CPU - just change the chip and flash the bios, get a 15%+ performance improvement on a 2700X.

There's no denying that if you're already on a top Intel CPU, your P3D / XP experience is the best you can currently get. AMD has gained, but not entirely closed the gaming gap.
Despite my disappointment on the gaming benchmarks, based on what was expected from them after the Computex keynote, a Zen 2 CPU is going to appear in my PC very soon.

[westman 257]

1 hour ago, F737NG said:

I don't often do this, but I'm calling out your 'results'.

On 3 different test websites, Cinebench R20 single thread results were:

Ryzen 9 3900X: 528 / 524 / 516      (PCWorld / CGDirector / LinusTechTips)
Intel I9-9900K: 509 / 513 / 511

You are the first person I've seen on any social media that is running 5.2Ghz regularly in P3D - a handful of people are running 5.1.

Given your bias towards promoting all things Intel, your post needed a rebuttal. Every  has stated that the 3900X wins on rendering tests, even single thread.

There is no longer an IPC advantage for Intel over AMD, the 3700X and 3900X appear to be in the performance ballpark of a 9900K, the Zen2 CPUs (except for the 3900X) are considerably better priced than their Intel counterparts, enough to buy two quality sceneries for the sim (allowing for sales taxes).

All this makes the Ryzen CPUs very worthy of consideration if anyone is considering an upgrade, especially if you sim with a Zen 1 or Zen+ CPU - just change the chip and flash the bios, get a 15%+ performance improvement on a 2700X.

There's no denying that if you're already on a top Intel CPU, your P3D / XP experience is the best you can currently get. AMD has gained, but not entirely closed the gaming gap.
Despite my disappointment on the gaming benchmarks, based on what was expected from them after the Computex keynote, a Zen 2 CPU is going to appear in my PC very soon.

My 3900X 522/ not the best but close to the tests results? the 509 is with locked FRQ same as the all core clock.

9900k my result  516 not far from them  or ?

9900k yhat i have in the sim HTOff runs 582points in CB R20 not 5,2ghz regualiry i run it at 5.5ghz in P3D-V4.5 HF1 win 10 1903. ( the Chip is a Golden sample)

Check with Pete Dowson and Rob.A they run P3D with the same FRQ with 10C watercooling i do it with AIO ( Golden Chip)

you dont  think my results ar OK? here is a screen in P3D with pmdg 777 at essa if you can read cpuz you see the FRQ.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zx94qb8dshvffn7/P3D V4-5 9900k.png?dl=0

Keep on , think i was very close to the quality reviewers with my results.

They dont test the 9900k overclocked only STD , the Intel Chip have a lot of  OC headroom that the Amd not have

Thanks

Edited July 9, 2019 by westman

[F737MAX 5,603]

6 minutes ago, westman said:

My 3900X 522/ not the best but close to the tests results? the 509 is with locked FRQ same as the all core clock.

9900k my result  516 not far from them  or ?

9900k yhat i have in the sim HTOff runs 582points in CB R20 not 5,2ghz regualiry i run it at 5.5ghz in P3D-V4.5 HF1 win 10 1903.

you dont  think my results ar OK? here is a screen in P3D with pmdg 777 at essa if you can read cpuz you see the FRQ.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zx94qb8dshvffn7/P3D V4-5 9900k.png?dl=0

Keep on , think i was very close to the quality reviewers with my results.

They dont test the 9900k overclocked only STD , the Intel Chip have a lot of headroom that the Amd not have

Two things:
1. Your core voltage on your linked picture showing CPU-Z is missing.
2. Your core voltage from your CPU-Z benchmark signature, set at 5.6Ghz is 1.536v at only 64°C.

You must be running an impressive cooling setup on a renowned hot chip (delidded?) that reviewers on YouTube would make videos of.

For us mere mortals, your test results are irrelevant, as most of us only have good air / AIO water coolers.