What will P3D make of the 10 core Comet Lake CPU later this year, when planning for future P3Dv5 performance is unknown at the moment. 

1 hour ago, rjfry said:

What will P3D make of the 10 core Comet Lake CPU later this year...

May not be as soon as many had hoped (including Intel): https://www.techspot.com/news/79820-leaked-intel-roadmap-shows-10nm-desktop-cpus-wont.html

Greg

3 hours ago, lownslo said:

May not be as soon as many had hoped (including Intel): https://www.techspot.com/news/79820-leaked-intel-roadmap-shows-10nm-desktop-cpus-wont.html

Greg

The Intel roadmap includes a 14nm 10 Core Comet Lake possibly early 20 and a Rocket Lake 2021, 10nm Ice Lake Mobil CPUs this year. 

Edited April 26, 20197 yr by rjfry

A tech company's "roadmap" is a most critical path forward... for the marketing department.

On 3/2/2019 at 12:18 PM, TrentXWB said:

Thanks! I got my 9700K a few weeks ago with Z370F strix but I am still waiting for FSL to drop their update to test it out. Just now thinking about the RAM. 3200 C14 or C16, price/ performance gain?

I'm glad you went for the 9700K.

I can say that my 8700K (6 core) is most definitely NOT enough cores for texture loading.  You are better off with your 8-core.

I am able to run HT=on which avoids the core saturation problem (blurries, from not having enough cores available for texture loading) and still maintain 5.0 ghz with reasonable temps. This is on water with an h110i.

On 2/3/2019 at 2:32 PM, NBouc said:

Hi Hendrick,

I recently upgraded from a 6600K OC to 4.5 GHz to a 9700K OC to 4.9 GHz (cannot keep stable higher that 4.9, but I've seen others achieve 5.0+ ) and I am happy with it. I chose the 9700K over the 8700K because I mainly use this computer for P3D v4.4 and don't really need HT (with the 8700K, I would have disabled HT anyway for better P3D stability) since I don't use any software taking advantage of HT (no video editing etc...). Going with 8 cores was the logical choice in my case and I see P3D using them all with less micro-pauses compared to my previous 6600K.

If, like me, your main use is P3D, then the 9700K might be a good choice. The 8700K is still a very good CPU, easily overclockable to 5.0 GHz, but might generates more heat when OC than the 9700K in my opinion. At 4.9 GHz, my 9700K is cooled on air with a Noctua DH-U14S and runs between 60-65C under load, with a few short peaks at 70C.

Since I never had the 8700K, I cannot offer any hard evidence of which one will best fit your need, I simply choose the 9700K for the reasons stated above, following my personal guts feeling. Lets see if some 8700K users can offer some more info regarding their choice. May be they will come up with some experience to steer you their way 😉

Best regards,

 

i dont have a 9700k yet but pretty sure its better especially for p3d since hyperthread is pointless, thats why thats the one im gonna buy

45 minutes ago, oscarduran10 said:

i dont have a 9700k yet but pretty sure its better especially for p3d since hyperthread is pointless, thats why thats the one im gonna buy

Good choice Oscar 🙂

 

On 4/26/2019 at 4:54 PM, Mace said:

I'm glad you went for the 9700K.

I can say that my 8700K (6 core) is most definitely NOT enough cores for texture loading.  You are better off with your 8-core.

I am able to run HT=on which avoids the core saturation problem (blurries, from not having enough cores available for texture loading) and still maintain 5.0 ghz with reasonable temps. This is on water with an h110i.

A simple test to ascertain whether HT on is a good thing or not vis a vis terrain texture loading demand:

Set up a flight in an area w/ ultra-high terrain texture loading demand.   Set your stop watch and hit FLY, then measure the time it takes to load the entire scene.  Do this for HT on and HT off w/ a clean slate fresh boot, w/ an appropriate affinity mask.   I did this test at the behest of SteveW and discovered on no uncertain terms HT on reduced load time quite substantially.  I plan to purchase a I9-9900K for my next build based on the same logic of having 16 LPs available if and as needed.  I'm on an ancient SB-E 6 core CPU and the dang thing won't die!   If it means only running the main thread at 4.7 or 4.8Ghz the difference between that clockspeed and 5.0Ghz is virtually meaningless in terms of performance.  Even on my old CPU and now old GTX Titan I have liquid smooth video performance.

10 hours ago, Noel said:

A simple test to ascertain whether HT on is a good thing or not vis a vis terrain texture loading demand:

Set up a flight in an area w/ ultra-high terrain texture loading demand.   Set your stop watch and hit FLY, then measure the time it takes to load the entire scene.  Do this for HT on and HT off w/ a clean slate fresh boot, w/ an appropriate affinity mask.   I did this test at the behest of SteveW and discovered on no uncertain terms HT on reduced load time quite substantially.  I plan to purchase a I9-9900K for my next build based on the same logic of having 16 LPs available if and as needed.  I'm on an ancient SB-E 6 core CPU and the dang thing won't die!   If it means only running the main thread at 4.7 or 4.8Ghz the difference between that clockspeed and 5.0Ghz is virtually meaningless in terms of performance.  Even on my old CPU and now old GTX Titan I have liquid smooth video performance.

LM recomend HToff they need the core0 (main tread) to do as much clock cycles as possible , 6 pysical cores with HT 16lp with core 0 unmaked is like a cpu with 7.2 physical cores., the max work a ht tread can do is 25% of a physical core 4treads (LP) = 1 core 

4core cpus its recomend if you have HTon terr loading is better , 

i have tested this on lot of differnt cpus , 4 core 4790k-7700k, 6 core 8700k, 8core 5960X-9900k, 12core 7920x , 18core 7980XE, HT on an off.

when you have 8 cores or more its not a big difference after 10cores its hard to see any difference at all , example the 7980XE the htoff was faster not much but mesurable ( run rhe test with same clockspeed) with HT off and 300mhz higer clock with htoff its was clearly faster.

the upcoming 10core Intel is a intresting CPU for simmers if it can clock as the 9700-9900k but if its clock the same or less you dont gone see any difference.or worce performance in P3D.

Keep in mind that a 8700k at 5.0ghz is 35% faster then your old pal 4.8ghz SB-E cpu

Edited May 18, 20197 yr by westman

On 5/18/2019 at 1:19 AM, westman said:

LM recomend HToff they need the core0 (main tread) to do as much clock cycles as possible , 6 pysical cores with HT 16lp with core 0 unmaked is like a cpu with 7.2 physical cores., the max work a ht tread can do is 25% of a physical core 4treads (LP) = 1 core 

4core cpus its recomend if you have HTon terr loading is better , 

i have tested this on lot of differnt cpus , 4 core 4790k-7700k, 6 core 8700k, 8core 5960X-9900k, 12core 7920x , 18core 7980XE, HT on an off.

when you have 8 cores or more its not a big difference after 10cores its hard to see any difference at all , example the 7980XE the htoff was faster not much but mesurable ( run rhe test with same clockspeed) with HT off and 300mhz higer clock with htoff its was clearly faster.

the upcoming 10core Intel is a intresting CPU for simmers if it can clock as the 9700-9900k but if its clock the same or less you dont gone see any difference.or worce performance in P3D.

Keep in mind that a 8700k at 5.0ghz is 35% faster then your old pal 4.8ghz SB-E cpu

I assumed a theoretical point of diminishing returns vis a vis more cores, but clearly w/ my old SB-E HT on was much better than HT off.  Also, today is today, and things move on.  With I9-9900K one can use HT or not, but that is not true w/ 9700K.  Right now 9900K looks the best.  I'm very happy to see 9900K employs a soldered IHS.  By my review of single-core performance over my 3930K, at the anticipated max clock speed of a 9700K/9900K we should see ~44% increase which will be very meaningful when combined w/ a 1080Ti or 2080Ti.   As I say my 3930K doesn't want to die so we'll wait until it does before assembling a new system.  I like to see serious increases in performance before replacing perfectly fine parts.  I've got 6 years now on this machine and zillions of flight hours overclocked w/ HT on to 4.42Ghz.   What a robust CPU!  On air no less!

Edited May 19, 20197 yr by Noel