Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

If you for some reason want to uppgrade to 8cores from a 6core cpu 8700k to 9900K.
you have a good Z370 Mobo with external usb 3.1 gen2 controller and not use wifi.
If you read the specs the only big difference is onboard Wifi and usb 3.1 gen2

I read in some treads here at Avsim that Z390 should OC better then the Z370 true?
or is it rumors that popped up on the net without any source.

Have start Overclocking a 9900k on my Z370 Apex MoBo .

Get the CPU stable with  5.4ghz HT-on and 5.5ghz   HT-off , cooling customloop 360 rad and D5 pump.
I write in a tread here at avsim that i pass the 9900k if i not find a really GOOD cpu, get lucky to find one.

The ASUS Z370 APEX Overclock as the Top of the line Z390 boards can even be sligtly better .

Funky Nasty if you find a good  9700k-9900k CPU , its the only you need.

here is a CB15 test run, no tweaks mems 4133 c17  no tweaking a std asus mem profile.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ibiovy3e17s50sl/snaphsot0091.png?dl=0

Edited by westman

Share this post


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

Posted (edited)

Daft question....  is it really worth the extra stress / instability / reduced life expectancy / expensive cooling etc etc..... for a 10 percent boost in clock speed ?

If you are getting 60 fps, we are talking 5 or 6 fps between 4.5 and 5 Ghz.

At a more common 30 fps target.... we are literally talking 3 ..... yes, THREE FPS.

Why do people push there systems so high for 3 to 6 fps benefit ? 

I can understand faster RAM and NvMe drives, as the synergy of these components leads to a much smoother experience.

......But ..... I have never understood why people will push their CPU an extra 100 to 200 Mhz, in turn raising the temperatures from 60 to over 80 degrees C, just for a few FPS.... ESPECIALLY, when turning down 1 or 2 sliders - just 1 notch - will probably DOUBLE that FPS gain !

 

Edited by Gabe777
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Gabe777 said:

Daft question....  is it really worth the extra stress / instability / reduced life expectancy / expensive cooling etc etc..... for a 10 percent boost in clock speed ?

If you are getting 60 fps, we are talking 5 or 6 fps between 4.5 and 5 Ghz.

At a more common 30 fps target.... we are literally talking 3 ..... yes, THREE FPS.

Why do people push there systems so high for 3 to 6 fps benefit ? 

I can understand faster RAM and NvMe drives, as the synergy of these components leads to a much smoother experience.

......But ..... I have never un.derstood why people will push their CPU an extra 100 to 200 Mhz, in turn raising the temperatures from 60 to over 80 degrees C, just for a few FPS.... ESPECIALLY, when turning down 1 or 2 sliders - just 1 notch - will probably DOUBLE that FPS gain !

 

Well stated. Apt points.👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, westman said:

If you for some reason want to uppgrade to 8cores from a 6core cpu 8700k to 9900K.
you have a good Z370 Mobo with external usb 3.1 gen2 controller and not use wifi.
If you read the specs the only big difference is onboard Wifi and usb 3.1 gen2

I read in some treads here at Avsim that Z390 should OC better then the Z370 true?
or is it rumors that popped up on the net without any source.

Have start Overclocking a 9900k on my Z370 Apex MoBo .

Get the CPU stable with  5.4ghz HT-on and 5.5ghz   HT-off , cooling customloop 360 rad and D5 pump.
I write in a tread here at avsim that i pass the 9900k if i not find a really GOOD cpu, get lucky to find one.

The ASUS Z370 APEX Overclock as the Top of the line Z390 boards can even be sligtly better .

 

Thanks for the report!

Rob A. reports at another forum that he's running 5.5 (assume he's still on the z390 Fomrula), but seems to require a 2 stage boot up process that is not unlike the start up sequence for a Saturn V rocket.

18 hours ago, westman said:

Funky Nasty if you find a good  9700k-9900k CPU , its the only you need.

here is a CB15 test run, no tweaks mems 4133 c17  no tweaking a std asus mem profile.

But that's just it ....what are the odds of me finding a "good" 9900 or 9700.

Yes! Nice Cinebench score  ....and I like those voltages.  WTG, man.

 

If given the chance, post some other performance screen shots.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gabe777 said:

Daft question....  is it really worth the extra stress / instability / reduced life expectancy / expensive cooling etc etc..... for a 10 percent boost in clock speed ?

If you are getting 60 fps, we are talking 5 or 6 fps between 4.5 and 5 Ghz.

At a more common 30 fps target.... we are literally talking 3 ..... yes, THREE FPS.

Why do people push there systems so high for 3 to 6 fps benefit ? 

I can understand faster RAM and NvMe drives, as the synergy of these components leads to a much smoother experience.

......But ..... I have never understood why people will push their CPU an extra 100 to 200 Mhz, in turn raising the temperatures from 60 to over 80 degrees C, just for a few FPS.... ESPECIALLY, when turning down 1 or 2 sliders - just 1 notch - will probably DOUBLE that FPS gain !

 

I take it you didn't fly into LAX this morning.  Off the charts beautiful -the broken clouds, city lights and lightning over the San Gabriel's  ....totally worth the price of admission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, FunknNasty said:

Thanks for the report!

Rob A. reports at another forum that he's running 5.5 (assume he's still on the z390 Fomrula), but seems to require a 2 stage boot up process that is not unlike the start up sequence for a Saturn V rocket.

But that's just it ....what are the odds of me finding a "good" 9900 or 9700.

Yes! Nice Cinebench score  ....and I like those voltages.  WTG, man.

 

If given the chance, post some other performance screen shots.

Thanks!

The 9900k have problems with Older B-die that ones for Z370 and Z270 on Z390 mems that do 4133-4266 with cr1 cant make that on Z390  about 100 mhz less, on the other hand the new kits is dont like cr1 you ar often stuck at cr2.

run P3D at 5.5ghz avx0 HT-off ,here a CB15 HT-off with little bclk, its very good cpu not need much vcore thats the key to have decent temps, 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hy8b9rzl4kopf8w/snaphsot0100.png?dl=0

Edited by westman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, westman said:

The 9900k have problems with Older B-die that ones for Z370 and Z270 on Z390 mems that do 4133-4266 with cr1 cant make that on Z390  about 100 mhz less, on the other hand the new kits is dont like cr1 you ar often stuck at cr2.

run P3D at 5.5ghz avx0 HT-off ,here a CB15 HT-off with little bclk, its very good cpu not need much vcore thats the key to have decent temps, 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hy8b9rzl4kopf8w/snaphsot0100.png?dl=0

Glad you mentioned the memory ....my memory does not like bios 1801, which I assume is geared up for the 9xxx coffee lakes. It runs about 5 to 7% slower than bios 1401. One of the reasons I went with the 8086. Well, that and I was pretty much guaranteed a 5.3 clock at voltages under 1.4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

Glad you mentioned the memory ....my memory does not like bios 1801, which I assume is geared up for the 9xxx coffee lakes. It runs about 5 to 7% slower than bios 1401. One of the reasons I went with the 8086. Well, that and I was pretty much guaranteed a 5.3 clock at voltages under 1.4.

seen the same but the z390 is worse, did a aida not bad much work to explore.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ss2qs4t5fw4ngxz/cachemem.png?dl=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, westman said:

seen the same but the z390 is worse, did a aida not bad much work to explore.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ss2qs4t5fw4ngxz/cachemem.png?dl=0

Well, I’m bummed now. I had a 4400 c18 kit that I tested with the 8600 and 8086 on the 1401 bios but NOT the 1801 .... wonder if the 4400 kit would have worked as advertised on the newer bios , they were horrible on the 1401.

....kicking myself for NOT trying the 4400 kit on the 1801 .....was going to do it but got lazy about it and then was up against the rma date.

edit: nice Aida score ....real nice

Edited by FunknNasty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

Well, I’m bummed now. I had a 4400 c18 kit that I tested with the 8600 and 8086 on the 1401 bios but NOT the 1801 .... wonder if the 4400 kit would have worked as advertised on the newer bios , they were horrible on the 1401.

....kicking myself for trying the 4400 kit on the 1801 .....was going to do it but got lazy about it and then was up against the rma date.

no my 4600 kit dont like cr1 with 1801, i run my old galaxy 4000 think they work better for now , my 4600 worked better on older bios but stuck at cr2.

my 9900k was a spare cpu this is how a real golden one performs on a nzkt 280 AIO 1.27v llc6 5.4ghz my do with the same cooling 1.34v (lovest vcore to pass CB15 not highest points) this is a ES chip my is retail

https://www.dropbox.com/s/f2y2ytblkis7fjv/golden binned.jpg?dl=0

Edited by westman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, FunknNasty said:

I take it you didn't fly into LAX this morning.  Off the charts beautiful -the broken clouds, city lights and lightning over the San Gabriel's  ....totally worth the price of admission.

No I didn't. But I know for a fact, that it would look just as good with 10 percent less autogen , or a little less anti aliasing, or shadow quality reduced a notch etc etc etc., to compensate for the 10 percent lower CPU power.

MOREOVER, I'll be able to do that flight every day for the next 5 years, while a PC running at 90 degrees, will be dead, long before then.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a short video aida64 stress test, the 9900k run with fractal AIO 360 and 1080TI cooled with a NZXT X42-G12.

the temps is stabilisized i max temp less then 80C in P3D not over 70C.

Its to much know how and nonsens clames like the 90c guy , and is it 10% with fast mems i dont think he knows what he talks about, my two cents.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I agree with @Gabe777 that pushing the CPU to its absolute limits is unwise with the benefits being so small. I have my i7-8086K set at 4.6Ghz now and I'm more than happy. If I need a few more fps at busy airports like EGLL or KLAX I just reduce UT Live from 100% down to a lower level. Removing 50+ Ai will have a significant impact on performance.

The worst performance I've had was on approach to Aerosoft Heathrow Xtended 09L with 230+ Ai and the fps hovered around 20. Still more than acceptable for a good landing. And that's running at UHD!

I accept there are people who want the maximum performance from their systems but don't understand their logic. Each to their own I suppose.

Edited by Ray Proudfoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I agree with @Gabe777 that pushing the CPU to its absolute limits is unwise with the benefits being so small. I have my i7-8086K set at 4.6Ghz now and I'm more than happy. If I need a few more fps at busy airports like EGLL or KLAX I just reduce UT Live from 100% down to a lower level. Removing 50+ Ai will have a significant impact on performance.

The worst performance I've had was on approach to Aerosoft Heathrow Xtended 09L with 230+ Ai and the fps hovered around 20. Still more than acceptable for a good landing. And that's running at UHD!

I accept there are people who want the maximum performance from their systems but don't understand their logic. Each to their own I suppose.

Ray its all up to you and Gabe77, can give you a small hint this system is atleast 30% faster and 2 more cores then your 8086k with slow 3000mhz mems.

As TS i hope you can start a tread there you discuss pushing your systems to the absolute limits , i have not push this to the limits yet iam on the safe side for 5-6years on other hand i get a new system to test soon.

After reading your Mega tread 5GHZ OC and even give you some answers, not sure you now what the absolute limits is atleast not on my system.

Edited by westman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@westman, enjoy your extreme system. I'm enjoying mine. I don't consider 3000Mhz memory slow.

it seems you're still not satisifed and want an even faster system. Addicted to speed? Sounds like it to me. 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@westman, enjoy your extreme system. I'm enjoying mine. I don't consider 3000Mhz memory slow.

it seems you're still not satisifed and want an even faster system. Addicted to speed? Sounds like it to me. 😂

Yes want a faster system, iam one of lucky that get new test hardware for free 

Share this post


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

I agree with @Gabe777 that pushing the CPU to its absolute limits is unwise with the benefits being so small. I have my i7-8086K set at 4.6Ghz now and I'm more than happy. If I need a few more fps at busy airports like EGLL or KLAX I just reduce UT Live from 100% down to a lower level. Removing 50+ Ai will have a significant impact on performance.

The worst performance I've had was on approach to Aerosoft Heathrow Xtended 09L with 230+ Ai and the fps hovered around 20. Still more than acceptable for a good landing. And that's running at UHD!

I accept there are people who want the maximum performance from their systems but don't understand their logic. Each to their own I suppose.

Totally.

I reduce Autogen from very dense to Normal and get a 30 percent boost !

Why would I pay over a 1000 quids to upgrade from a 7700k at 4.5 auto boost, plus a 1080 GTX , to a 9xxx and a 2080 ti, for a 25 percent boost ?

Equally, why fry my CPU - which never exceeds 65 degrees, for a boost of 5 to 10 FPS...?

FLIGHTSIM  has never looked so good... I run on a 32 inch MVA 2K monitor and P3D is gorgous.

I'll say it - I'm not afraid - I will not be greedy.

In 2 or 3 years, when a 6 or 700 quid investment will give me a 60 or 70 percent boost - without any stoopid overclocking - I may THEN upgrade, and my current hardware can be relegated to a media PC, for running 16K video at 1000 fps !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, westman said:

Ray its all up to you and Gabe77, can give you a small hint this system is atleast 30% faster and 2 more cores then your 8086k with slow 3000mhz mems.

I think you're underestimating the 9900K at 5.4/5.0 with 4000+ low latency memory ....I'd like to see Rays hardware configuration vs yours, with the p3d settings you run, set a with a FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=.01.  <vbg>

Edited by FunknNasty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Gabe777 said:

Totally.

I reduce Autogen from very dense to Normal and get a 30 percent boost !

Why would I pay over a 1000 quids to upgrade from a 7700k at 4.5 auto boost, plus a 1080 GTX , to a 9xxx and a 2080 ti, for a 25 percent boost ?

Equally, why fry my CPU - which never exceeds 65 degrees, for a boost of 5 to 10 FPS...?

FLIGHTSIM  has never looked so good... I run on a 32 inch MVA 2K monitor and P3D is gorgous.

I'll say it - I'm not afraid - I will not be greedy.

In 2 or 3 years, when a 6 or 700 quid investment will give me a 60 or 70 percent boost - without any stoopid overclocking - I may THEN upgrade, and my current hardware can be relegated to a media PC, for running 16K video at 1000 fps !

My processor runs at 70c and processes 2x what yours does.

I probably paid 20% more for my hardware than you did for yours but I'm probably getting 2x the performance ...greedy? I call it surplus value.

I ran a Sandybridge at 5.0 for 5 years ....the 1st of year of use I was publishing benchmarks at 5.4 Ghz .... The person I sold it to says it's still running strong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

I think you're underestimating the 9900K at 5.4/5.0 with 4000+ low latency memory ....I'd like to see Rays hardware configuration vs yours, with the p3d settings you run, set a with a FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=.01.  <vbg>

Iam a nice guy not want to harm them to much, you ar probaly right my friend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@westmanhasn’t disclosed his graphics card or resolution. And @FunknNastyis running at 2560*@1440 which for a 1080Ti is like running a Ferrari at 50mph.

Why aren’t you running at 4K when your kit can support it?

I don’t have all sliders to the right. I fly Boeing so have no need to see every building in P3D.

And what is FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=.01 all about? I thought P3D didn’t need tweaks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

My processor runs at 70c and processes 2x what yours does.

I probably paid 20% more for my hardware than you did for yours but I'm probably getting 2x the performance ...greedy? I call it surplus value.

I ran a Sandybridge at 5.0 for 5 years ....the 1st of year of use I was publishing benchmarks at 5.4 Ghz .... The person I sold it to says it's still running strong.

Which is great.

But you are not getting 2x the FPS performance.

If you are upgrading from old stuff then fine.

Bu it isn't worth upgrading from Kabylake just yet.

But I think the point we were making was that overclocking for a 10 percent gain isn't worth the benefit... I see 8 and 9 series cpus running at 90 degrees...  and that's with massive and noisy watercoolers.

We Kabylakers just reduce a few sliders 1 or 2 notches and still get a 30 percent boost.

I will not overclock 10 percent and fry my cpu just for 5 or 6 more fps. It is absurd... as is upgrading for just a 30 percent boost.

My best upgrade was to a M.2 NvMe drive.

 

Edited by Gabe777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

To unsubscribe.

Edited by Gabe777
Pointless discussion

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