Ryzen 7 3800x as replacement for 8600k @ 5.0

[asgnp 27]

Hi all,

I am looking to upgrade from a 8600k (@5.0) to a Ryzen 7 3800x because the 6 cores/ threads are slowing me down in CAD, modeling and rendering. For p3dv4.5 the 8600k and rtx 2080 is doing a fine job and I’m able to maintain 35-40 fps in resource heavy airports, fslabs a320, activesky, etc.

The 3800x seems to score higher on single core benchmarks than any other ryzen 3000 chip... so the big question is...will the 3800x be a good replacement for the 8600k? Also, for memory, would there be a big performance impact... 3600 cl16 vs 3600 cl18?

Thanks in advance.

[himmelhorse 1,276]

asgnp,

I have just bought the 9 3900 replacing an i7 2600k and have never been happier ... weeeellll 

Xplane11 has gone from a max of 20FPS to a very reliable 55 FPS (XPlane is fairly well known for not playing well with Ryzen.) With P3Dv4.5 however, I have found performance varying from 6 to 30 (limited to 30FPS) and 6 to 15 FPS (unlimited) flying round ORBX YBBN and that scenery package is very far from spectacular. Getting away from that airport however and I can get around 30 to 50 FPS. 

I went with Ryzen after watching the latest LR Q and A livestream and they stated that Vulkan was going to bring up to 60 percent performance increase because it was going to utilise all cores. At the moment it only uses two or three apparently. 

I also believe that new engines are going to do much the same for P3D in the next iteration of that platform, but they are not doing a bad job with core utilisation at the moment, Better core utilisation and more cores is where we are headed I think,  and I live in hope.

MSFS is still an unknown quantity and again, I am hoping for the best.

I must say, however, that for flight simming, i9 is still ahead in the performance stakes.

The vital word you mention is CAD and I think for those tasks, Ryzen is a no brainer and the more cores the better.

I would also guess that a few people will disagree with me and they may well be right.  I am a born optomist LOL

Regards

Tony

[MatthewS 761]

I have a 4+ year old Intel i7 3930K and I'm thinking of moving over to AMD Ryzen 9 3950X....   Maybe it's worth stretching for that rather than settling for the Ryzen 7 3800x ?

[asgnp 27]

57 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

I have a 4+ year old Intel i7 3930K and I'm thinking of moving over to AMD Ryzen 9 3950X....   Maybe it's worth stretching for that rather than settling for the Ryzen 7 3800x ?

Sure, I could. But I’d want to know for sure if the Ryzen 3800x or 3950x can match or at the least, come close to a 5ghz 8600k in terms of fps. Also, not sure whether SMT plays well with p3dv4.5.

[himmelhorse 1,276]

asgnp,

If 5 FPS REALLY matter to you when you can average more than 40 FPS with Ryzen, then opt for the i9 which is currently the leader in game performance. Anything above 22 FPS for me is silky smooth and I could not really pick the difference between 40 FPS and 45 FPS.

 My only issue with P3D is ORBX YBBN and I am fairly sure that a Core i9 9900ks would not really make a huge amount of difference there, and, everywhere else is fine. I am not a technical person, but for me, my decision was based solely on gaming, and where it was going in the future with the increasing efficiency and utilisation in the use of cores. The 3950x  I think will make any clock speeds largely irrelevant except in bragging rights, and I genuinely wish I had the funds to go with the 9 3950x.

In summary, if you want those extra 5 FPS or so in P3D4.5, and that is all that matters to you, then I would recommend the Core i9. It is the king of clock speeds and overclocking.

For CAD (not something I have ANY experience with) the Ryzen is an obvious choice, given the many reviews on youtube and elsewhere. All the reviews I have seen have acknowledged the Core i9 as the king of gaming and slightly deficient in almost all other tasks thrown at it.

I genuinely believe that an inconsequential 5 FPS in Flightsimming with the added benefits of its CAD abilities, I personally would opt for the Ryzen and preferably the 3950x if you can afford it.

Your priorities ... your choice,   The really good news is that at this moment in time it does make a difference but not a huge difference. What about 2021 though?

Regards

Tony

 

[asgnp 27]

27 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

asgnp,

If 5 FPS REALLY matter to you when you can average more than 40 FPS with Ryzen, then opt for the i9 which is currently the leader in game performance. Anything above 22 FPS for me is silky smooth and I could not really pick the difference between 40 FPS and 45 FPS.

 My only issue with P3D is ORBX YBBN and I am fairly sure that a Core i9 9900ks would not really make a huge amount of difference there, and, everywhere else is fine. I am not a technical person, but for me, my decision was based solely on gaming, and where it was going in the future with the increasing efficiency and utilisation in the use of cores. The 3950x  I think will make any clock speeds largely irrelevant except in bragging rights, and I genuinely wish I had the funds to go with the 9 3950x.

In summary, if you want those extra 5 FPS or so in P3D4.5, and that is all that matters to you, then I would recommend the Core i9. It is the king of clock speeds and overclocking.

For CAD (not something I have ANY experience with) the Ryzen is an obvious choice, given the many reviews on youtube and elsewhere. All the reviews I have seen have acknowledged the Core i9 as the king of gaming and slightly deficient in almost all other tasks thrown at it.

I genuinely believe that an inconsequential 5 FPS in Flightsimming with the added benefits of its CAD abilities, I personally would opt for the Ryzen and preferably the 3950x if you can afford it.

Your priorities ... your choice,   The really good news is that at this moment in time it does make a difference but not a huge difference. What about 2021 though?

Regards

Tony

 

5 fps won’t matter at all. The issue for me i guess is whether i can comfortably maintain 30-35 fps in resource dense scenery and aircraft. Are you able to run p3d smoothly with SMT on? Do you think you could test with SMT off? I know some games really hate SMT/ HT.

[himmelhorse 1,276]

asgnp,

Unfortunately I cannot mate,  I am in Surabaya at the moment for about a week. 

However, I can tell you that this is a stock installation and all my P3D sliders are set at either 100 percent or 75 percent roughly. XPlane is set at 100 percent but AA is set at 4 x msaa

XPlane performance is slightly better than P3D except where I am at ORBX YBBN when P3D/Ryzen does not cut the mustard.

Other than that, I am very happy with the choice and I have no performance issues whatsoever other that YBBN.  If you can go to 3950x I am sure you will be even happier given the CAD aspect. 

I stress again, however, that the core i9 is slightly better for Gaming. My best advice is to watch Linus Tech tips and Jayztwocents on youtube where they compare gaming figures. Please note that flight simming does not play a role here but you will get the idea. Michael Brown from XForce is also a good one to watch and he is directly involved with Austin Myers and XPlane development.

Regards

Tony

[HarryVoyager 21]

In the Il-2 GB flight sims, the Zen 2 and Sky Lake CPUs are at this point family equivalent. However, Zen 2 does not have AVX-512 support, only AVX2, so in applications that use AVX-512 it falls behind. Il-2 only uses AVX, and does not, as near as I can tell require AVX-512, so I'm wondering, do we know whether P3D is using AVX-512? That might explain the difference. 

Zen 2 also tends to have higher cache latency than the Sky Lake chips, but if you're running DDR 3600 memory that tends to help there. You'll need to check if XMP is on in your bios, however. 

You should be able to get DDR 3600 CAS 16 fairly economically if you look for the non-rgb versions. I think I got my 64gb quad pack for about $200.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

8600k @ 5GHz -> Ryzen 7 3800x is NOT an upgrade for flight sim.  If you make this move, you are going to be disappointed.  Without utilizing some form of sub-ambient cooling (like a water chiller, or even phase change) you will not be able to achieve significantly greater performance than what you currently achieve, with hardware that is available today.  5GHz Coffee Lake is fast, no matter how you slice it.  If you really feel the need for an upgrade, I would suggest waiting until Intel's 10nm desktop chips come out next year, as they have significantly higher IPC (instructions per clock) than the current *-Lake micro-architecture CPUs (anything from Skylake up to the current 9th generation Coffee Lake (refresh) chips).  

[asgnp 27]

36 minutes ago, TechguyMaxC said:

8600k @ 5GHz -> Ryzen 7 3800x is NOT an upgrade for flight sim.  If you make this move, you are going to be disappointed.  Without utilizing some form of sub-ambient cooling (like a water chiller, or even phase change) you will not be able to achieve significantly greater performance than what you currently achieve, with hardware that is available today.  5GHz Coffee Lake is fast, no matter how you slice it.  If you really feel the need for an upgrade, I would suggest waiting until Intel's 10nm desktop chips come out next year, as they have significantly higher IPC (instructions per clock) than the current *-Lake micro-architecture CPUs (anything from Skylake up to the current 9th generation Coffee Lake (refresh) chips).  

As mentioned above, I’m not looking for upgraded performance... I don’t expect any improvement over coffeelake at 5ghz...If it merely performs the same, thats good enough for me. It’s just that the 6 core/threads is slowing me down in CAD and rendering... hence the 3800x... or better yet, 3900x or 3950x.

Sure the 10nm intel chips will have better ipc, considering the new micro architecture, but that’s still a fair long way out. I really don’t want to wait that long.

Regardless not many people here seem to have ventured into zen 2... so i guess I’ll just have to wait for positive confirmation.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

1 hour ago, asgnp said:

As mentioned above, I’m not looking for upgraded performance... I don’t expect any improvement over coffeelake at 5ghz...If it merely performs the same, thats good enough for me. It’s just that the 6 core/threads is slowing me down in CAD and rendering... hence the 3800x... or better yet, 3900x or 3950x.

Sure the 10nm intel chips will have better ipc, considering the new micro architecture, but that’s still a fair long way out. I really don’t want to wait that long.

Regardless not many people here seem to have ventured into zen 2... so i guess I’ll just have to wait for positive confirmation.

It won't be a sidegrade either.  You will see lower performance in flight sim, guaranteed.  

For my computing needs, I have separate systems for separate tasks.  My gaming/sim computer has a 5GHz 9900k and a 2080 Ti, both under water.  My workstation/media server has a 4GHz 7960x and a GTX 1660.  

Best tool for the job, that's my opinion.  

[himmelhorse 1,276]

asgnp,

4 minutes ago, TechguyMaxC said:

Regardless not many people here seem to have ventured into zen 2... so i guess I’ll just have to wait for positive confirmation

I most definitely have ventured there.

Whilst, I am still not at my flightsim computer, I can tell you that Ryzen performance is definitely not as fast as Intel nor is it as overclockable yet. The performance difference, however, is not that great, in my opinion.

My very best advice is to hold on to what you have got for the moment. XPlane are going (allegedly) to release Vulkan this month and, again, allegedly, Ryzen is going to get huge benefits from that.

P3D, at the moment, I believe, is going to perform better on your current system than with Ryzen.The new engines for P3D (rumoured) will give grater performance but to an unknown extent. Bear in mind, too, that it has always favoured (performance wise) Intel in the past

For me, going to Ryzen was in fact a significant difference over my old core i7 2600k, across all flight sim platforms, which is understandable.

Whatever, you do, though, upgrade to the best you can afford for future proofing purposes.

 Regards

Tony

[TechguyMaxC 516]

@himmelhorse please update your quote as I did not make those statements, asgnp did.  Thanks.

[himmelhorse 1,276]

TechguyMaxC

I apologise unreservedly mate, I simply copied your quote of asgnp and did not realize that the quote would be attributed to you.

Again, apologies and absoplutely no offence meant.

Regards

Tony

[TechguyMaxC 516]

@himmelhorse, no worries, I'm not offended or upset.  If you click the edit button on the post you should be able to update the quote by typing in asgnp's username in place of mine.