Hi everyone, 

I’ll start by saying I’m not overly knowledgeable in pc parts. I recently purchased a computer off a friend. It’s a I7 7700. I feel as tho it’s a good base however I would like to upgrade the CPU, in doing my research I’ve come to the conclusion that my board can’t really take a better cpu. I’m looking for a recommendation on a board and cpu combo. I would like to keep the case and I also have a gtx 1060 6GB card that I plan on re-using.

anyone have recommendations on a mobo and cpu combo that I can research? I fly the usual p3d, PMDG, flight beam etc scenery. I’d like to have something that could be hopeful for msfs 2020 however there really is no way in knowing what will be reasonable for msfs 2020 at this time.

thanks...just starting to get my feet wet in pondering an upgrade.

9900k or 10900k (not out yet - launching soon).  9900k should be paired with a Z390 motherboard, 10900k should be paired with a Z490 motherboard (also not out yet).  

Try things out with the 7700 first if you haven't already.  I went from a 7700k to a 9900k and the difference in flight sim was negligible.  Performance almost identical, only faster texture/autogen loading on the 9900k.  

A 9900K should be a fairly big improvement over a 7700 (non-K), which can only hit 4.0 GHz with all four cores loaded up.  A 9900K clocked at 5.0GHz is 30-35% faster when clock speed and IPC are considered, with twice the physical cores, and twice the L3 cache.  It should handily outperform the 7700.  I went from a 7700K overclocked to 4.8GHz to an 8086K (6-core) and at 5.0 GHz it was a solid improvement over the 7700K machine (which I am using to type this).  The experience was much smoother...with frames locked at 30, the 8086K only rarely dropped below 30.  My portable rig uses a 5.0 GHz 9900K, and I think its performance would also be a worthy upgrade from my old 7700K, and especially from a 7700 constrained to 4 GHz.

As to motherboard, I'm happy with the ASUS Maximus XI Hero--I have two of them.

Thanks..I guess I also need to make sure the boards fit in the tower? Do most boards fit in most cases or is it a hit & miss kinda thing?

any other suggestions I’d be happy to take.

thanks again

Edited April 21, 20206 yr by flyinpilot212121

2 hours ago, w6kd said:

A 9900K should be a fairly big improvement over a 7700 (non-K), which can only hit 4.0 GHz with all four cores loaded up.  A 9900K clocked at 5.0GHz is 30-35% faster when clock speed and IPC are considered, with twice the physical cores, and twice the L3 cache.  It should handily outperform the 7700.  I went from a 7700K overclocked to 4.8GHz to an 8086K (6-core) and at 5.0 GHz it was a solid improvement over the 7700K machine (which I am using to type this).  The experience was much smoother...with frames locked at 30, the 8086K only rarely dropped below 30.  My portable rig uses a 5.0 GHz 9900K, and I think its performance would also be a worthy upgrade from my old 7700K, and especially from a 7700 constrained to 4 GHz.

As to motherboard, I'm happy with the ASUS Maximus XI Hero--I have two of them.

Did you also disable hyperthreading?  When I had a 7700k at 5.2GHz with HT enabled I didn't have performance issues, only a bit slower texture/autogen loading compared to the 9900k at 5.0GHz that replaced it.

1 hour ago, TechguyMaxC said:

Did you also disable hyperthreading?  When I had a 7700k at 5.2GHz with HT enabled I didn't have performance issues, only a bit slower texture/autogen loading compared to the 9900k at 5.0GHz that replaced it.

On quad-core CPUs I generally ran with HT on with an appropriate affinity mask to keep the first physical core dedicated to the main thread.  With 6/8-core CPUs I've had better luck with HT off and no AM.  My 7700K was maxxed out at 4.9 with voltage higher than I wanted to see in sustained ops, so I ran it most of the time a notch lower at 4.8 GHz.  A 7700K that'll hold 5.2 with HT on is a golden chip.

The move to the hexacore 8086K CPU produced a truly striking improvement in fluidity.  It's so good that I've kept the 8086K (at 5.3GHz) in my primary sim PC rather than trying to drop in a 9900K.  I'm still unconvinced that an 8-core CPU at 5.0 beats a 6-core at 5.3 when running P3D.  That said, the 9900K at 5.0 on my portable box is no slouch, either.  But both of them really do eclipse the quad-core 7700K, which is still in daily use as my ancillary PC, running weather, ATC, Navigraph Charts, and a moving map remotely.

Regards

Pay close attention to the I/O ports provided by the MB.  Too often it appears buyers look too long at performance specs and too little at how to harvest that performance for intended use....  Just saying.....

8 hours ago, fppilot said:

Pay close attention to the I/O ports provided by the MB.  Too often it appears buyers look too long at performance specs and too little at how to harvest that performance for intended use....  Just saying.....

Thanks, anything in particular to look for? I’m not sure what an I/O port is...maybe I’ll hit up google and research that.

18 minutes ago, flyinpilot212121 said:

I’m not sure what an I/O port is...

It is those ports where you plug stuff in.  USB (types and especially locations); sound, mic, etc.  Number of ports for power and cabling to SATA HDD or SDD drives.  Then others depend on what is on the motherboard. For example, a motherboard may (like the example below) have a lot of USB ports, but only the back edge of the motherboard is available once mounted in a case, so those that are not on that edge are only available to run cables to places like the front panel on whatever case you buy.  Especially when siming or gaming, those locations need to be evaluated with the flight or gaming controls you plan to use.  Also, there is now a type USB-C port and it may become more and more important over time....

Think backwards from the finished system you need so that you can see if your choice of MB and case will get you there.  They are not all the same....

This is what my motherboard provides, and I have often wished it provided an eSata port to connect an external Sata drive for making backups of my SDD.  It does not provide that.  This is the MB in my 2015-built system.  I will soon be looking to build a new system and will keep a sharp eye on these factors, as I did last time.

Edited April 22, 20206 yr by fppilot

2 hours ago, fppilot said:

It is those ports where you plug stuff in.  USB (types and especially locations); sound, mic, etc.  Number of ports for power and cabling to SATA HDD or SDD drives.  Then others depend on what is on the motherboard. For example, a motherboard may (like the example below) have a lot of USB ports, but only the back edge of the motherboard is available once mounted in a case, so those that are not on that edge are only available to run cables to places like the front panel on whatever case you buy.  Especially when siming or gaming, those locations need to be evaluated with the flight or gaming controls you plan to use.  Also, there is now a type USB-C port and it may become more and more important over time....

Think backwards from the finished system you need so that you can see if your choice of MB and case will get you there.  They are not all the same....

This is what my motherboard provides, and I have often wished it provided an eSata port to connect an external Sata drive for making backups of my SDD.  It does not provide that.  This is the MB in my 2015-built system.  I will soon be looking to build a new system and will keep a sharp eye on these factors, as I did last time.

Oh ok that makes sense, thanks!

6 hours ago, fppilot said:

This is what my motherboard provides, and I have often wished it provided an eSata port to connect an external Sata drive for making backups of my SDD.  It does not provide that.  This is the MB in my 2015-built system.  I will soon be looking to build a new system and will keep a sharp eye on these factors, as I did last time.

eSATA has pretty much been left behind in favor of USB 3.1 and 3.2.  I've got some older BlacX HDD cradles that use eSATA, and a couple newer ones that use USB 3, and the transfer rates on the USB units with the same drives in them are considerably (~30%) faster.

Most motherboards that are suitable for higher-end CPUs and overclocking have several USB headers on the mobo in addition to the ports on the backplane.  Many cases have front-panel ports with cabling already in place to attach to those headers.  And most USB HID devices (joysticks, throttle quads, rudders, etc) are fairly low bandwidth and work just fine when multiplexed to one of the PC's USB ports via an external USB hub...in fact with HID devices sometimes you get a more stable result with an external powered hub.

 

This is harder than I thought, I’m doing a bit of research on newegg and there’s just way too many cpu options...all sorts of generations and numbers...ughhh this could get ugly lol.

thanks guys for the help.

6 hours ago, w6kd said:

eSATA has pretty much been left behind in favor of USB 3.1 and 3.2.  I've got some older BlacX HDD cradles that use eSATA, and a couple newer ones that use USB 3, and the transfer rates on the USB units with the same drives in them are considerably (~30%) faster.

Correct. Understand I used my lack of eSata in my new system build five years ago to illustrate my point about the newly embraced USB-C.  I say embraced because C has been around for a few years and just now emerging....  Not clear about C, but if I can find it on a board with all else I will be looking for, then other features being equal, including reliability reports, the board with C will win over one without.  Again, all other features and reliability/repuytaion being equal.