Opinions on New High End PC for X-Plane, FS2020?

[Alpha Floor 237]

19 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Jaime, if you look at the recommended specs for both X-Plane and MFS you’ll see that providing you have 32Gb RAM your proposed system will be fine in both.

https://www.x-plane.com/kb/x-plane-11-system-requirements/

https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/microsoft-flight-simulator-system-requirements/

Thank you very much Ray, you've been very helpful! I owe you a pint 😉

Almost nailed it down at this point. Need to make a decision between i9 9900k and AMD 3900x.

I will sleep on it and pull the trigger tomorrow...

 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

3 minutes ago, Alpha Floor said:

Thank you very much Ray, you've been very helpful! I owe you a pint 😉

Almost nailed it down at this point. Need to make a decision between i9 9900k and AMD 3900x.

I will sleep on it and pull the trigger tomorrow...

You’re welcome Jaime.  Look at the overclocking capability of each. That’s critical given no one runs them at stock speed. Let us know what you decide on.

[vortex681 806]

7 hours ago, Alpha Floor said:

Geez, I am now doubting whether I should go for the AMD 3900x rather than the i9 10900x

Before you make your decision, it's worth watching this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vjj6UyPGUtE

In most games it's not the fastest CPU, sometimes by quite a long way. Don't confuse it with the newly announced 10900k.

[Alpha Floor 237]

1 minute ago, vortex681 said:

Before you make your decision, it's worth watching this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vjj6UyPGUtE

In most games it's not the fastest CPU, sometimes by quite a long way. Don't confuse it with the newly announced 10900k.

Thanks, just watched that funny enough xD

I believe the 10990x is ruled out. The 3900x also in favor of the 3800x, about 150 GBP cheaper and identical performance on X-Plane. Is it worth paying an additional 150 GBP on 4 extra cores I won't use? Probably not.

So the decision to be made now is between 3800x and i9 9900k. What I like about the AMD is that it's one year newer and the socket still has at least another generation to go whereas the i9 is dead technology.

[vortex681 806]

4 minutes ago, Alpha Floor said:

So the decision to be made now is between 3800x and i9 9900k.

At the moment, I'd go with the 9900k. It might not be compatible with the next gen Intel boards but it's likely to be a top performer for some time to come. However, if you can wait a few months, the newly announced CPUs may give you more for your money.

Edited May 5, 2020 by vortex681

[Alpha Floor 237]

Gentlemen,

Thank you all very much for your very useful help.

I finally went with i9 9900k and Nvidia 2080 Super.

I wanted AMD to be the better choice but after much reading and researching, the 9900k seems to outperform the Rayzen 3800/3900/3950x series across the board by about 10%. This 10% can be very important 5 years from now. And for flight simulation one wants the best single-thread performer you can get, and today that is the 9900k. Also in favour of Intel, they overclock better than AMD.

Maybe my 2030 build will feature an AMD chip...

Thank you all very much again!

Jaime

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

Jaime, glad you've reached a decision. You were wise to stick to Intel as the vast majority of simmers use the Intel / Nvidia combo to great effect.

Just the monitor / display to sort out now and what you're doing about your old PC.

[MaDDogz 242]

I use that case.(Bought from same company)

It's a nice one, bags of room, real good airflow from the large front fans.

And, for giggles when your bored, strobe lights on! 😄 

 

[Alpha Floor 237]

54 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Jaime, glad you've reached a decision. You were wise to stick to Intel as the vast majority of simmers use the Intel / Nvidia combo to great effect.

Just the monitor / display to sort out now and what you're doing about your old PC.

Thanks Ray. A good friend of mine was slightly disappointed when I told him I went Intel rather than AMD. He thinks I "chickened out". The reality is I want whatever is best for Flight Simulation, and Flight Simulators are very niche...

About the monitor, I think I will go: IPS, 1440p, 27". Question is whether I should go ultrawise or 16:9... Will have to think about this... All I really need is a single monitor for the simulator and an additional monitor for auxilliary tasks (charts, browser etc.)

Old PC... Well, networking them could be an option but don't have that much space. I'll ship it back to my old room at my parents' in Madrid to have something to browse the internet with when I go back for a weekend :D (once we are allowed to...). It's so old that I see no point in trying to sell it. The most valuable component will be the GTX 770 and I can sell that for what, 30 GBP at best?. Not worth it...

[Alpha Floor 237]

44 minutes ago, MaDDogz said:

I use that case.(Bought from same company)

It's a nice one, bags of room, real good airflow from the large front fans.

And, for giggles when your bored, strobe lights on! 😄 

Great to hear that! It also looks cool.

Very happy with the purchase right now (let's see when it arrives!), I believe I bought the best PC that 2331 GBP can buy for use in flight simulation. :D

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

9 minutes ago, Alpha Floor said:

Thanks Ray. A good friend of mine was slightly disappointed when I told him I went Intel rather than AMD. He thinks I "chickened out". The reality is I want whatever is best for Flight Simulation, and Flight Simulators are very niche...

About the monitor, I think I will go: IPS, 1440p, 27". Question is whether I should go ultrawise or 16:9... Will have to think about this... All I really need is a single monitor for the simulator and an additional monitor for auxilliary tasks (charts, browser etc.)

Old PC... Well, networking them could be an option but don't have that much space. I'll ship it back to my old room at my parents' in Madrid to have something to browse the internet with when I go back for a weekend 😄 (once we are allowed to...). It's so old that I see no point in trying to sell it. The most valuable component will be the GTX 770 and I can sell that for what, 30 GBP at best?. Not worth it...

You made the right call. 👍

Monitors are purely a personal choice so I hope you enjoy your new one. Agreed the second-hand price of old PCs is low which is why it would make a perfect platform for moving maps etc. But if you don't have the space then fair enough.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

2 hours ago, Alpha Floor said:

Thanks Ray. A good friend of mine was slightly disappointed when I told him I went Intel rather than AMD. He thinks I "chickened out". The reality is I want whatever is best for Flight Simulation, and Flight Simulators are very niche...

About the monitor, I think I will go: IPS, 1440p, 27". Question is whether I should go ultrawise or 16:9... Will have to think about this... All I really need is a single monitor for the simulator and an additional monitor for auxilliary tasks (charts, browser etc.)

Old PC... Well, networking them could be an option but don't have that much space. I'll ship it back to my old room at my parents' in Madrid to have something to browse the internet with when I go back for a weekend 😄 (once we are allowed to...). It's so old that I see no point in trying to sell it. The most valuable component will be the GTX 770 and I can sell that for what, 30 GBP at best?. Not worth it...

You made the right call on the CPU in choosing Intel, though personally I would've waited for the recently-announced and soon-to-be-released 10900k.  I see a lot of confusion in your posts about Intel SKUs: 10900x, 10990x, 10900k, and I get it, Intel could definitely benefit from a new naming scheme, but it is important to get this straight so here's a little primer:

X series SKUs are for High-End Desktop (HEDT) markets.  These chips tend to have more cores and more PCI-e lanes than mainstream Intel chips.  They are intended for production workloads (like video, photo, and sound editing, 3d modeling, etc.)  Also, the 10990x is technically just a rumor at this point.

K series SKUs are aimed at overclockers.  These chips run at higher clock speeds and have fewer cores than X series chips, which makes them better at gaming (and simming).

So while the 10900x and the 10900k share a number, and a core count, they are quite dissimilar.  10900k can run up to 5.3GHz right out of the box while the 10900x only hits 4.5GHz.  Also, the cache architecture of X series chips differs from that of K series chips and without getting into complex technical details, suffice it to say that on average, K series chips tend to run a bit faster at the same clock speed as X series chips, say 5-10% depending on the workload.  Games (and sims) in particular tend to prefer the cache architecture of K series (or simply put: mainstream deskstop) chips over the larger, slower cache of the X series chips.  This all adds up to a healthy performance boost in games for the K series.

 

Re: monitors

IPS panels are preferred by some, but in my experience they have significant drawbacks.  The backlight bleed is too great, to the point that "black levels" are almost non-existant and instead you get grey levels.  I've got a 34" ultrawide gaming monitor with GSync, 100Hz refresh rate, 3440x1440 resolution, and an IPS panel.  I wish I never bought the thing.  Everything about it is great, except the panel type.  If it were a VA panel I would be happy but it is hard to drive VA panels at the same rates as TN or IPS panels, so it is what it is.

I'm not suggesting you get a TN panel, the image quality on those is notoriously poor compared to all other display technologies, just be careful with IPS.  If you plan to use your monitor in a bright room then you may not notice the backlight bleed inherent to IPS panels, or you may even get lucky and end up with a display that has a lower amount of backlight bleed than the average for IPS panels.  But if you want to use your display in a dark room (as I do) then you may find the backlight bleed to be intolerable in dark scenes.  In the case of simming, this means night flying.  

[Alpha Floor 237]

3 minutes ago, TechguyMaxC said:

You made the right call on the CPU in choosing Intel, though personally I would've waited for the recently-announced and soon-to-be-released 10900k. 

Thanks very much!

It really makes sense for me to buy this PC now as I am going to start my CPL as soon as the lockdown is lifted. I want to make use of this "idle" time at home to get as much simulator flying done as possible in preparation for it.

With tech and computers there is always something new, better and cheaper around the corner if you wait a couple months. I've come to realize that the best time to buy anything tech is when you want it, need it and can afford it.

I do agree the i9 9900K is an old chip on a dead platform, that's the thing I don't like about it. But I wanted my computer "now" due to opportunity cost and the alternatives today were i9 10990X and Ryzen 3700X (Maybe also i7 9700K). It seems the 9900K is the best of these.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

The 10900k was already announced, and should reach retail shelves before the end of this month.  I'm not suggesting waiting indefinitely, only about 3 weeks remain until you can purchase one of these CPUs.  The choice is yours, of course, but if I were in your shoes I would wait.

[Alpha Floor 237]

1 hour ago, TechguyMaxC said:

The 10900k was already announced, and should reach retail shelves before the end of this month.  I'm not suggesting waiting indefinitely, only about 3 weeks remain until you can purchase one of these CPUs.  The choice is yours, of course, but if I were in your shoes I would wait.

Yes, in that case you have a point.

I have saved at least 200 GBP and 3 weeks of waiting though... To get a CPU on a dead socket. Oh well.