if you can spend a little more go for the 3900X - its a beast.

 

 

 

I think if money is an issue get a Ryzen 5 3600 and invest the extra $300 in a better video card for maximum bang for buck over getting a 3900X personally. The delta between the two is very narrow and if the difference is a 3900X with a 3060 or a 3600 with a 3080 I think the 3080 would be more useful.

18 minutes ago, Anthracite said:

So much benefit from the parallelism offered in dx12, not to mention the vendor specific benefits of dlss and the architecture independent ray tracing. Considering msfs is published by Microsoft I find the situation bemusing.

Yes - the Zen 3 (if it performs as the leaks indicate) will really shine with DX12 when all those cores with shared L3 cache gets some working room 🙂 I guess they are on DX11 as they started the project back in 2016 when DX12 was very young and few used it for anything but demos. I guess that has been on many project meetings but postponed to get the full Covid-boost from people sitting at home longing for far away places... And to be honest - the DX11 implementation is rather awsome as it is and runs surprisingly well on my 4790k with an RTX 2080 card. The 2080 I bought two years ago saved me from that 3600 you had to get as a stop gap. The Zen 4 and DDR5 is coming up on the radar now but I'm done waiting!

23 minutes ago, mazex said:

Yep - I have waited for the Zen 3 a long time now. My wallet is wide open for a 12 core Ryzen 4900X in November 😉 Unless Tiger Lake is a surprise... It might cling on to the single thread crown by a hair vs the Zen 3, but that is so 2015 🙂 

Tiger Lake is mobile only, which is looking really good in terms of IPC gains and graphics, but I guess is not coming to desktop due to 10nm yields still being extremely poor. 11th generation on desktop will be Rocket Lake instead, supposedly a Sunny Cove/Willow Cove hybrid backport on 14nm, with 10% IPC increase over Skylake, up to 8 cores, even higher power consumption and a Q2 2021 release. With Alder Lake rumoured to be pushed to 2022 and 7nm being delayed further, it's not looking very good for Intel...

 

3 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

Tiger Lake is mobile only, which is looking really good in terms of IPC gains and graphics, but I guess is not coming to desktop due to 10nm yields still being extremely poor. 11th generation on desktop will be Rocket Lake instead, supposedly a Sunny Cove/Willow Cove hybrid backport on 14nm, with 10% IPC increase over Skylake, up to 8 cores, even higher power consumption and a Q2 2021 release. With Alder Lake rumoured to be pushed to 2022 and 7nm being delayed further, it's not looking very good for Intel...

Correct - sorry, meant Rocket Lake. All these lake CPUs we have had for ages while they have tried to get a new architecture in place is confusing 🙂

all depends what you are willing to spend on it, some ppl always want the latest tech, no need for me.

i say amd 5 3600 can be gotten for a good price, a better gpu is much more usefull in this game.

6 minutes ago, mazex said:

Correct - sorry, meant Rocket Lake. All these lake CPUs we have had for ages while they have tried to get a new architecture in place is confusing 🙂

It has become somewhat confusing indeed. As far as I understand, "Lake" now stands for a client line-up, "Rapids" a server line-up (starting with Sapphire Rapids), and "Cove" is an architecture. The next few architectures are rumoured to be Willow Cove (Tiger Lake, Sapphire Rapids), Cypress Cove (Rocket Lake), Golden Cove (Alder Lake, Granite Rapids) and Ocean Cove (Meteor Lake).

1 hour ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

It has become somewhat confusing indeed. As far as I understand, "Lake" now stands for a client line-up, "Rapids" a server line-up (starting with Sapphire Rapids), and "Cove" is an architecture. The next few architectures are rumoured to be Willow Cove (Tiger Lake, Sapphire Rapids), Cypress Cove (Rocket Lake), Golden Cove (Alder Lake, Granite Rapids) and Ocean Cove (Meteor Lake).

Couple that with them now using the obnoxious 10xxx branding, it’s like they’re hoping the additional numbers make them seem more grandiose.

4 hours ago, Farlis said:

That advantage is clearly so marginal that the much higher prices of Intel make this a no-brainer.

I wouldn't call 5fps avg in a flight sim marginal.

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by Pilot53

AMD R5 3600 for the price vs performance it's a nobrainer, if you want to spend more go up a notch, it's AMD time now, not Intel time.

Less than half the price of a 9900k and same performance
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AMD-Ryzen-5-3600-vs-Intel-i9-9900K/3481vs3334

8 hours ago, bigjer73 said:

Hello, I'm looking for suggestions on which MEDIUM PRICED AMD CPU you would recommend.

Today, the 3700X or the i5-10600k should give you about the same performance. Beware benchmarks, they're like political polls - no single one is accurate. Take an aggregate of 5 or 10 and you can see trends.

Yes, Intel will give you a higher single core speed with generally fewer cores; AMD will give you lower single core speed, but many more of them.

I run an i5-9600k at 5Ghz. Was great for P3D because it didn't use cores and I needed just a few really fast cores. But the 9600k's six cores (no hyperthreading) is a limiting factor for me in MSFS. The 10600k adds hyperthreading, so you could probably run close to 5ghz with 12 logical cores.

I think either the 10600k or the 3700x will give you great performance for under $300.

A couple benchmarks show the 3700x outperforming the i9-9900k at 1440p and 4k.

 

If you have a X570 or B550 chipset motherboard it's safe to buy any CPU now and you can upgrade later when the new generation of AMD CPUs come out. 

Right now I think an 8-core R7 3800X would be the best purchase. FS2020 doesn't use more than 4 cores, but having a few extra is smart considering addons running in the background. I would not go lower than 8 cores.

Edited August 25, 20205 yr by Republic3D

5 minutes ago, Pilot53 said:

I wouldn't call 5fps avg in a flight sim marginal.

It *is* marginal when the 5 FPS difference occurs when the sim is already displaying at 45 FPS.
When at 20 FPS instead, an improvement of 5 FPS makes *a lot* of difference.

 

9 minutes ago, EmaRacing said:

Less than half the price of a 9900k and same performance.

I wouldn't call a 16 - 17% difference the "same performance".
That said, if MrFuzzy's linked MSFS benchmark chart is right, the 3600 running 35 FPS 1% low compared to the 9900K running only 41 FPS 1% low is very impressive from the Ryzen chip.

2 minutes ago, F737NG said:

It *is* marginal when the 5 FPS difference occurs when the sim is already displaying at 45 FPS.
When at 20 FPS instead, an improvement of 5 FPS makes *a lot* of difference.

 

I wouldn't call a 16 - 17% difference the "same performance".
That said, if MrFuzzy's linked MSFS benchmark chart is right, the 3600 running 35 FPS 1% low compared to the 9900K running only 41 FPS 1% low is very impressive from the Ryzen chip.

Think about how fast p3d runs without pmdg or fslabs, throw in some high quality payware aircraft when they are released and those 5 fps will be important in fs2020.