Intel is still the best choice for MSFS (and other games)

[Der Zeitgeist 1,575]

2 hours ago, MrFuzzy said:

I don't understand why you don't believe these numbers, really. They make perfect sense and more than a website reported this. Things may change with DX12, we will see.

The problem I'm having with this benchmark is the fact it doesn't seem to show the clock speed the CPUs are running at, it doesn't show what type of RAM is being used, and it doesn't show what cooling solutions are installed (which influences the maximum boost clock).

I'm pretty sure the 20% or so difference in FPS between the 3950X and 10900K in that benchmark is the result of lower core clocks and maybe also the type of RAM installed on the Ryzen. Especially since there are other benchmarks that show almost identical performance when you allow the Ryzen to boost to 4.5 and use high frequency RAM, which heavily improves the performance of the Ryzen Zen 2 platform:
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-Spiel-15259/Specials/FS-2020-Benchmark-Test-Review-1356467/2/

The premise of this thread is that high-end Intel CPUs are the better choice for FPS in MSFS and gaming in general, and my point is that when you level the playing field, apply comparable clock speeds and RAM frequencies, in addition to real-world gaming resolutions on these platforms (1440p/4K, because very few people will get a CPU like this and game at 1080p), most of the difference in FPS will disappear in real-life applications.

Add to that the difference in pricing, power consumption and cooling requirements on the Intel platform, and I'd put the premise of this thread into question.

[Chock 17,769]

5 hours ago, MrFuzzy said:

Being the difference between the two platforms about 100-150 $ including the heatsink, I don't think it takes a "crazy billionaire" to choose Intel.

You do know 'crazy billionaire' is just an expression, right? 😉 

[MrFuzzy 2,118]

35 minutes ago, Der Zeitgeist said:

The problem I'm having with this benchmark is the fact it doesn't seem to show the clock speed the CPUs are running at, it doesn't show what type of RAM is being used, and it doesn't show what cooling solutions are installed (which influences the maximum boost clock).

I'm pretty sure the 20% or so difference in FPS between the 3950X and 10900K in that benchmark is the result of lower core clocks and maybe also the type of RAM installed on the Ryzen. Especially since there are other benchmarks that show almost identical performance when you allow the Ryzen to boost to 4.5 and use high frequency RAM, which heavily improves the performance of the Ryzen Zen 2 platform:
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-Spiel-15259/Specials/FS-2020-Benchmark-Test-Review-1356467/2/

What resolution did they test? Framerates looks very low for all the systems and they used different RAM for each high end system, which makes the comparison messy.

Also, at that time the 3080 was not available and a more powerful GPU highlights the CPU differences better.

Techspot is pretty reliable: if they did not specify anything, CPUs ran at their default boosting frequency (that for Intel is much higher but it's not the tester's fault of course) and the RAM used was the same with the same XMP profile.

As for the price, again... the 3950X is more expensive than the 10900K and requires a similar cooling system. Moreover it's more sensitive to RAM speed than the Intel counterpart. The best alternative with an eye on the wallet would be the 3700X in my opinion.

With that said I don't want to state that Ryzen are bad CPUs, just that if you are upgrading now with a focus on MSFS, this is the current situation. 

[swiesma 625]

If you are now upgrading and play at 1440p or higher - the CPU doesn't matter. And if we talk 4K - then get whatever CPU you like and get yourself a 3090.

[RobJC 2,069]

3 minutes ago, swiesma said:

If you are now upgrading and play at 1440p or higher - the CPU doesn't matter. And if we talk 4K - then get whatever CPU you like and get yourself a 3090.

Until study sims, AI traffic and other add-ons get thrown into the mix. Then you will most certainly want the fastest Cpu possible. 

[Kilo60 660]

Reason #1 why I choose my Intel 9900k over AMD and with almost everything on Ultra and, with my 2080 Super, in 2k, never experienced any stutters!

 

 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Kilo60

[Kilo60 660]

2 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Until study sims, AI traffic and other add-ons get thrown into the mix. Then you will most certainly want the fastest Cpu possible. 

YUP!!!!

[swiesma 625]

15 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Until study sims, AI traffic and other add-ons get thrown into the mix. Then you will most certainly want the fastest Cpu possible. 

Will not matter in 4K, you will be still GPU bottlenecked.

Vermeer will also change the game again.

Edited September 28, 2020 by swiesma

[Claudius_ 326]

Some people can't see that our "game" is not optimized, so they run benchmarks and buy high end CPU/GPU for nothing but a 5 fps difference at 4k. I think that we have to avoid to bottlenecking our minds, too. 

[swiesma 625]

5 FPS more or less are still around 5-10% in most 4k-scenarios 🙂

[RobJC 2,069]

19 minutes ago, swiesma said:

Will not matter in 4K, you will be still GPU bottlenecked.

Vermeer will also change the game again.

Help me understand this. I have a 4770K cpu. Are you saying that if i get a 4k display and 3090 i will still be gpu bottlenecked, so there is no point in upgrading my cpu? Because right now i view those components as independent pieces of the puzzle, somewhat. I might be gpu bottlenecked right now (1070) but if i had a faster cpu i might have less initial stutters when loading an airport, or i could run more ai traffic, etc. I might not get more than 27 FPS due to my gpu but a faster cpu helps in many other areas of the sim. 

[swiesma 625]

30 minutes ago, RobJC said:

Help me understand this. I have a 4770K cpu. Are you saying that if i get a 4k display and 3090 i will still be gpu bottlenecked, so there is no point in upgrading my cpu? Because right now i view those components as independent pieces of the puzzle, somewhat. I might be gpu bottlenecked right now (1070) but if i had a faster cpu i might have less initial stutters when loading an airport, or i could run more ai traffic, etc. I might not get more than 27 FPS due to my gpu but a faster cpu helps in many other areas of the sim. 

It diesnt matter if you get a 10900k or a 3900X. Thats what I'm saying.

Read the 3080 benchmarks. All 4k benchamrks are NOT CPU limited in any way with any modern CPU. And no, the 4770K or my 6700Kis not a modern CPU.

It is like this: The lower the resolution the more load shifts to the CPU. And at 4K almost the whole load is on the GPU. If you use any 6 or 8 core CPU in 4K you are in 98% not CPU limited.

 

But it also depends on the software. P3D for example reacts different than MSFS.

Edited September 28, 2020 by swiesma

[swiesma 625]

https://youtu.be/8Jw23ABNYMM

 

Just watch the CPU utilization. 

[marsman2020 1,310]

2 hours ago, swiesma said:

https://youtu.be/8Jw23ABNYMM

 

Just watch the CPU utilization. 

The game is not spawning enough threads to use 100% of the CPU.  So saying it's not a CPU bottleneck because the CPU use is less than 100% on some 3rd party tool is not correct.

For example on a 10-core CPU if the game spawns 2 threads, it will show 20% CPU use when those 2 cores are being fully used. 

For a 12-core CPU, it would show 16.6%.

It's entirely possible that if those 2 cores were able to run at a higher MHz value, you'd get more FPS, but still only show 20% utilization or 16% utilization since the cores are maxed out.

The correct way to see what the limiting factor is is to run on Dev Mode in MSFS and see if it says 'Limited by Main Thread' or 'Limited by GPU'. 

The game engine takes x ms of CPU time to complete a 'tick' and y ms of GPU time to render a frame, whichever is longer is going to be the bottleneck.  The dev mode display shows the exact ms times for the two operations.

I would not consider any other 3rd party information to be a good way to see where the bottleneck is. 

[RobJC 2,069]

6 hours ago, swiesma said:

It diesnt matter if you get a 10900k or a 3900X. Thats what I'm saying.

Read the 3080 benchmarks. All 4k benchamrks are NOT CPU limited in any way with any modern CPU. And no, the 4770K or my 6700Kis not a modern CPU.

It is like this: The lower the resolution the more load shifts to the CPU. And at 4K almost the whole load is on the GPU. If you use any 6 or 8 core CPU in 4K you are in 98% not CPU limited.

But it also depends on the software. P3D for example reacts different than MSFS.

Gotcha. Just wanted to clarify that. Thanks for the explanation.