October 4, 20205 yr I decided to upgrade my system from an 8700k at 5ghz, to that of an i9-10900k, mainly because of gaining the cores for rendering that would help with that. I pretty much figured i'd break even in sims and games. So I have a baseline test i was using in msfs2020, eglc clear weather runway 27, in the MR20 ovation from carenado (it hits the fps a bit harder than the 152 cessna which is typically 45 plus here). On the old system with high settings (4k), i was achieving 40 fps on the runway. I failed to note the cpu ratio while in sim, but the cpu % is typically 19-25%. The new 10900k i've tried setting two cores to 53 and the rest at 51, vcore in bios is around 1.31 currently, with Gskill ddr400 32gb memory set to 4200 but laxed timings of 18 18 18 40 and 1.5v. I've tried turbo boost on and off, off it never goes above 37x however. Speed shift is off. EIST is on (tried off too). Either way, 53 on two cores vs 51 made little difference and i think 1 fps difference going from 4000 cas17 to 4200 cas18. The result on the 10900k with this test: 37-38 fps (2 fps less). However i noted the cpu core in cpuz (which says 8-51) never really goes above 47 in sim (in the OS it will fluctuate, sometimes 46, 49, 50 etc). Anyone else with either 8700k or the newer cpu, can you comment on the sim and cpuz/core ratios while in sim, just double checking i dont have something missing here? Thanks in advance Asus Strix z790-e; 1000 watt evga SuperNova Plat; 14900k AC_LL 0.55 adp -0.050 253/253/355 CEPoff (CB-1pass 39200 80c, msfs peak 92,avg 60-78c, astrorender 95c,room76F); 64GB(dual 32) cl32 6400 at 6400 xmpII F5-6400J3239G32GX2-TZ5RK, Asus Ryuo III 360mm; Thermaltake v51 Case; Gigabyte 4090 OC; VR-Crystal; Dofreality H6; Astrosite
October 4, 20205 yr Just thinking out loud, try setting the windows 10 power plan to "High Performance" and see if the behavior is different.
October 4, 20205 yr Author Thanks. Yea I have that set and min cpu at 5% Asus Strix z790-e; 1000 watt evga SuperNova Plat; 14900k AC_LL 0.55 adp -0.050 253/253/355 CEPoff (CB-1pass 39200 80c, msfs peak 92,avg 60-78c, astrorender 95c,room76F); 64GB(dual 32) cl32 6400 at 6400 xmpII F5-6400J3239G32GX2-TZ5RK, Asus Ryuo III 360mm; Thermaltake v51 Case; Gigabyte 4090 OC; VR-Crystal; Dofreality H6; Astrosite
October 4, 20205 yr Hello, same here with my 9900k.I think they made the Sim with the restrictions in the last update more compatible for lower and older CPU because my CPU ist working on max 18%. I tried to overcocked but there is no benefit aubout. I bet with you, my old I7/3770 will make the same good job with the 2080. Conclusion: we need more GPU-Power only. Stephan from Germany My System
October 5, 20205 yr Author I think that is probably the case that its more gpu sided now. However, on my old board i was able to retest it. I'm seeing 5-5.1 ghz while the sim is running. On the 10900k its usually around 4.7 or 4.9 i think at best (5.1 is the all core ratio). I did at one point have it clocked all the way down to 3.7ghz and there was no dip in fps haha, so sadly the cpu isnt being used much. Asus Strix z790-e; 1000 watt evga SuperNova Plat; 14900k AC_LL 0.55 adp -0.050 253/253/355 CEPoff (CB-1pass 39200 80c, msfs peak 92,avg 60-78c, astrorender 95c,room76F); 64GB(dual 32) cl32 6400 at 6400 xmpII F5-6400J3239G32GX2-TZ5RK, Asus Ryuo III 360mm; Thermaltake v51 Case; Gigabyte 4090 OC; VR-Crystal; Dofreality H6; Astrosite
October 5, 20205 yr If you want to see the cores in the max, maybe you can try to have only 6 cores activated without ht. Try it and comment. I have been reading that MFS is optimized for the use of 6 cores, you can try and comment here, and try too with 8 cores without hyperthreading on. I am interested in upgrading from 4 cores 8 threads.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.