54 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

Since you already have a very decent CPU I would recommend prolonging your purchase as much as you can. As with Zen 2, it is expected that chips from later batches will be able to hit boost clocks more consistently and be more stable in general. Also you get to skip any issues that might be fixed with newer BIOS revisions.

Yup. I really am in no hurry to be first in line as my 3900x is a solid performer. Besides, I guess it'll be hard to even get my hands on one the coming months. I'll wait a couple of months for sure.

38 minutes ago, ca_metal said:

It could be an overkill, actually. Maybe the 5800x + 6800xt combo would be a better option. 
 

Talking about next year’s possibilities, I wouldn’t be surprised to see new intel CPUs and a Nvidia 3080 Super and a 3080 Ti joining the fight.

From what am seeing I would probably agree the sweet spot is the 5800x... although the 5600x is no slacker and at that price point it’s looking like a great option too.

If I were looking to buy a 5800X right now I would try and step up to the 5900X, 4 extra cores for $100 more. The former is not a great value, though prices could shift once better availability (and maybe competition) kick in.

In most games I play, my i7-9700k 8-Core 4.6MHz CPU is not even close to being a bottleneck gaming at 4K.  Upgrading my CPU is not going to help at all.

Now MSFS is a different beast and can easily become main thread limited even at 4K.  I have to think this is just poor optimization and Microsoft/Asobo need to address this before the game has any chance of being successful on Xbox.  I'm expecting a shift to DX12 to help, and maybe there's other things they can do to increase threading.

So while it might help to throw more CPU at MSFS right now, I have to believe that they will get this sorted soon and then it will be like most other games, where if you're playing at 4K like I am, you're better of investing in the most GPU you can afford rather than a better CPU.

Mine arrives Monday to replace my 3700X which was a stopgap for these insane monsters. So much power out of 105W TDP, yay!

Just watched an LTT review. Even the 5600X beats the 10900K in most games. RIP

40 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Now MSFS is a different beast and can easily become main thread limited even at 4K.  I have to think this is just poor optimization and Microsoft/Asobo need to address this before the game has any chance of being successful on Xbox.  I'm expecting a shift to DX12 to help, and maybe there's other things they can do to increase threading.

They will. In the latest developer Q&A they said that for Update #6 they will reduce the workload on the main thread and improve multi-threading. This means that in main thread limited scenarios, there will be a 6-10 FPS improvement.

5800 should be the ticket. Hope to get my hands on one as soon as I can (after trying to find a ps5 next week)

52 minutes ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

They will. In the latest developer Q&A they said that for Update #6 they will reduce the workload on the main thread and improve multi-threading. This means that in main thread limited scenarios, there will be a 6-10 FPS improvement.

Yeah, I recall that.  I assume 6-10fps is a guess? I tend to agree with that.  I was playing Ubisoft's Ghost Recon Breakpoint prior to this, and when they launched Vulcan support (previously DX11) my CPU utilization went down 20% and my fps went up 10% (about 5fps at 4K).  It was enough for me to run true 4K at around 45-50fps rather than have to downscale the rendering to 80%.  If the same happens with MSFS, then I should be able to get a solid 45-50fps (currently 40-45) at 4K ultra with my 2080Ti and hopefully 60fps with a GPU upgrade to a 3090.

 

1 hour ago, suncoastflyer said:

Just watched an LTT review. Even the 5600X beats the 10900K in most games. RIP

Yeah, but keep in mind they have to run very biased testing to get any differences to show at all.  Running a game at 1080p at 200fps might reveal a few fps difference between these CPUs but when you get into MSFS at 4K ultra, any modern CPU with 6 cores or more is not going to be the main problem.

What we really need, is a monster 4 core / 8 thread CPU that can run at 8Ghz... Not a 16 core / 32 thread CPU at 4GHz. 🙂

9 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

Yeah, I recall that.  I assume 6-10fps is a guess? I tend to agree with that.  I was playing Ubisoft's Ghost Recon Breakpoint prior to this, and when they launched Vulcan support (previously DX11) my CPU utilization went down 20% and my fps went up 10% (about 5fps at 4K).  It was enough for me to run true 4K at around 45-50fps rather than have to downscale the rendering to 80%.  If the same happens with MSFS, then I should be able to get a solid 45-50fps (currently 40-45) at 4K ultra with my 2080Ti and hopefully 60fps with a GPU upgrade to a 3090.

Ahhh you're speaking of fps gains from adding Vulkan support, which as a low-level API should be comparable in performance to DX12 coming to MSFS at some point in the future. 

The 6-10fps they mentioned in the Q&A video end of October will be due to general multi-threading optimisations, and will be released rather soon - they haven't given a specific roadmap for DX12 yet. That's probably going to be released "when it's ready", and probably happening along with the Xbox version. 

Anyway, according to another Q&A video (I think end of September) they don't expect a big bump in FPS from DX12, the reason to implement it is rather because of the additional features it enables, such as DLSS and ray tracing. However, that doesn't mean we won't see better multi-threading from it too.

Edited November 6, 20205 yr by pstrub

WOW, +5 fps in Full HD.

17 hours ago, Carts85 said:

From what am seeing I would probably agree the sweet spot is the 5800x... although the 5600x is no slacker and at that price point it’s looking like a great option too.

Sure, you might be right, but I would feel safer having at least 8/16 cores/threads. Even more now the next-gen on the consoles will have 8/16 even on the weakest model (the Series S).

I have a 10700k and using MSFS right now I see all the 8/16 cores/threads being used. I mean, I would go with the 5800x just to be safer, but I guess the 5600x will perform the same on most games.

14 hours ago, Virtual-Chris said:

What we really need, is a monster 4 core / 8 thread CPU that can run at 8Ghz... Not a 16 core / 32 thread CPU at 4GHz. 🙂

^^^This. I'm still waiting to see some testing with FSX and newer cpu.

I think we might see 5.4 Ghz CPU's in the next couple of years, but they are really struggling to get any higher now (due to the materials used and the laws of physics 🙂).

So while raw Ghz has always been the key in the past (when things were mainly single core), I think optimising the IPC (instructions per cycle) has become the most important thing now (as AMD have just done), as lots of cores is only part of the answer as well.

Also, I have mainly been an Nvidia / Intel supporter in the past, but due to price and performance, I would seriously have to consider something like an AMD 5900X CPU (wouldn't need a 5950X) with one of their new graphics cards.  I like the idea of that shared memory thing they have going on, as it seems to deliver around another 5-15% gain on top of these new figures.

My only worry with AMD is just the drivers and certain incompatibilities that seem to crop up from time to time.  I had trouble many years ago which led to me switching to Nvidia / Intel then.

Edited November 6, 20205 yr by bobcat999

Not sure the 5800x is worth it to be honest, the difference of $100 for the 5900x makes the latter the obvious choice with 50% more cores/threads.