Anyone have 11900K P3D/FS Experiences?

[CaptKornDog 281]

Hello everyone,

Been in the middle of trying to upgrade my 4 year old machine for a year now.  (And what a year it’s been.)

 

I’m primarily a P3D user, eventually getting into MSFS.  I’ve been primarily using Intel for the last 10+ years on my machines, having been extremely disappointed by AMD in the past.  I had been considering a 5900X as an upgrade to my 7700K (@4.8), but they’re simply not available in my area like most others’ experience.  Considering AMD again was something I have certainly been debating recently.
 

However, it seems 11900K’s are starting to pop up in limited numbers locally.  Something I’d at least have a chance of getting my hands on at a reasonable price.  I’ve always believed clock is king in FS/P3D, so seeing some 11900K’s with good cooling hit a 5.0+ GHz all-core overclock now sounds just as tempting, especially if I can physically get one.  Currently have a 1440p/144 Hz panel paired with a 3080.

 

This leads to my question: does someone have direct experience with the 11900K?  Nearly every reviewer has criticized it, but flight simming is an extremely niche use case.  My system is for some limited photoshop productivity, but mostly gaming (with emphasis on flight simming); some light streaming, however no video editing.  I do tend to multi task a bit while at cruise.

If anyone has direct experience with P3D/FS and an 11900K, I’d certainly appreciate any input?  Or if you have experience with both an 11900K and 5900X perhaps.

 

Thanks.

[Bob Scott 7,714]

I do not have any hands-on experience with the 11900K, but my P3D experience with the 10-core 10900K and Z490 chipset (easy o/c to 5.2 GHz on water cooling) has been nothing short of spectacular.  Personally, if I were looking to build right now, I'd still go with the 10900K rather than an 8-core 11900K and a pricey Z590 mobo running at the same clock speeds.  I haven't seen anything to suggest that there's anything in the new CPU/chipset that compensates for/justifies losing two physical cores. 

The Denver Micro Center website shows 25+ of both the 10900K and the 10850K in stock as I write this.  But God help you if you need a GPU...

[KL Oo 695]

Following. Exact same situation, thoughts and issues as the OP. 

I’m also interested in you’re comments @w6kd as I initially thought the same about the 10900k vs the 11900k but thought the whole improved architecture might play a part....  I do agree with the OP however that clock is king and the didn’t think the two additional cores of the 10900k would make much difference in and of themselves.... 

[CaptKornDog 281]

PCIe Gen 4 is also nice to have for future use.  While commonly available now, not sure I’d take a step back 1 generation for the 2 extra cores at a step down of IPC and loss Gen 4 with a 10900K, putting me right back into 11900K vs 5900X territory.  A year ago, if I was able to get my hands on one, absolutely would have gone for a 10900K.  I’ve read 5900X’s can hit 5.0 on some cores; but it’s been a mix of how many (and I can’t seem to find anyone with reasonable cooling has hit 5.0 all-core).

 

Of course, the one seemingly positive review of the 11900K on Micro Center’s website specifically references MSFS haha.  Again, what a non-mainstream hobby we have.

[Nuno Pinto 1,394]

The 11900K is a step back from the 10900K which was also not the nicest CPU... A lot of power usage for not that much performance. i'd go for an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (can't really find usage for 12 cores within P3D or MSFS for that matter) and that's over 100 USD above the 5800X's price.

Intel just arrived to the PCIe 4.0 and the motherboards will surely change with the next CPUs. AMD is the way, better IPC, way lower wattage (thus much better optimization)...

That's my $0.02 and my simulators literally fly with that CPU. Coming from the 8700K it was an insane increase in performance.

[Charlatan 68]

28 minutes ago, Nuno Pinto said:

The 11900K is a step back from the 10900K which was also not the nicest CPU... A lot of power usage for not that much performance. i'd go for an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (can't really find usage for 12 cores within P3D or MSFS for that matter) and that's over 100 USD above the 5800X's price.

Intel just arrived to the PCIe 4.0 and the motherboards will surely change with the next CPUs. AMD is the way, better IPC, way lower wattage (thus much better optimization)...

That's my $0.02 and my simulators literally fly with that CPU. Coming from the 8700K it was an insane increase in performance.

Yes, I went from an 8700k, to a 5600x and was a massive difference.

[G-RFRY 1,705]

Test on the PCIE gen 4 show no better performance when Gaming and not much on loading.

[CaptKornDog 281]

6 hours ago, G-RFRY said:

Test on the PCIE gen 4 show no better performance when Gaming and not much on loading.

Yep, for now with current hardware and games.

[G-RFRY 1,705]

This is what may make a difference two PC Gaming performance later this year.

  Microsoft Shares More Details on Microsoft DirectStorage for PC in April (update) (guru3d.com)