Currently I am running a i7-8700K @5GHz. It is paired with a RTX 2070 and 32 gigs of RAM. So the system is average but I should still be getting at least 45-60fps in all situations. Lately I have been experiencing “notchy” frame rates near populated areas, like for example I purchased SeattleX and I tell you, I swear I thought I had a i3 processor and a GTX 660 flying over Seattle with that add on. The lowest frame I saw was 8fps. So it got me thinking that just maybe my 6 core 12 threaded processor from 2018 is the hold up. Maybe. So I got online and was looking at a newer i9-10850K which is 10 core 20 thread. And honestly, this newer processor is about the same price I paid for my i7 when I got it a few years back. Do you think I would see a significant jump in performance switching to a newer processor? It can’t be the RTX 2070, or my RAM… so it has to be that processor. 

Seattle X is a hog.  You'll need lots of horsepower.

1 minute ago, jmdriskell said:

Seattle X is a hog.  You'll need lots of horsepower.

Oh yeah no doubt.. but still in other situations I’m like hmmm this set up should have more power than it does… so I’m just curious to know that upgrading would be worth it or would I not see much change if at all….

13 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

A CPU upgrade is worth it in any simulator ... I can't discuss P3D future version but I can recommend more cores as having benefits.

I recommend you look at timeframe consistency as a measure of performance rather than FPS.  Stutters are a result of high variances in timeframe so as to be noticeable and distracting.  

Cheers, Rob.

But how much of a difference would we be talking here you think? Would it completely give me 60fps in ANY situation? Or would it be more like ok, that $500 gave you an extra 3fps. Enjoy. Lol 

1 hour ago, Deltaair1212 said:

Currently I am running a i7-8700K @5GHz. It is paired with a RTX 2070 and 32 gigs of RAM. So the system is average but I should still be getting at least 45-60fps in all situations. Lately I have been experiencing “notchy” frame rates near populated areas, like for example I purchased SeattleX and I tell you, I swear I thought I had a i3 processor and a GTX 660 flying over Seattle with that add on. The lowest frame I saw was 8fps. So it got me thinking that just maybe my 6 core 12 threaded processor from 2018 is the hold up. Maybe. So I got online and was looking at a newer i9-10850K which is 10 core 20 thread. And honestly, this newer processor is about the same price I paid for my i7 when I got it a few years back. Do you think I would see a significant jump in performance switching to a newer processor? It can’t be the RTX 2070, or my RAM… so it has to be that processor. 

Yes, I also went from a 8700k to a 10850k and the additional cores help make a smoother experience with less terrain loading delays.

Just now, kevinfirth said:

Yes, I also went from a 8700k to a 10850k and the additional cores help make a smoother experience with less terrain loading delays.

Okay cool that’s great I found someone that had my CPU and upgraded to the one I mentioned. What do you have your frames locked at? 

8 minutes ago, Deltaair1212 said:

But how much of a difference would we be talking here you think? Would it completely give me 60fps in ANY situation? Or would it be more like ok, that $500 gave you an extra 3fps. Enjoy. Lol 

Difficult to be precise. I can say I manage 50fps in any situation in the Majestic Q400, not every other aircraft...but that's in 4k with a 3090.  You may find you are still GPU limited with a 2070 depending on your resolution and weather.

6 minutes ago, kevinfirth said:

Difficult to be precise. I can say I manage 50fps in any situation in the Majestic Q400, not every other aircraft...but that's in 4k with a 3090.  You may find you are still GPU limited with a 2070 depending on your resolution and weather.

I hope not! That RTX 2070 wasn’t easy to come by! I got it during the GPU shortage so I went to hell and back to get that card so it better not be bottlenecking me! I run at 1080p on medium settings. 

2 hours ago, Deltaair1212 said:

I hope not! That RTX 2070 wasn’t easy to come by! I got it during the GPU shortage so I went to hell and back to get that card so it better not be bottlenecking me! I run at 1080p on medium settings. 

I have a spare 2080Ti I can sell you for a mere £3 squillion? 😉

At 1080p medium setting you should be ok 🙂

 

I'm waiting for the Alder Lake 12900. My current CPU is 4-5 years old, and I stressed it a lot. The CPU is allowed to retire soon. 😥

 

I think it would be helpful to take a look at whether your CPU core 0 is running at 100% in these situations as well just to rule out that it's not the GPU that is the bottleneck. DD sceneries can be tough to render for even the best GPU's. 

No CPU available will give you 60 fps in "any" situation. Will you get an improvement? Probably, but it will be marginal. 

 

10 hours ago, Deltaair1212 said:

Currently I am running a i7-8700K @5GHz. It is paired with a RTX 2070 and 32 gigs of RAM. So the system is average but I should still be getting at least 45-60fps in all situations. Lately I have been experiencing “notchy” frame rates near populated areas, like for example I purchased SeattleX and I tell you, I swear I thought I had a i3 processor and a GTX 660 flying over Seattle with that add on. The lowest frame I saw was 8fps. So it got me thinking that just maybe my 6 core 12 threaded processor from 2018 is the hold up. Maybe. So I got online and was looking at a newer i9-10850K which is 10 core 20 thread. And honestly, this newer processor is about the same price I paid for my i7 when I got it a few years back. Do you think I would see a significant jump in performance switching to a newer processor? It can’t be the RTX 2070, or my RAM… so it has to be that processor. 

I think your starting assumption has to be challenged as pretty unrealistic--my previous build was an i7-8086K (a top-binned 8700K) at 5.3GHz and a 2080Ti, and "at least 45-60fps" was absolutely not attainable.  It's still not with a 5.2GHz 10-core 10900K and a 3090.

Seattle has been a performance-challenged area in the ESP-based sims ever since FSX.  So yes, more CPU horsepower will help--the most apparent advantage of moving from 6 cores to 10 cores has been improvements in heavy autogen areas like SoCal and Seattle where every bit of horsepower seems to help.

1 hour ago, DChockey08 said:

I think it would be helpful to take a look at whether your CPU core 0 is running at 100% in these situations as well just to rule out that it's not the GPU that is the bottleneck. DD sceneries can be tough to render for even the best GPU's. 

No CPU available will give you 60 fps in "any" situation. Will you get an improvement? Probably, but it will be marginal. 

 

Then on DD’s end, why even release the product at all? Why put something out there that they know for a fact nobody will be able to run smoothly? If a 3090, and a i9 can’t tackle the scenery, I would have never even put a price tag on it and released it to the public that would be silly on their part. 

2 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Like I said, you're looking at the wrong measure FPS.  What is needed is consistency in Timeframe, but I can't discuss P3D Betas specifically.  However, I'll suggest those with more cores in the future will be happier on the tuning front.  

I think both are important. 50fps gives me a more fluid and smooth look around when using trackIR.  Consistent frametimes eliminate stutter.  Both together is a fantastic experience, which I can now sustain in the Q400 in any weather scenario and scenery.  Never been able to do that in any other ESP based sim or with other hardware. 🙂

5 minutes ago, Rob_Ainscough said:

Like I said, you're looking at the wrong measure FPS.  What is needed is consistency in Timeframe, but I can't discuss P3D Betas specifically.  However, I'll suggest those with more cores in the future will be happier on the tuning front.  

I never had a problem with DD's Seattle even when combined with Orbx WA TE and QW 787 and that was on my older 9900K + Titan RTX ... but again, I aim for timeframe consistency not FPS which is usually 33.3ms with max deltas at 7ms.

Cheers, Rob.

Then how do you go about tweaking with time frames? I’ve never heard this term before only frames per second.