3 minutes ago, Seth2021 said:

So far is stable, never had a single bsod but needs a good cooling + Motherboard. Regarding thermal throttling, depends always of MSFS heavy multitasking loading  on all P-cores which is rare.

Seth,

I meant stable 5.7Ghz frequency, not stable overall performance 🙂

Sorry for my bad English.

4 minutes ago, Rockliffe said:

Seth, so how do you get to 5.7ghz, without manually OCing? Are you liquid cooled? 

With Intel Extreme tuning utility. I changed all P-cores to 5.7ghz + i undervolted per Point voltage offset ( Asus Bios).Adaptive Boost + Asus Multicore enhancement enabled.

Just now, Seth2021 said:

With Intel Extreme tuning utility. I changed all P-cores to 5.7ghz + i undervolted per Point voltage offset ( Asus Bios).Adaptive Boost + Asus Multicore enhancement enabled.

Wow...that's totally reversed approach than we have used with old machines for many years. 

Would be nice to have some video tutorial to make MSFS and 13900k friends. I'm about to get an upgrade (13900k +4090) by the end of this month. 

1 minute ago, G-YMML1 said:

Seth,

I meant stable 5.7Ghz frequency, not stable overall performance 🙂

Sorry for my bad English.

No worries my English  is also bad. No reason for stable 5.7ghz to be honest as i use Asus Dynamic core voltage. When i am on MSFS all cores are running at 5.7ghz continuously 

2 hours ago, Bob Scott said:

I doubt it.  The 13900K has a lot more silicon producing heat--8 performance and 16 efficiency cores versus the 9900K's 8, and at much higher clock speeds.  With a very aggressive water cooling system (two 360mm deep radiators in series external to the CPU case, 0.5" ID tubing, Laing D5 pump) temps spike rapidly into throttling territory under an all-core load.  It might be possible with some of the E-cores shut down and careful load management, but I wouldn't even think to try it.

Interesting.  Near as I can tell MSFS does not need 8 performance cores and 16 non perf cores, because it really can't use them well especially the 16 non perf cores that is a waste of heat producing silicon.  Beyond the main thread on my 9900K the other 6 cores (I mask Core07 from all other apps running) are nowhere near loaded, ever.  What is needed is maximum single-thread performance, as it's always been in flight sims.  Sounds like 13900K is really not designed optimally for what MSFS can use.

These folks cite Noctua as a reasonable choice for gamers w/ 13900K--perhaps not great for when that CPU is really maxing out, but MSFS doesn't really do that except on one core:  https://www.geekawhat.com/best-cpu-coolers-for-intel-core-i9-13900k/

Cheers

Edited June 1, 20233 yr by Noel

2 hours ago, G-YMML1 said:

Wow...that's totally reversed approach than we have used with old machines for many years. 

latest Intel Extreme tuning utility works really good with 13900K + you could change core ratio tuning on the fly with out Bios restarting etc. When i don't use MSFS i return back to 5.5ghz. 

I wish someone could make a turorial for those who are not hardware savvy, to help get a good speed out of the 13900k. I don't know if I have to invest in water cooling to get to, say eg 5.2Ghz, or whether it can be done on air.

3 hours ago, Noel said:

Interesting.  Near as I can tell MSFS does not need 8 performance cores and 16 non perf cores, because it really can't use them well especially the 16 non perf cores that is a waste of heat producing silicon.  Beyond the main thread on my 9900K the other 6 cores (I mask Core07 from all other apps running) are nowhere near loaded, ever.  What is needed is maximum single-thread performance, as it's always been in flight sims.  Sounds like 13900K is really not designed optimally for what MSFS can use.

Noel,

Once again, please do not compare older generation CPSs like yours with more modern hardware. When I fly the Fenix A320 in MSFS all 8 p-cores are working at least 80%, one or two will even stay above 90% most of the time. Why? - because the Intel Thread Director works very cleverly with the Win 11 Task Scheduler to distribute the workload evenly. On modern hardware MSFS is anything but main-thread restricted.

Oh, and about the heat - I've got an Intel XTU profile that turns off 8 of the e-cores, average CPU temps when running MSFS is 63 degrees.

1 hour ago, Rockliffe said:

I wish someone could make a turorial for those who are not hardware savvy, to help get a good speed out of the 13900k. I don't know if I have to invest in water cooling to get to, say eg 5.2Ghz, or whether it can be done on air.

You could find many tutorials for 13900K on youtube, I strongly recommend to start with this: 

https://youtu.be/ApxJU28tp7Q?t=1

As you will see, 13900k don't need any weird tweak to reach at least 5.5ghz. Just to try to have a good AIO cooler ( Corsair H150i or H170i Icue capelix for example) and the most important hardware part : A good Motherboard to handle  current and voltages. 

3 hours ago, Noel said:

Interesting.  Near as I can tell MSFS does not need 8 performance cores and 16 non perf cores, because it really can't use them well especially the 16 non perf cores that is a waste of heat producing silicon.  Beyond the main thread on my 9900K the other 6 cores (I mask Core07 from all other apps running) are nowhere near loaded, ever.  What is needed is maximum single-thread performance, as it's always been in flight sims.  Sounds like 13900K is really not designed optimally for what MSFS can use.

These folks cite Noctua as a reasonable choice for gamers w/ 13900K--perhaps not great for when that CPU is really maxing out, but MSFS doesn't really do that except on one core:  https://www.geekawhat.com/best-cpu-coolers-for-intel-core-i9-13900k/

I've only ever run MSFS on my backup machine with the 10900K, but I have a portable rig I take when travelling in our motor home that runs a 9900K @ 5.0 GHz cooled by a Noctua NH-D15 (the full 2-fan version).  The NH-D15 struggles a bit with heavy loads on the 9900K--it's keeping up, but barely, with temps hitting the mid-70s running P3D.  I generally prefer water cooling, but I went with the NH-D15 on that machine because I didn't relish the idea of water connections getting jostled around for hours at a time in a moving vehicle.  I also see much heavier multi-core CPU usage on the 10900K in MSFS (running WIndows 10) than you're describing--enough so that I really do think air cooling is a pretty iffy proposition at best on a massively multi-core processor like the 13900K.

 

44 minutes ago, Seth2021 said:

You could find many tutorials for 13900K on youtube, I strongly recommend to start with this: 

https://youtu.be/ApxJU28tp7Q?t=1

As you will see, 13900k don't need any weird tweak to reach at least 5.5ghz. Just to try to have a good AIO cooler ( Corsair H150i or H170i Icue capelix for example) and the most important hardware part : A good Motherboard to handle  current and voltages. 

Thanks Seth

2 hours ago, Rockliffe said:

I wish someone could make a turorial for those who are not hardware savvy, to help get a good speed out of the 13900k. I don't know if I have to invest in water cooling to get to, say eg 5.2Ghz, or whether it can be done on air.

I suggest that you consider the following points.

Water has a greater thermal capacity than air.

On air, you don't have moving parts and any tubing. But you have a warranty. 

When dealing with water, it's possible to experience pump malfunctions and leaks. Not so many instances but something of no issue at all with air.

When using water to cool a computer, the temperature is lower than when using air and the fans do not have to work as hard. 

Specifically, in your case, only 5.2 GHZ air would be a consideration. But it will make a difference if you decide to let the CPU exceed 5.2.

 

3 hours ago, SierraDelta said:

Noel,

Once again, please do not compare older generation CPSs like yours with more modern hardware. When I fly the Fenix A320 in MSFS all 8 p-cores are working at least 80%, one or two will even stay above 90% most of the time. Why? - because the Intel Thread Director works very cleverly with the Win 11 Task Scheduler to distribute the workload evenly. On modern hardware MSFS is anything but main-thread restricted.

Oh, and about the heat - I've got an Intel XTU profile that turns off 8 of the e-cores, average CPU temps when running MSFS is 63 degrees.

We can certainly compare anything provided we note where they differ, especially when the same balanced suite of benchmarks are used.  When I mentioned the non-main thread cores were nowhere near loaded on my older CPU what I didn't mention was that I run the sim locked w/ the method described in my sig.  If I unlock the sim w/ the press of the * key this is what it looks like.  This was done after reading your post earlier after I had landed and didn't want to restart another flight so just used slew mode at a modest pace.  Note the frame rate is nearly maxed in the main thread Core07, and the others are nearly fully loaded too, and this on the older generation CPU, in Win 10:

Now here's where I live most of the time with frame rate locked 33.  On the ground when I might be panning more I will often turn off the lock and in PMDG 738 will see around high 30's to low 40's at moderately complex airports.  Everything is relaxed and there is ample headroom to cope w/ transient spikes in demand from FSLTL for example, since the main thread is hovering around 70% of peak load.  I enjoy ultra smooth stutter free animation everywhere, though with this hardware on occasion one needs to use tools to modulate during runtime, which RTSS' hotkeyhandler.dll handily provides.  high end current hardware would obviate this bigtime I'm assuming.

4 hours ago, SierraDelta said:

On modern hardware MSFS is anything but main-thread restricted.

So in the Fenix with T-LOD of 400, at say KJFK or KLAX, w/ FSLTL maxed or at least highly realistic static and dynamic AI, you're not main thread restricted? 

Like others have said, I also have the i9-13900KF with the ARTIC Liquid Freezer II 420 and you absolutely DON'T need or want to OC this baby since it runs at 5.5 already. For MSFS2020, I have everything turned up and CPU is doing fine. The one thing I did have to do is to limit the wattage (in the BIOS) to Intel specs to keep it from running too hot. This is an issue with motherboards not limiting to specs by default nowadays.