One more week...

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-zen-2-cpu-5-ghz-overclock-4-5-ghz-all-core-boost/

In particular:

"~4.4GHz performs similar to a 5Ghz 9900k – in Cinebench"

I have my eye on the Ryzen 5 3600X, bursts to 4.4 stock. And on top of everything else, B450 mobo's are going for cheap, MSI gaming plus mini-ITX is on sale at NewEgg for $100 (seems to be working for me so far although I couldn't overclock my 2600 worth a darn)

Gonna have my cake and eat it too, yum. Not completely sold on AMD GPU's (although I'm willing to crown the Vega56 as the el cheapo king of DCS, reality is, it's what I had lying around) but AMD may be looking really good for DCS in the CPU/mobo department. At half the price.

I am afraid that I am one of those people with an unjustifiable prejudice against AMD. I would not use one of their products if you gave it to me wrapped in $100 bills. Their hardware might be fine but they have some of the most useless software guys on the planet.

After many years with Nvidia, I tried the AMD 295x2. Driver support was so frustrating I sold it for a used 980ti. CPUs have generally been pretty reliable, though, and my next PC will likely be Ryzen based.

I've been fine with my 1700x and might upgrade next year, although now that I think about it I have no reason to. Nothing I play is noticeably CPU bottlenecked, and with a 1080ti I'm getting great frames with every game. Huh.

I've been fine with my 1700x and might upgrade next year, although now that I think about it I have no reason to. Nothing I play is noticeably CPU bottlenecked, and with a 1080ti I'm getting great frames with every game. Huh.

That's a very decent CPU, I didn't gain a thing moving from 1700 to 2600. I found the 1700 easier to overclock, probably silicon lottery. Solid CPU.

Gen3 supposedly has more instructions per cycle, and I imagine DCS will like that. We'll see

Yeah Crimson was the bane of my existence back when I was mining. Only had one Intel box though, couldn't see spending the money

Day one buy for me. Almost 2 years ago I built on a high end X370 board, knowing the Ryzen first gen was a bit weaker but AM4 would have longevity, and in a couple years the Ryzen core would mature and I’d be able to upgrade. Had I bought intel then, I would be stuck with a 7xxx series; next week I’ll be running a 9xxx series-level chip, with no motherboard replacement.

Glorious.

Today my I7 2700K @4.8Ghz hit 95% all cores at nevada. He can't handle my 1080TI anymore. I'll probably buy the Ryzen 7 3700x 8/16 + 32GB DDR4 3200mhz in October.

Speaking of upgrading. I'm running 16GB of RAM lagging along at 1700MHz because I wasn't paying attention when I bought it.

Looking at HyperX which I know for a fact will run at rated speed with my mobo, options

1. 16GB running at 3466Mhz for $117

2. 32GB running at 3200MHz for $205

I'm kinda leaning toward the 16GB package, I don't mind spending a hundred bucks but not sure I see the marginal value in spending another hundred for 32 cuz it's not clear to me DCS will use it anyway, plus it'll be slower. Thoughts?

Speaking of upgrading. I'm running 16GB of RAM lagging along at 1700MHz because I wasn't paying attention when I bought it.

 

Looking at HyperX which I know for a fact will run at rated speed with my mobo, options

1. 16GB running at 3466Mhz for $117

2. 32GB running at 3200MHz for $205

 

I'm kinda leaning toward the 16GB package, I don't mind spending a hundred bucks but not sure I see the marginal value in spending another hundred for 32 cuz it's not clear to me DCS will use it anyway, plus it'll be slower. Thoughts?

I wouldn’t worry too much about the speed, but the extra capacity is really nice. I’ve heard 32gb really helps with stutters; I’ve never tried on 16gb, but with my 32gb I never get stutters.

Will plonk one 3900x onto my existing motherboard.

I might put up test results for comparison with my current 2700x.

Will plonk one 3900x onto my existing motherboard.

I might put up test results for comparison with my current 2700x.

I was originally worried that my (our) boards wouldn’t provide enough power for the 12 and 16 core parts, but amazingly they managed to keep the TDP to 105w, so we should be able to handle it. Craziness.

I don’t do a lot of multicore heavy work, so I’m leaning toward the 3800X myself. It costs $100 less, and at the same TDP but with 4 fewer cores, I’m hoping it will have additional boost / overclock headroom to eek out some extra single core performance.

PS: I wonder if the 8 core parts will be on one fully enabled chiplet, or 2 half enabled ones... with the cache dropping from 64 in the 3900X to 32 in the 3800X, I suspect it will be just one chiplet. This should lower inter core latency, but I wonder what effect it will have on overclocking?

The Crosshair vi will take even a 16 core, my fear is the Power supply when all cores are overclocked

is there any advantage for us that are already at or over 5.0Ghz?

Hard to say until there are actual benchmarks I would guess. Also, depends on how many cores and, for DCS, when Vulcan comes out how well we get to use extra cores if I read the leaves right.

I'm seriously looking at a R5 3600, I have the R5 1600 now, and it performs quite nicely OCed to 3.5ghz in DCS VR, but a little extra boost would be welcome. :D

(I have never built a system for myself using Intel, overpriced for what you get IMHO).

I'm seriously looking at a R5 3600, I have the R5 1600 now, and it performs quite nicely OCed to 3.5ghz in DCS VR, but a little extra boost would be welcome. :D

 

 

(I have never built a system for myself using Intel, overpriced for what you get IMHO).

The "x" model goes to 11.

is there any advantage for us that are already at or over 5.0Ghz?

depends on the number of cores you have. If you are on a 8700K or above, its too soon to upgrade.

Im not aiming for a sensible upgrade, its just for fun. :D

is there any advantage for us that are already at or over 5.0Ghz?

Well you got robbed by Intel already so not really :)

The point of the new Ryzen is to have a cpu as good as what you have or just slightly better at best but for 249$ instead of 500$+ and the additional money you probably had to spend for cooling that o/c cpu to 5ghz.

It helps people who want to spend more on the gpu instead to see a real increase of performance in gaming overall, not just the cpu.

probably my next cpu will be a 3600 after 9 years with 2500k/2600k

. I have an I5-660k @ 4.4 which runs great. But with VR it hits 100% usage pretty easily, and once I upgraded to the Index it's starting to chug.

I might jump on this AMD train.

. I have an I5-660k @ 4.4 which runs great. But with VR it hits 100% usage pretty easily, and once I upgraded to the Index it's starting to chug.

 

I might jump on this AMD train.

What GPU are you running ? Surprised to hear of pixels effecting CPU .

1080ti

It typically stays around 90% while i'm in VR

What GPU are you running ? Surprised to hear of pixels effecting CPU .

Near as I can tell everything except msaa and pd hits the CPU at least some.

Near as I can tell everything except msaa and pd hits the CPU at least some.

Yes , that is my impression as well . But both are pixel-related . Thus the increase in pixels via the Index i would have thought would only effect the GPU , not the CPU .

Well you got robbed by Intel already so not really :)

ok that was funny :)

but to put it in perspective, the extra $2/week i spent was well worth it. and cutting out that extra sausage roll each Sunday morning before church has helped my health too.