i5 vs i7, what would you suggest for DCS VR?

[sirrah]

I'm still doing research (dreaming:P) on what system to buy..

I read somewhere that for gaming purposes the i7 would only be slightly better than an i5.

 

Since I plan to primarily use the pc for DCS World VR, I was wondering if there is any noticeable difference between using an Intel i5 instead of an i7? Where better to ask than here

Will DCS World VR use the 6 extra threads of the i7?

 

With other words, will it pay off to go for the more expensive i7, or will the i5 be just as good for DCS VR?

 

 

 

(The release of the Ryzen 2 (in about 2 weeks) might change everything of course. I expect It to at least influence Intel prices.. :thumbup: )

[johnco61]

I’m no expert on this but I have an i7 and I think the only difference between the two is that the i7 has Hyper-Threading, I have Hyper-Threading turned off for two reasons, my CPU gets too hot with it running and apparently you get a performance hit when gaming.

So I would save yourself some money and go with the i5, unless you need Hyper-Threading for other reasons

[A Hamburgler]

I have the i5 8600k running at 4.5 and it’s more then enough for any game even Arma. Never had an issue with my cpu in vr.

[schroedi]

At the moment DCS supports 2 threads (1 for sound and 1 for everything else). In the future they might change that to 3 threads (AI might get it's own thread). So i7 doesn't make any sense.

[firmek]

Get i5 model with a highest clock rate. Add the monday saved from i7 to SSD or better GPU.

[Gladman]

I'd suggest an i5 that you can overclock (The higher the Ghz the better). Maybe in the distant future an i7 will be needed if/when multicore support becomes reality but I suspect that to be a couple years out at least.

[toutenglisse]

Basically DCS is harder with the GPU. And using VR, DCS uses a really small % of CPU, because it's even more demanding on the GPU.

So sirrah, for mostly using DCS VR, I would say you'd see no difference between a i5 and i7 - when I turn hyperthreading on or off with my i7 I see no difference.

Actually only few games really uses hyperthreading at their advantage.

 

Gladman, DCS isn't multithreaded but it is multicore : if you want to see it you have to use a sufficiently low resolution so your GPU is not bottlenecking your CPU (for my 1080Ti I need 1080p, so I would say 720p for your 1080) than maxout all settings and set Vsync off : there you will see all your CPU cores at/near max.

[hannibal]

fastest quad u should go for

[rrohde]

Doesn't the underlying operating system benefit from the i7's architecture while DCS is running? Even though DCS itself might be running well on the i5 CPUs, what about all other processes around it that are active at the same time? That's something I was always curious about.

[Wolf8312]

I dont think you'll see much of a difference either way, but I would go with the I7 simply because with VR especially you never know what the future is going to bring. You gotta figure that sometime down the line somebodys going to make use of all those cores/threads!

 

But seriously sometime in the future a whole new flight sim may be released and you've got to figure that such developers would be smart enough to make use of as many cores as possible.

 

And also I know we all love DCS and flight sims but surely there are some other games you would like to play lol! Not that I play any of them myself but I mean to get round to it one day!

[sirrah]

As usual, thanks for all the feedback! :thumbup:

[Wolf8312]

As usual, thanks for all the feedback! :thumbup:

 

So have you made a decision?

[sirrah]

So have you made a decision?

 

After all comments here I will definately go for the i5 (somewhere in the 7xxx range I think)

[NineGzuz]

If it comes down to budget, for VR I would put money towards getting the best graphics card you can afford, and taking the i5.

[streakeagle]

Even with hyperthreading disabled, the i7 still has some hardware advantages. But everything I have ever seen online led me to go with the i5 purely from a cost-effective point of view. I don't get into custom cooling, so I can only modestly overclock my i5's. But in all the flight sims I play their performance is nearly identical to what others are getting with similarly clocked i7s, despite any advantages the i7s may have beyond hyperthreading.

[firmek]

Even with hyperthreading disabled, the i7 still has some hardware advantages. But everything I have ever seen online led me to go with the i5 purely from a cost-effective point of view. I don't get into custom cooling, so I can only modestly overclock my i5's. But in all the flight sims I play their performance is nearly identical to what others are getting with similarly clocked i7s, despite any advantages the i7s may have beyond hyperthreading.

+1. From pure technical design perspective i7 is obviously better than i5. But unless the budget is unlimited - which it's safe to assume in most of the cases it's isn't, the $/FPS gain between i5 and i7 is borderline inefective. In other words we spend a lot just to get a few more frames pers second. From the overall system perspective it's better to invest in a better GPU and SSD drive as those bring better improvement per money spent.

[Iad6012]

in regards to getting the i5 with a 2070 or 80 super (depending on price) the SSD ... i originally thought a 500gb m.2 and a 2tb 3.5" drive ... but someone suggested getting a 1tb M.2 and nothing else for now...

 

 

first is that a better option ? what about 500 m.2 and a 500 2.5" ssd vs a 1tb m2 alone...

 

 

cheers !!

[speed-of-heat]

be aware that the current i7-9700k does not have hyper-threading, but it does have 8 real cores... p.s. agreed in the immediate bang for buck ... an i5 you can get up to 4-5 depending on your cooling solution, and like for like perf from a DCS pov is pretty marginal

Edited April 1, 2020 by speed-of-heat

[Baldrick33]

Basically DCS is harder with the GPU. And using VR, DCS uses a really small % of CPU, because it's even more demanding on the GPU.

So sirrah, for mostly using DCS VR, I would say you'd see no difference between a i5 and i7 - when I turn hyperthreading on or off with my i7 I see no difference.

Actually only few games really uses hyperthreading at their advantage.

 

Gladman, DCS isn't multithreaded but it is multicore : if you want to see it you have to use a sufficiently low resolution so your GPU is not bottlenecking your CPU (for my 1080Ti I need 1080p, so I would say 720p for your 1080) than maxout all settings and set Vsync off : there you will see all your CPU cores at/near max.

I think DCS is very CPU demanding especially in VR. It also uses mostly one core. Basically the fastest single core speed CPU is the best to go for.

 

Note that Windows will move the work between cores so it appears that many cores are used and the overall percentage usage is low whereas in fact the CPU is maxed out on one core.

 

I noticed a more significant gain with DCS in VR going from an i7-5820K @ 4GHz to an i5-8600K @ 5GHz than I did from a 1080 (not ti) to 2080ti

[Bob_Bushman]

Currently DCS is mostly Single core.

Hardly nothing else is.

Even though DCS primarily only uses the one main thread, VR doesn't, it has a lot of extra processes, more than track-ir etc, also DirectX uses it's few threads for it's business, then there is all the other things you want to run, Discord, SRS etc etc.

 

More cores always finds work, even as it is. Right now.

 

And even though DCS isn't very multicore right now, that is likely to change rather soon.

 

Buying a CPU now focusing only one single core performance, would most likely leave you wanting an upgrade inside of a year when DCS does update, as well as leaving you wanting the higher core count immediately for any use case outside of DCS.

 

I'm on an i7 8700k right now, and if I could justify it I would have upgraded that to a Ryzen 3900x for the additional core count.

[The_Nephilim]

After all comments here I will definately go for the i5 (somewhere in the 7xxx range I think)

 

 

Well not sure if that is a good Idea, I have a 7600K @ 4.8GHZ and I am looking to upgrade.. my 4 cores are at about 70-75% Utilization when DCS is running.. I think DCS alone pegs it at 50% Utilization amongst the other software I have running besides normal OS Runnings..

 

I was definetely thinking Intel but wondering if I should go with the 9700K or 9900K as I lean to maybe a Pimax 5-8K VR headset in the future..

 

Mostly realizing if I went with a Pimax I would probally need a 2080Ti.. right now I sport a Odyssey Plus headset with a 1080GTX and that is near limits for DCS in its current state..

 

I would try aand ffind some benchmarks for the 7xxx series with headset you have to see how it fares compared to a 9700-9900K model.. I know I definetely think I need a new CPU Motherboard with a new video card but I hear the nVidia was held of till at least September for release well that iss the rumor so who knows for sure when 3xxx series are coming..

[Notso]

I'm still doing research (dreaming:P) on what system to buy..

I read somewhere that for gaming purposes the i7 would only be slightly better than an i5.

 

Since I plan to primarily use the pc for DCS World VR, I was wondering if there is any noticeable difference between using an Intel i5 instead of an i7? Where better to ask than here

Will DCS World VR use the 6 extra threads of the i7?

 

With other words, will it pay off to go for the more expensive i7, or will the i5 be just as good for DCS VR?

 

 

 

(The release of the Ryzen 2 (in about 2 weeks) might change everything of course. I expect It to at least influence Intel prices.. :thumbup: )

 

i9

[eaglecash867]

Heh...not sure the i9 existed yet when this thread was started. It has definitely pulled a Bernie Lomax. :D

[The_Nephilim]

i9

 

 

OK what is so special about an i9, from what I see it is Hyperthreaded but in most cases users just end up disabling the HT anyhow, so what not just get an i7-9700K ??

[DERacing]

Currently DCS is mostly Single core.

Hardly nothing else is.

Even though DCS primarily only uses the one main thread, VR doesn't, it has a lot of extra processes, more than track-ir etc, also DirectX uses it's few threads for it's business, then there is all the other things you want to run, Discord, SRS etc etc.

 

More cores always finds work, even as it is. Right now.

 

And even though DCS isn't very multicore right now, that is likely to change rather soon.

 

Buying a CPU now focusing only one single core performance, would most likely leave you wanting an upgrade inside of a year when DCS does update, as well as leaving you wanting the higher core count immediately for any use case outside of DCS.

 

I'm on an i7 8700k right now, and if I could justify it I would have upgraded that to a Ryzen 3900x for the additional core count.

 

 

Wait a minute... Im probably hitting micro center tomorrow to pick up a replacement for my current i7-8700 (not K) cpu. Was going to get an i7-9700K model.

 

 

Im a bit confused on the choices though. Is the Ryzen 3900x better than a 9700k? What other options should I be looking at? Should I save a few bucks and go i5 and get hyper threading?

 

Sorry guys, Im lost on the new architectures for the CPU's now a days.

 

 

That said, my current specs are i7-8700, Asus Prime B360M-A mobo, 64gb Corsaid DDR4, RTX 2080Ti, Samsung Odyssey Plus WMD.

 

 

Whats the best bang for the buck to run with? I expect to upgrade the mobo and go to liquid cooling within a few months. So I know I will be bottlenecked a little with the mobo. Any thoughts on those as well?