If You Could Build A New Computer Just for Falcon BMS Right Now…
-
No it is not much more bang for your buck it is exactly the opposite as Intel considers the 2011 setup to be more of a money maker for them and the price of the motherboards and CPUs prove it.
The ONLY quad core Kaby Lake CPUs on the list that have 2.9 base clocks are low power specific or mobile specific CPUs hence you are cherry picking numbers to make your choice look better. No one is going to chose a 7700T over a 7700K for a normal desktop setup. The 7700 has a base clock of 3.6 and the 7700K has a base clock of 4.2. Heck even the i5 Kaby Lake 7600K is a 3.8 base clock. Also never mind that going from a Kaby Lake based system where he could buy a new motherboard for 100-150 (from newegg) suddenly shoots up to 379 at the CHEAPEST on newegg for a 2011 based board. Oh yeah also not for a new motherboard but a refurb. If he wanted new then the price jumps again to 469. So much for “only” a 30 dollar difference.
Simple here. Unless he is going for a rig where he would need a ton of PCI Express lanes via several m.2 or u.2 NVMe drives he wouldn’t be well served by going the 2011 route as the performance does NOT match the price increase. Even if he wanted or needed a ton of PCIe lanes I wouldn’t suggest Intel via 2011 or from the i9 series but AMD Ryzen as that would fit his budget better and be a bit more in line with price to performance.
This is fair, although all the other Kabys on the list were actually less than this one. So I used the highest price point. i5s are overpriced as a marketing sell to consumers… the 7700k is 369, which is exactly $30 difference for the CPU. It’s still a 4-core instead of 6, and there is ABSOLUTELY no point in OC’ing processors out there right now unless you are doing serious CPU intense video editing…in 4K…and 3D…on 3 concurrent streams. Nothing out there, and certainly no games, even come close to pushing these to their limits. Cores are more important than clock speed for the average machine, because cores improve multithreading, and multithreading is the new black… Historically, cores have had little impact on gaming, but this will become much more relevant in the gaming world as DX12 proliferates, because it uses multithreading.
I did say a good CPU/MoBo/RAM combo is 1100-1200, which accounts for the high MoBo cost you refer to.
No game out there requires 32 gigs of RAM. He would be just fine at 16. Air cooling is also just fine to control price.
Here would be a great comparison video for this scenario. It is comparing an older haswell versus a 6700k but the haswell stats are basically the same but it clocks slightlyly higher than the broadwell you are linking. The ONLY time there is a massive performance gain with a 2011 versus a Z170 is in applications. Games there is very little difference at all compared to the price jump.
This has been contested elsewhere in this thread, and they are correct. Just because Falcon can’t use it, doesn’t mean there aren’t games that don’t. Several 4x games can use it, XP11, DCS 2.1, or just general ability to multitask while doing something RAM intensive, like switching out of 3D to look something up. RAM is never a bad investment, and it’s cheap… dirt cheap. Why limit yourself if you don’t HAVE to? This is low hanging fruit certainly, and if you have to sacrifice something, then nix some RAM. But if you can get everything else you need, and still get the extra RAM, it WILL make a difference.
However, that reason does not justify the extra cost of the chip and motherboard you’ll have to be using. It’s like going quad-SLI for an additional 25fps over a single-card configuration. Overkill and not really bang-for-buck.
No, just no. 16GB RAM, done. If you need 32GB RAM, you need 32GB RAM and you know EXACTLY why you need 32GB RAM. Otherwise, stick to 16GB. Liquid cooling, I’m guessing you’re talking about AIO? Sure, they’re cool and if you want to be staring into your hardware and admiring all the cool lighting effects, go for an AIO solution. If you’re more about ease-of-maintenance, performance, and USING your PC as opposed to gawking at it, consider a good, beefy aircooler.
This depends on the situation. The extra RAM has already been contested. And there are a lot of uses outside gaming where it can come in handy. Win10 is very good with mem pre-fetch and caching. It will dynamically find good use for 64GB of RAM, let alone 32. It’s not a bad investment…
Hefty CPU without liquid cooling is just asking for failures. It’s a big picture approach, not just the CPU temp readout. When your CPU runs consistently at 70-80 C, that’s not good for the board or the CPU, or anything else in there which has a fan to help keep it cool (GFX card? RAM? HDD? all suffer in performance when they get too hot). Something WILL fail, much sooner than a properly cooled CPU at 25-40 C. Not to mention all that amazing extra clock speed you paid for in the ~K series, will get throttled when your core temp gets that high and you’ll perform like a $90 i3… This is 10x more true when you OC. The speeds are set where they are for that specific reason. It’s the best usable speed on a given die, under specific thermal conditions. This is why you can’t RMA an overclocked CPU, and it voids the warranty.
This all comes down to preference. I use my PCs for more than just gaming, but I have never regretted having the extra power from the -E chips (2011 boards) while gaming either. If you like the onboard GFX from the Kabys to run an additional screen, then whatever works. I would rather repurpose an old nvidia card and get a dedicated GPU and vRAM for something like that–even if it’s a little old or sub-par, instead of eating away from my system resources. And I would rather know the extra $30-60 I’m paying is being spent on cores and performance, instead of mediocre onboard GFX chips I won’t use. Most gamers would never touch the onboard GFX, so for the AVERAGE gamer, it is a useless improvement from the previous chip. Your setup is not AVERAGE, because you drive 25 monitors or something like that, but the AVERAGE gamer will likely never even plug anything into it. Wasted space on the CPU die…
-
What are people’s thoughts on AMD Ryzen?
My Q9550 has been in service in 2009 and performs still very well today - for a 8 year old system mind you! I’m looking at replacement options and I’m considering switching back to AMD for a Ryzen 5 1600 build. (Not convinced that the 1600X is worth the extra money). From what I read online, the 1600 outperforms equally priced i5s and offers much better value for money than the i7s.
I haven’t used AMD since the Athlon days (running a [email protected] on a KT7 board) so I am wondering what the thoughts are on Ryzen builds for BMS?
-
This has been contested elsewhere in this thread, and they are correct. Just because Falcon can’t use it, doesn’t mean there aren’t games that don’t. Several 4x games can use it, XP11, DCS 2.1, or just general ability to multitask while doing something RAM intensive, like switching out of 3D to look something up. RAM is never a bad investment, and it’s cheap… dirt cheap. Why limit yourself if you don’t HAVE to? This is low hanging fruit certainly, and if you have to sacrifice something, then nix some RAM. But if you can get everything else you need, and still get the extra RAM, it WILL make a difference.
This depends on the situation. The extra RAM has already been contested. And there are a lot of uses outside gaming where it can come in handy. Win10 is very good with mem pre-fetch and caching. It will dynamically find good use for 64GB of RAM, let alone 32. It’s not a bad investment…
I’m not so sure… over here, the most expensive 16GB RAM kit can be £100+ less than the cheapest 32GB RAM kit, in some cases, a 32GB kit doubles in price compared to a 16GB kit. While I won’t argue about how other games or programs may or may not use more than 16GB of RAM, I will argue that your £100 is best spent elsewhere on the system and may see significantly better results and returns for the money spent. However, if you’ve got a spare £100+ lying about and you’re happy with the rest of your machine, then sure, go and play with 32GB of RAM. That amount of money being “dirt cheap” would be relative to your financial situation
As the OP said: “to do anything other than run Falcon BMS and other similar sims” but then I asked what “similar sims” meant exactly?
Hefty CPU without liquid cooling is just asking for failures.
False. You are basically saying air cooling cannot compete with liquid cooling which is a lie. A good aircooler can outperform a mediocre liquid cooler, and a bad liquid cooler can outperform a bad aircooler. Compare a good aircooler with a good liquid cooler, compare their prices, and compare the temps. You’ll be surprised.
You can see from this page that a Noctua NH-D15 (£80) runs about 3 degrees C hotter than a H105 (£110) but is the same or cooler than a H110 under max load, or about 1 degree hotter under idle. In this other review, the NH-D15 is about 3.5 degrees C hotter than a H110i at Performance Mode (£120) at stock or about 5 degrees hotter at OC load. However, further down, you’ll see that the Noctua outputs around 24-35db while the H110i is at 40-68db. Cheaper and more quiet!
If you’re talking about failures, things can get more interesting with a liquid cooling setup. The absolute worst that could happen with an aircooler is that you end up with a passive heatsink.
I would rather repurpose an old nvidia card and get a dedicated GPU and vRAM for something like that–even if it’s a little old or sub-par, instead of eating away from my system resources.
-
This is fair, although all the other Kabys on the list were actually less than this one. So I used the highest price point. i5s are overpriced as a marketing sell to consumers… the 7700k is 369, which is exactly $30 difference for the CPU.
The 7700K is also 4.2 base clock and on big air is easy enough to push to 5.0. That is a lot of head room over 3.4.
It’s still a 4-core instead of 6, and there is ABSOLUTELY no point in OC’ing processors out there right now unless you are doing serious CPU intense video editing…in 4K…and 3D…on 3 concurrent streams. Nothing out there, and certainly no games, even come close to pushing these to their limits. Cores are more important than clock speed for the average machine, because cores improve multithreading, and multithreading is the new black… Historically, cores have had little impact on gaming, but this will become much more relevant in the gaming world as DX12 proliferates, because it uses multithreading.
Based on the stated budget that still points to an AMD Ryzen setup. Intel enthusiast is too expensive for what he can afford.
I did say a good CPU/MoBo/RAM combo is 1100-1200, which accounts for the high MoBo cost you refer to.
He needs a lot more than just a CPU/mobo/RAM. Add in a decent video card and you are up to at least 1300-1500 range and he still needs more for the new rig. That would also be a underpowered GPU compared to the CPU and RAM. AMD Ryzen or Intel 7700K setup will give him more room to buy a better video card and still have good performance.
This has been contested elsewhere in this thread, and they are correct. Just because Falcon can’t use it, doesn’t mean there aren’t games that don’t. Several 4x games can use it, XP11, DCS 2.1, or just general ability to multitask while doing something RAM intensive, like switching out of 3D to look something up. RAM is never a bad investment, and it’s cheap… dirt cheap. Why limit yourself if you don’t HAVE to? This is low hanging fruit certainly, and if you have to sacrifice something, then nix some RAM. But if you can get everything else you need, and still get the extra RAM, it WILL make a difference.
Yes it will but with his budget that could easily make the difference between buying a 1070 or a 1080 or a 480 to a 580 and going from 16 gigs of RAM to 32 is NOT going to equate to the same performance jump as either of those GPU upgrades.
Hefty CPU without liquid cooling is just asking for failures. It’s a big picture approach, not just the CPU temp readout. When your CPU runs consistently at 70-80 C, that’s not good for the board or the CPU, or anything else in there which has a fan to help keep it cool (GFX card? RAM? HDD? all suffer in performance when they get too hot). Something WILL fail, much sooner than a properly cooled CPU at 25-40 C.
Funny how I have never used WC yet I have OC’ed CPUs for a good decade now with ZERO issues of longevity or performance based on heat. Unless you are into pretty serious OCing WC is not required at all and no it isn’t going to kill your components or even affect performance as long as you have a good case with good airflow. My last setup was a i7-2700K and the only reason I am not running that now is because I wanted to have the best Sky Lake CPU that was supported on Windows 7. The 2700K and motherboard still works JUST FINE.
Not to mention all that amazing extra clock speed you paid for in the ~K series, will get throttled when your core temp gets that high and you’ll perform like a $90 i3… This is 10x more true when you OC. The speeds are set where they are for that specific reason. It’s the best usable speed on a given die, under specific thermal conditions. This is why you can’t RMA an overclocked CPU, and it voids the warranty.
LOL. The ignorance of this statement is really mind boggling. The only level of truth there is about RMAing CPUs. Other than that it is pure non sense. Like stated before I have run OCed Intel CPUs for a long time now, all on big air, with no performance issues what so ever. Certainly nothing that could ever make it comparable to any i3.
This all comes down to preference. I use my PCs for more than just gaming, but I have never regretted having the extra power from the -E chips (2011 boards) while gaming either. If you like the onboard GFX from the Kabys to run an additional screen, then whatever works. I would rather repurpose an old nvidia card and get a dedicated GPU and vRAM for something like that–even if it’s a little old or sub-par, instead of eating away from my system resources. And I would rather know the extra $30-60 I’m paying is being spent on cores and performance, instead of mediocre onboard GFX chips I won’t use. Most gamers would never touch the onboard GFX, so for the AVERAGE gamer, it is a useless improvement from the previous chip. Your setup is not AVERAGE, because you drive 25 monitors or something like that, but the AVERAGE gamer will likely never even plug anything into it. Wasted space on the CPU die…
The fact of the matter still remains that this guy or gal is working on a 2k budget and your recommendations don’t take into account those limitations. As of today for someone wanting to build a new rig I cannot see why anyone would recommend a 2011 or a 2066 setup as the cost is higher than AMD Ryzen and the performance isn’t that far off to justify the added expense. That or at a minimum a 7600K or 7700K as of today.
-
I’m not so sure… over here, the most expensive 16GB RAM kit can be £100+ less than the cheapest 32GB RAM kit, in some cases, a 32GB kit doubles in price compared to a 16GB kit. While I won’t argue about how other games or programs may or may not use more than 16GB of RAM, I will argue that your £100 is best spent elsewhere on the system and may see significantly better results and returns for the money spent. However, if you’ve got a spare £100+ lying about and you’re happy with the rest of your machine, then sure, go and play with 32GB of RAM. That amount of money being “dirt cheap” would be relative to your financial situation
Never mind that say he put the extra cash into the GPU for the new build he could always go back and add 16 gigs in later as money permitted. Not exactly as easy or convenient if he short changed his GPU purchase simply to have 32 gigs of RAM out the gate.
If you’re talking about failures, things can get more interesting with a liquid cooling setup. The absolute worst that could happen with an aircooler is that you end up with a passive heatsink.
Yeah this is the second cherry picked argument on the subject. He has completely avoided the AMD Ryzen comparison so far as well.
-
It’s still a 4-core instead of 6…. Cores are more important than clock speed for the average machine, because cores improve multithreading, and multithreading is the new black… Historically, cores have had little impact on gaming, but this will become much more relevant in the gaming world as DX12 proliferates, because it uses multithreading.
a machine that isn’t intended to do anything other than run Falcon BMS and other similar sims.
First, isn’t BMS still a clock-speed-dependent sim? IIRC, a faster dual-core will run BMS better than a slower quad-core… at least that’s how I understood it. Is it different now with 4.33? If not, then for the purposes of the OP, he wants faster clock speed, not necessarily more cores so a 6-core or 8-core is just extra, un-needed expense.
Second, BMS isn’t multithreaded, correct? Sure, he’ll still be able to benefit from extra cores for other stuff he runs alongside BMS, but again, no need to go more than 4 cores.
Third, DX12 is still a ways away and DX12 flight simulations even further, if any are planned. Is XP11 DX10/11? In any case, by the time DX12 proliferates enough, we’ll probably be 2 or 3 or even more CPU generations into the future.
-
Never mind that say he put the extra cash into the GPU for the new build he could always go back and add 16 gigs in later as money permitted. Not exactly as easy or convenient if he short changed his GPU purchase simply to have 32 gigs of RAM out the gate.
Well, a GPU upgrade is also a relatively easy thing of unplugging the old one and slotting in the new one, then flogging the old one on eBay But as you said, the extra cash spent on a GPU will give better ROI than if spent on RAM. Unless maybe RAM drive? But we’re getting extremely complicated for something that may be solved by slotting in an M.2 NVME drive…. and I would wager that a RAM drive vs. M.2 NVME drive performance won’t be “felt” by the user unless he constantly uses a stopwatch alongside his PC.
He has completely avoided the AMD Ryzen comparison so far as well.
I’ve not paid much attention to Ryzen aside from the fact that it’s got Intel scrambling to it’s feet. Competition is good!!
-
@Ice: Still not seeing the big picture when it comes to air vs liquid
Where does the air go in a forced air system? Through the CPU, into the heatsinks, dissipates into the ambient air. This raises the ambient temp of the rest of the system, a lot.Second, where does the air come from? Most cases (As Stub pointed out earlier) are carefully designed to have a specific air flow path inside the case. Adding a huge vacuum in the middle of the case destroys that airflow. Which makes it harder for the rest of the system to efficiently cool. +/- 1 or 2 degrees on the CPU is not comparable when everything else in the system runs 10 degrees hotter. This is on top of the already hotter ambient temp of the system in point 1.
Liquid systems remove the CPU cooling almost entirely from the case designed draw through cooling, which results in more “clean” air for the other components of the system. The heat is dissipated at the exit point of the system via the fans that come with the LC system, so it never gets introduced into the ambient case air. As I said before, I look at it from the whole system concept, not just the number on the CPU sensor. It makes a difference for high end systems. If you look at every high end benchmark on Tom’s they all say you need Liquid, Open Loop, to do anything other than stock freqs. Air just won’t cut it with the more powerful processors.
Third, from what I understand; CPU is not the bottleneck in BMS, and BMS DOES have multithreading built into the program–This has been discussed in the past on the forums, and someone (Sorry I can’t recall who right now and I already started typing this so I’m not going to do a search) always comes in with the hammer and says yes, with some big long explanation about where and how and why etc… From what I can tell, it is not very effective, or efficient, but it’s there. It’s rather moot in this conversation though, because the hard work is done during render in BMS, which cannot use multithreading. However, my point was more to the multitasking aspect. If you run nothing else at all on your system, then fine. If you run even 1 other program along with BMS, you benefit from more cores. Just loading the system and the 60+ processes and services running in Windows wil benefit from the extra cores. One core = one process at a time. Thread management allows the operating system to switch that core from one process to the next to facilitate multitasking on a single core. But until you come close to doubling the speed of a lower core system, an extra core always wins the computational battle, EVERY TIME until you get to a number of cores or clock speeds well outside this discussion. 6*3.6 > 4 * 4.2…that’s just simple math. The ONLY exception to that rule being if you are in an environment that TRULY runs only 1 process at a time. Which hasn’t been Windows since the DOS days. I know a little bit about this one, I’m about to complete my PhD in Computer Science. Benchmarks are misleading because they are almost always conducted by a biased party, and the results are skewed by instruction handling more than clock speed.
@Stubbies
You are wrong. If you don’t explicitly set an OC profile on MOST good motherboards, it will default to a “Balanced” profile, which throttles CPU performance based on usage, power, AND COOLING. Based on the specs you said you are using, I’m not surprised you have never had a failure, you don’t have the need for WC. But a 140W TDP i7 Enthusiast chip will need it. Period. Otherwise you’ll run 60+ degrees at idle, and well above that under load. My suggestion was based on the processor I recommended. Not a lower TDP chip, or an i5, or a Ryzen. The chip I suggested would benefit greatly from a liquid cooled system. Wasted money on an i5, or a 90W ~K chip. No arguments from me there. But if you’re going to go for a new rig, and you want it to push the limits for other stuff out there and not JUST falcon, I recommend the higher power. It’s worth it. And it’s certainly achievable for under 2K. As I said in my initial post, you might be forced to choose between Monitor/GFX card as far as quality goes. But given the options on the table, I would rather replace one of those in 6-12 months when I had more money as opposed to replacing the CPU. That’s just me, because I prefer the higher end enthusiast and Xtreme chips for my other PC uses. Those don’t get updated nearly as much as every day consumer chips do, so once I get one, I plan to have it for a few years.Thermal Throttling: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/desktop-5th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.html Para 5.7 Still mind boggled with ignorance?
-
MorteSil
I have great regard for what you have to say, and agree with you on some points, but I think your flogging a dead horse here.
Haswell-E is a “enthusiast” chip not a gamers CPU, it clocks to low, it costs too much, it only supports 28 pci lanes unless you spend more money, it produces to much heat(140w), which means spending more money. Water cooling has its advantages YES, but for 140w =$+. Good air in a good case doesn’t produce a “vacuum”.
Those Mobo cost more again. And 4 channel DDR which is a 4 piece memory kit you do pay more for.
These rigs are for people who spend $1000s on pro software, not gamers and certainly not flight simmers.
And as far as value for money goes AMD has just whipped Intel’s backside and are in a dither trying to look like they have something. But they don’t yet.
Let it go, and live to fight another day.
Much regard……Shad
-
Well, a GPU upgrade is also a relatively easy thing of unplugging the old one and slotting in the new one, then flogging the old one on eBay But as you said, the extra cash spent on a GPU will give better ROI than if spent on RAM.
The point wasn’t the ease of physically doing it but the overall ease. As long as the purchase was 8x2 and not 4x4 then it is incredibly easy to just buy another 16 gigs and drop it in. With the GPU you would have to re-sell the old one and you will not get the new card value out of it.
Unless maybe RAM drive? But we’re getting extremely complicated for something that may be solved by slotting in an M.2 NVME drive…. and I would wager that a RAM drive vs. M.2 NVME drive performance won’t be “felt” by the user unless he constantly uses a stopwatch alongside his PC.
SSD versus m.2 has already been tested game performance wise against each other. Basically no difference at all in lots of titles. I don’t see moving from m.2 to RAM drive making any difference either for that kind of comparison.
I’ve not paid much attention to Ryzen aside from the fact that it’s got Intel scrambling to it’s feet. Competition is good!!
Just wish that AMD was giving NVidia fits like they are to Intel.
-
I agree Shadow, it’s a multitasking power house that may be a little overkill for most gamers. But it’s really really nice for multitasking and compiling my large projects at work. Mine at work is OC’d to 4.4 (And solid 31 C with LC), so not so bad on the clock. But out of pure curiosity I tried to put one together tonight for under 2K. You could do it without an SSD and a low end monitor, 2100 with the SSD. This is pretty close to what I figured earlier when I assumed you would have to sacrifice on either GFX or Monitor. If you really felt you didn’t need the WC, you could dump the extra $$ into the monitor, or upgrade to the better mobo (359 vs 239) and have a decent system for just about anything you wanted to do on it, not just games. Certainly qualified for Falcon, DCS, or XP11 no problem. All prices from newegg.
WD Blue 1TB - 49.99
Samsung Monitor 24" - 199.99 (1080 not 4K)
EVGA GTX 1080 SC2 8GB - 569.99
Logitech MK550 - 44.99
Corsair Veng 16GB - 159.99
Win10 Pro - 139.99
Corsair Hydro H100i V2 - 109.99
i7 6800K w ASUS X99-A II Combo - 639.56
Cooler Master Elite Mid Tower Case w/ PS - 73.85
Total: 1988.34SanDisk 64GB SSD - 126.99
New Total: 2115.33 -
But until you come close to doubling the speed of a lower core system, an extra core always wins the computational battle, EVERY TIME until you get to a number of cores or clock speeds well outside this discussion. 6*3.6 > 4 * 4.2…that’s just simple math. The ONLY exception to that rule being if you are in an environment that TRULY runs only 1 process at a time. Which hasn’t been Windows since the DOS days.
This logic ONLY plays out in application performance which I readily admit the more cores the better. The video I linked CLEARLY shows apples to apples gaming performance metrics where those cores most of the time mean NOTHING to gaming performance. The 4 cores performed just as good as the 6 cores. Perhaps at some utopia point in time in the future this will change when DX12 gets it’s act together but as of today that is not the case.
I know a little bit about this one, I’m about to complete my PhD in Computer Science. Benchmarks are misleading because they are almost always conducted by a biased party, and the results are skewed by instruction handling more than clock speed.
At the end of the day the end user doesn’t care about the WHY of the same performance they only look at how much performance am I getting for xx number of dollars spent for what they are doing. If the person is heavy into applications and likes good gaming performance as well then I would lean that person towards an AMD Ryzen setup as it is more cost effective than Intel for 6+ core setups with very similar performance. For max gaming performance at lowest cost the winner will still be between a 7600K/7700K. Those are just facts regardless of how much you want to be riding Intel on the enthusiast platform.
@Stubbies
You are wrong. If you don’t explicitly set an OC profile on MOST good motherboards, it will default to a “Balanced” profile, which throttles CPU performance based on usage, power, AND COOLING.Which has nothing to do with the price of tea in China as I have my 6700K locked in at 4.6 GHz through the BIOS. But thanks for assuming I guess.
Based on the specs you said you are using, I’m not surprised you have never had a failure, you don’t have the need for WC.
Yeah because a 6700K OCed to 4.6 and a pair of Titan X(m). Yeah no one would ever consider that a high end system…
But a 140W TDP i7 Enthusiast chip will need it. Period. Otherwise you’ll run 60+ degrees at idle, and well above that under load.
So I guess thank you for proving my point that xcraftllc would be better served by NOT using your suggested build given his budget constraints?
My suggestion was based on the processor I recommended. Not a lower TDP chip, or an i5, or a Ryzen.
…or xcraftllc’s budget.
The chip I suggested would benefit greatly from a liquid cooled system. Wasted money on an i5, or a 90W ~K chip. No arguments from me there. But if you’re going to go for a new rig, and you want it to push the limits for other stuff out there and not JUST falcon, I recommend the higher power. It’s worth it.
If the person can afford it. Which in this case we have already shown that setting up a 2011 based rig will blow right through a 2k budget with a good video card.
And it’s certainly achievable for under 2K.
No he cannot get everything he would need on a 2011 based rig for 2k or under unless he were to REALLY sacrifice GPU power and at that point what is the point of building a world class CPU rig and then only being able to put a 1050 or a 1060 on it? You just make the GPU the serious bottleneck.
As I said in my initial post, you might be forced to choose between Monitor/GFX card as far as quality goes. But given the options on the table, I would rather replace one of those in 6-12 months when I had more money as opposed to replacing the CPU. That’s just me, because I prefer the higher end enthusiast and Xtreme chips for my other PC uses. Those don’t get updated nearly as much as every day consumer chips do, so once I get one, I plan to have it for a few years.
Which is fine for you but that doesn’t mean that is a good match for what xcraftllc needs within his budget constraints. Basically if money is not an option and you can spend whatever you like then sure a 2011/2066 based system is great. Gaming performance with those setups is pretty much on par with a 7700K but the application performance clearly exceeds a 7700K. Gaming performance is about minimizing bottle neck spots not intentionally building one in via a weak GPU. Also CPUs don’t need to be replaced that often any more. At one point they were changed often but if it wasn’t for MS decision to draw a line on Windows 7 CPU support I’d still be running the 2700K as it is still quite viable.
You clearly have a heavy bias towards the enthusiast line but you need to be HONEST about price to performance against both AMD Ryzen and 7700K setups when gaming alone is concerned as that is exactly what xcraftllc specified.
-
This logic ONLY plays out in application performance which I readily admit the more cores the better. The video I linked CLEARLY shows apples to apples gaming performance metrics where those cores most of the time mean NOTHING to gaming performance. The 4 cores performed just as good as the 6 cores. Perhaps at some utopia point in time in the future this will change when DX12 gets it’s act together but as of today that is not the case.
At the end of the day the end user doesn’t care about the WHY of the same performance they only look at how much performance am I getting for xx number of dollars spent for what they are doing. If the person is heavy into applications and likes good gaming performance as well then I would lean that person towards an AMD Ryzen setup as it is more cost effective than Intel for 6+ core setups with very similar performance. For max gaming performance at lowest cost the winner will still be between a 7600K/7700K. Those are just facts regardless of how much you want to be riding Intel on the enthusiast platform.
Which has nothing to do with the price of tea in China as I have my 6700K locked in at 4.6 GHz through the BIOS. But thanks for assuming I guess.
Yeah because a 6700K OCed to 4.6 and a pair of Titan X(m). Yeah no one would ever consider that a high end system…
So I guess thank you for proving my point that xcraftllc would be better served by NOT using your suggested build given his budget constraints?
…or xcraftllc’s budget.
If the person can afford it. Which in this case we have already shown that setting up a 2011 based rig will blow right through a 2k budget with a good video card.
No he cannot get everything he would need on a 2011 based rig for 2k or under unless he were to REALLY sacrifice GPU power and at that point what is the point of building a world class CPU rig and then only being able to put a 1050 or a 1060 on it? You just make the GPU the serious bottleneck.
Which is fine for you but that doesn’t mean that is a good match for what xcraftllc needs within his budget constraints. Basically if money is not an option and you can spend whatever you like then sure a 2011/2066 based system is great. Gaming performance with those setups is pretty much on par with a 7700K but the application performance clearly exceeds a 7700K. Gaming performance is about minimizing bottle neck spots not intentionally building one in via a weak GPU. Also CPUs don’t need to be replaced that often any more. At one point they were changed often but if it wasn’t for MS decision to draw a line on Windows 7 CPU support I’d still be running the 2700K as it is still quite viable.
You clearly have a heavy bias towards the enthusiast line but you need to be HONEST about price to performance against both AMD Ryzen and 7700K setups when gaming alone is concerned as that is exactly what xcraftllc specified.
Post your build then? I found one that meets his criteria and mine, and can be used for other stuff besides gaming. A lot of other stuff.
And in case you’re in the market for tea in china later… https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/desktop-5th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.html Para 5.7… Second time I’ve given you this. Unless explicitly stated, I don’t assume, I research. Try it some time.
PS… Your BIOS CANNOT lock your processor speed. It can REQUEST a speed. Your processor will do what it is programmed to do regardless of what the BIOS asks of it. Completely transparent to you, it will adjust clock speed as required to meet it’s limitations. Feel free to verify that in the above link as well.
PPS… If you’re running 2 titans and a 6700k OC on straight air, I promise you you aren’t getting the full CPU performance. That’s a fact, no assumptions required. Let me know what your temp monitors say when you’re under load. The Titans alone will raise the case air temp above manageable levels for strictly fans.
BTW, I’m not really trying to be a d*ck and strictly confrontational with you, although I kind of get that feeling from you. I’m really trying to help, because you’re wrong, on several points. And I can guarantee you would get noticeably better performance from your rig under WC. And probably prevent one of the titans from melting a fan at some point in the future. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear you say your temp sits at 70+ C idle and well over 90 under full load, which is NOT ok…
-
About the bios and cpu speed regardless what intel says the speed from result measurement is altered. The cpu performs always the same functions regardles the speed u set, but how fast aint on the cpu to decide it. It cant perform faster than u set it to. The issue and the throtling trigger is exetuted when a certain temp is reached.
Also the system speed is affected by other factors besides cpu.
So YES u can set the cpu speed from bios. And depending on the cpu model u have no room for adjastment, some room, and no limit but the matterials stamina.
If u have the correct contacts in Intel u can get a fully unlocked cpu and get the hell out of it.
Intel is using this for years for marketing reasons among OC freaks to impress ppl of the chips achievements on setting world records on speed.
All those cant be done if your mobo and bios cant handle.
Also its the greatest steal of all times from Intel (others do it also) as it manipulates the mobopoly of cpu market it has established.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
About the bios and cpu speed regardless what intel says the speed from result measurement is altered. The cpu performs always the same functions regardles the speed u set, but how fast aint on the cpu to decide it. It cant perform faster than u set it to. The issue and the throtling trigger is exetuted when a certain temp is reached.
Also the system speed is affected by other factors besides cpu.
So YES u can set the cpu speed from bios. And depending on the cpu model u have no room for adjastment, some room, and no limit but the matterials stamina.
If u have the correct contacts in Intel u can get a fully unlocked cpu and get the hell out of it.
Intel is using this for years for marketing reasons among OC freaks to impress ppl of the chips achievements on setting world records on speed.
All those cant be done if your mobo and bios cant handle.
Also its the greatest steal of all times from Intel (others do it also) as it manipulates the mobopoly of cpu market it has established.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
NO! You can REQUEST CPU speed through the BIOS. The chip will not intentionally damage itself just to appease a request from a BIOS. Period. The right contacts in Intel is garbage. They aren’t going to willingly give away years worth of marketing advantage and trade secrets simply because you “know a guy…” CPU clocks are well ahead of the current released chips, but you don’t make any money by flooding the market with something 2x as good as what’s available then showing NO progression for the next 2 years. That’s called a business model, not market manipulation or marketing fluff. And it’s done in EVERY corner of EVERY market. Businesses exist to make money, not to make consumers happy.
Now that you’ve joined the debate I am gracefully bowing out of this thread because another nonsensical argument with you will probably get me banned.
PS… In the same thread you countered your own arguments. In one line you agree that you CAN lock a CPU speed in the BIOS, in another you say they ARE throttled, and in another, you say you can “get the hell out of it…” regardless of any limitations. What? Then you say the CPU will always perform the same regardless of clock speed…Double What?
-
NO! You can REQUEST CPU speed through the BIOS. The chip will not intentionally damage itself just to appease a request from a BIOS. Period.
I guess you’ve never heard of anyone frying their chip due to a wrong BIOS setting, huh?
-
Mortesil your last sentence sounds like when i was accused that i m empty of arguments and when the going gets taugh for me i twist or change subjects or avoid the subject.
Once again it doesnt have 2 do with me or u.
Ppl here read evaluate and come 2 their own conclusions.In every subject u participate u ask or demand from the one that has a different opinion from u to present a thesis that is evaluated by the grant jury, NASA, NSA, MIT and whatever. Your way sure, respected but i dont think im going to go to all that trouble, if u want take the role of the devils avocant and do your search.
Where is that hero Naldo with the great signature: “Everything on the internet is 100% true.”
I totally agree with ICE and there r zilion of examples personal and on the internet.
My experience is adequate to stand my ground and what i wrote on the subject. And guess what i aint gonna tell u.
[emoji38]sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
If you had a budget of around $2000 or so right now, what would you buy/build? To include the operating system/software and where you would buy the parts.
I see a lot of issues posted here, so I think a clean-slate approach might be best. I’m talking about a machine that isn’t intended to do anything other than run Falcon BMS and other similar sims.
Here’s my situation:
I have no desktop computer as of now. I simply have Falcon 4 Allied Assault, some pedals, and a Thrustmaster Cougar set with a force control mod. I’ve messed around with the software in the past with an old gaming computer I had a few years ago but that’s about it. I went to install it on my modern laptop that runs windows 10 but ran into all kinds of issues from the game to the controller software etc. I’m assuming this had a lot to do with windows 10.
I have enough time to build a computer, but I’m pretty busy now a days, and can’t afford to spend hours tweaking and fixing. I’m not going to be tweaking the software or building a cockpit or anything. I just want a good simple reliable set up that works from the beginning. Thanks in advance!
:munch:
Poor xcraftile ( the guy who started the thread) must be thinking “wtf, I better not ask which is the best GPU for BMS, I might get banned for over exciting the natives”
Sorry I was going to list both a Intel and AMD rig , but just realized how late it is. Tomorrow !
AMD was my choice this time around:
- Gigabyte AX370-Gaming K7 Supports fast ram and full of goodies.
- G.Skill 16G(2x8G)F4-3200C14D-16GFX DDR4 3200 MHZ 1.2V (The Ram must support AMD RyZen).
- AMD RyZen 5 1600 CPU, a 6 Core piece that will OC up to 4GHz. Comes with decent cooler
- OR
- AMD Ryzen 5 1600X 6-Core Socket AM4 3.6GHz CPU . No cooler included.
- With Cooler Master Hyper 212 LED Turbo CPU Cooler Red Cover (Value cooler)
If I went Intel:
- Gigabyte Z270X-Gaming 5 LGA 1151 ATX Motherboard or similar
- G.Skill 16G (2x8G)F4-3200C16D-16GTZKW PC4-25600 / DDR4 3200 Mhz
- Intel Core i5 7600K Quad Core LGA 1151 3.8 GHz Unlocked CPU Processor
- OR
- Intel Core i7 7700K Quad Core LGA 1151 4.2 GHz Unlocked CPU Processor
- And Cooler Master Hyper 212 LED Turbo CPU Cooler Red Cover (Value cooler)
GPU:
- MSI Radeon RX580 ARMOR 8G OC Graphics Card
- or MSI GeForce GTX 1070 Armor OC 8GB Video Card
Storage:
- Samsung 500GB SSD 850 EVO for OS & Apps
- Western Digital WD7500BPKX 2.5" WD BLACK,750GB,7200RPM,16MB,SATA III,5YRS for storage
PSU:
- Antec 620W High Current Gamer Modular PSU 80+Bronze, 135mm fan, High Current + or similar (Don’t wast money on any more wattage, more is not necessarily better)
Optical:
- LG H24NS SATA 24X± Super Multi DVDR Black OEM (cheap) unless you want Blu-ray
An important Case (Dust filters are a must)
- CoolerMaster CONSE400KWN2 N400 Black USB3.0 NO PSU
- or Antec Three Hundred TWO - Black Mid-Tower Gaming Case, The Essentially Cool and Quiet Case
- AND 2x CoolerMaster R4-JFDP-20PB-R1 PWM JetFlo 12CM Blue for air intake.
Monitor: 27" min. Good monitor aren’t cheap & new models are hard to get reviews on. You need to research, fast monitors aren’t always what you need. I went for a 32" 2560x1440 AOC IPS Panel, Great color and view angles but needs power to drive the higher rez.
- Samsung LS27F350FHEXXY 27inch Full HD FreeSync LED Monitor
- or AOC LED m2870VQ 28" 4ms VGA/DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort, Speakers 20m:1, 1920*1080, Black, 3yrs
Mouse:
- Logitech G403 PRODIGY Wired/Wireless Gaming Mouse. or better.
- I went for the G900.
You can price it out your self,
-
BTW, I’m not really trying to be a d*ck and strictly confrontational with you,
Same here. Let us continue the discussion, and if it feels confrontational, I don’t have that intent. I do intend to challenge your IDEAS, but not to be a d*ck.
@Ice: Still not seeing the big picture when it comes to air vs liquid
Where does the air go in a forced air system? Through the CPU, into the heatsinks, dissipates into the ambient air. This raises the ambient temp of the rest of the system, a lot.A few things here:
1. Positive air pressure vs. negative air pressure inside the case
2. Even if your CPU was at 100 degrees C, it doesn’t mean the ambient air is 100 degrees C. The ambient air temp INSIDE the case will depend on how much airflow goes through the case. Less airflow = higher heat, obviously.
3. People on serious watercooling setups have radiators at the FRONT of the case with fans blowing air INTO the case. You know this, right? Not all watercooling setups are made to exhaust air out of the case.Second, where does the air come from? Most cases (As Stub pointed out earlier) are carefully designed to have a specific air flow path inside the case. Adding a huge vacuum in the middle of the case destroys that airflow. Which makes it harder for the rest of the system to efficiently cool. +/- 1 or 2 degrees on the CPU is not comparable when everything else in the system runs 10 degrees hotter. This is on top of the already hotter ambient temp of the system in point 1.
I wonder where you got this “vacuum” idea from? Also, refer to my #1 point above.
Liquid systems remove the CPU cooling almost entirely from the case designed draw through cooling, which results in more “clean” air for the other components of the system. The heat is dissipated at the exit point of the system via the fans that come with the LC system, so it never gets introduced into the ambient case air. As I said before, I look at it from the whole system concept, not just the number on the CPU sensor. It makes a difference for high end systems.
You are talking about watercooling with the fans/radiator exhausting air out of the case… so here’s a thought for you: where does the air come from? It comes from INSIDE the case which is already above room temperature because of your hot GPU… unless you are using a blower-type GPU design which is not ideal because it is loud. If you’re using any of the GPUs with custom heat dissipation designs, most of them exhaust the hot air right back into the case.
As for this “whole system” talk, please show me where other PC components start throttling performance due to ambient in-case air temps? I am sure you’re worrying about nothing here.
If you look at every high end benchmark on Tom’s they all say you need Liquid, Open Loop, to do anything other than stock freqs. Air just won’t cut it with the more powerful processors.
Link to these? Have you looked at the stuff I linked? Why would you need watercooling when the best air cooler has roughly the same performance as the best watercooler and it even outperforms most of the other watercoolers? (I’m referring to AIO… I think custom loops are moot discussion at this point as we’re working with a budget)
Third, from what I understand; CPU is not the bottleneck in BMS, and BMS DOES have multithreading built into the program-
Maybe… but that does not mean it’s multi-threading optimised. Show me where it says how much better 6 cores will run over 4 cores?
Post your build then? I found one that meets his criteria and mine, and can be used for other stuff besides gaming. A lot of other stuff.
A lot of other stuff that the OP may very well NOT care about. It’s like asking someone for a good daily-commute car and you’re recommending a Ferrari because it’s good for commuting and a lot of other stuff (ie, picking up chicks, getting speeding tickets, etc.)
PPS… If you’re running 2 titans and a 6700k OC on straight air, I promise you you aren’t getting the full CPU performance. That’s a fact, no assumptions required. Let me know what your temp monitors say when you’re under load. The Titans alone will raise the case air temp above manageable levels for strictly fans.
You’re saying 2 Titans and a 6700K OC on air is getting throttled due to temps…. but you DO realize that even if he were to upgrade to a watercooling setup, guess where that is going to get the air to push through the radiators? FROM INSIDE THE CASE!! The very same air that his aircooler was using!! The only reason some reviews mention ambient room temp or ambient in-case temp is to adjust the final results… obviously if you OC a setup with 30 degrees room temp then do it again with the exact same setup with 20 degrees room temp, the second test will give different results despite not changing hardware.
I can’t believe I’m explaining this… :drink:
And I can guarantee you would get noticeably better performance from your rig under WC.
How? How? Please explain fully… especially after I’ve linked two reviews that shows an air cooler trading blows with AIOs that cost much more… reviews that show EXACTLY how the right aircooler gives SIMILAR performance with a watercooler.
-
Welp, I think I have less of an idea of what I want to build now… lol. Going back to my earlier, post, it sounds like that build I found on pcpartpicker will do just fine running windows 7. Again this is primarily a BMS rig, if I wanna mess around with XP11 or DCS I can always get some more ram and OC the CPU. Maybe upgrade to water cooled. Sounds about right?:
https://pcpartpicker.com/guide/hsgXsY/excellent-gaming-build