Absolute best single core performance?

[Adam Saint]

Hi guys. So I guess I have a pretty strange request/appeal for help.

My current gaming system is a 1080ti with a Gsync 4k monitor (Acer CB280HK) a 4790k @4.8ghz and 16gb 2133mhz RAM. The ONLY games I ever play are the STALKER series and the various mods that exist for them and because the game engines are very old they are notoriously dependent on one CPU core (and maybe 10% of another core) and I am horribly CPU limited with everything turned up. One core is absolutely maxed out and STALKER: clear sky especially has big frame drops in places. Meanwhile the 1080ti is hardly breaking sweat! So I'm looking to get rid of my 4790k but what should I replace it with?

I am prepared to pay whatever it costs - within the bounds of reason - to get the absolute best performance I can for my application. I thought that the 7700k might be a good bet - especially one of the binned 5.x ghz ones from Siliconlottery - but with Skylake-X coming out, I wonder if the 6 core 7800X might do better because of a superior cache architecture and quad-channel RAM? Switching off hyperthreading and, say, three cores and clocking the rest of them to the max might give the best overclock and let the active cores share all the L3? Or would I be better still going to the 8 core 7820X and letting the cores share even more L3? Or even the 10 core i9? While I know that a larger L3 cache only makes a small difference, as long as there actually is a difference I'm happy to pay for it

I would appreciate your input.

Many thanks.

 

[krumme]

Just a thought. What about ram speed and especially low latency how does that influence the dips?

 

[Adam Saint]

Just a thought. What about ram speed and especially low latency how does that influence the dips?

My current kit is CL10@2133mhz (XMP). Unfortunately everything faster than that seems to be physically too big (tall heatspreaders) to fit under my Phanteks cooler

Do you think that by ditching the cooler and maybe getting an AIO to allow taller RAM to be installed, I'd improve performance/reduce dips?

 

[someEEguy]

Hi guys. So I guess I have a pretty strange request/appeal for help.

My current gaming system is a 1080ti with a Gsync 4k monitor (Acer CB280HK) a 4790k @4.8ghz and 16gb 2133mhz RAM. The ONLY games I ever play are the STALKER series and the various mods that exist for them and because the game engines are very old they are notoriously dependent on one CPU core (and maybe 10% of another core) and I am horribly CPU limited with everything turned up. One core is absolutely maxed out and STALKER: clear sky especially has big frame drops in places. Meanwhile the 1080ti is hardly breaking sweat! So I'm looking to get rid of my 4790k but what should I replace it with?

I am prepared to pay whatever it costs - within the bounds of reason - to get the absolute best performance I can for my application. I thought that the 7700k might be a good bet - especially one of the binned 5.x ghz ones from Siliconlottery - but with Skylake-X coming out, I wonder if the 6 core 7800X might do better because of a superior cache architecture and quad-channel RAM? Switching off hyperthreading and, say, three cores and clocking the rest of them to the max might give the best overclock and let the active cores share all the L3? Or would I be better still going to the 8 core 7820X and letting the cores share even more L3? Or even the 10 core i9? While I know that a larger L3 cache only makes a small difference, as long as there actually is a difference I'm happy to pay for it

I would appreciate your input.

Many thanks.

Watch out for the reviews of the Intel i7-7740X, when released.

 

[vissarix]

You should choose between Skylake X 6 cores 12 threads or Coffelake with same configuration...As you said Skylake X has a different cache architecture and quad channel ram so we dont know exactly how much it will benefit from this..

If you get lucky and with a good AIO you will get 5ghz on the Skylake X, Coffelake might give you even more then that since it is on an improved process but we cant be sure..

Anyway you better wait for Coffelake to launch and then compare it with Skylake X and decide by yourself...

 

[Bouowmx]

2133 MT/s C10 is low latency (9.4 ns) but I don't know if the frequency (bandwidth) is a problem.

Wait until 06-19 (pre-order) or 06-26 (general availability) for Intel Skylake-X reviews. See if the revised cache helps. Kaby Lake-X is pointless because of Coffee Lake (August-September for K models), manufactured on 14 nm ++, which may possibly overclock even higher than Kaby Lake 14 nm + Core i5-7600K and i7-7700K.

 

[MajinCry]

Aren't the STALKER games built on Direct3D 9? Having an AMD card should bring some benefit, as NVidia's driver emulates a hardware scheduler; AMD cards have a hardware scheduler.

Unfortunately, Direct3D performance is often compared in bullshit synthetics, that NVidia dominates due to particular optimizations (same draw call being called multiple times in a row = better synthetic fps) that would never have any effect in an actual game.

 

[moonbogg]

Hate to say it but there ain't nothing you can do, not coming from a 4790k@4.8. You are looking at pathetic, minimal gains. A few FPS maybe. It will be years, probably more than 5 years before IPC increases in any meaningful way at all. Sorry but you're stuck.

 

[.vodka]

If you need the best single threaded performance right now without a single regard to price, it would be a 7700k (delidded + liquid metal) @ 5GHz or higher, paired with DDR4 4000 or higher if possible. Those results are on a 4.5GHz 6700k, a 5GHz 7700k will love the extra bandwidth even more.

Depending on the game and workload it'd be a relatively minor upgrade, or a huge one. You'd have to look for STALKER results on Haswell and Skylake to see if it's worth it to you.

As stated above Coffeelake and/or Skylake-X could change this, so if you can wait a little longer then it'd help to see how the outlook is like after the dust has settled... especially regarding SKL-X's 1MB L2 cache per core vs regular Skylake's 256KB, that could be important for games.

 

[SPBHM]

pretty much, the best would be 7700K OC + very fast ram

 

[tamz_msc]

If you're expecting a Kaby Lake 7700K@5GHz to help with the frame rate drops in Clear Sky, then sorry to say but it won't.

Are you using DX10 in Clear Sky? Turn sun rays down to medium. The X-ray engine loads areas in chunks, that's why you get frame rate drops when moving around in a location.

An SSD might help slightly.

 

[swilli89]

Th

Hi guys. So I guess I have a pretty strange request/appeal for help.

My current gaming system is a 1080ti with a Gsync 4k monitor (Acer CB280HK) a 4790k @4.8ghz and 16gb 2133mhz RAM. The ONLY games I ever play are the STALKER series and the various mods that exist for them and because the game engines are very old they are notoriously dependent on one CPU core (and maybe 10% of another core) and I am horribly CPU limited with everything turned up. One core is absolutely maxed out and STALKER: clear sky especially has big frame drops in places. Meanwhile the 1080ti is hardly breaking sweat! So I'm looking to get rid of my 4790k but what should I replace it with?

I am prepared to pay whatever it costs - within the bounds of reason - to get the absolute best performance I can for my application. I thought that the 7700k might be a good bet - especially one of the binned 5.x ghz ones from Siliconlottery - but with Skylake-X coming out, I wonder if the 6 core 7800X might do better because of a superior cache architecture and quad-channel RAM? Switching off hyperthreading and, say, three cores and clocking the rest of them to the max might give the best overclock and let the active cores share all the L3? Or would I be better still going to the 8 core 7820X and letting the cores share even more L3? Or even the 10 core i9? While I know that a larger L3 cache only makes a small difference, as long as there actually is a difference I'm happy to pay for it

I would appreciate your input.

Many thanks.

The x299 platform is the laughing stock of the tech community and many are deeming it dead on arrival. Just get the 7700k if you want single thread performance. You may want to look J to delidding as unfortunately Intel opted to cheap out on the thermal interface material

Sucks to void uour warranty but if you are fastest single core performance there are several videos out there on how to remove Intel's heat spreader to apply a quality TIM. Best of luckl

 

[ZGR]

This is why I bought the 5775c (but low clocks basically cancel out the benefits of the L4 cache) and am so intrigued by Skylake X's beefy L2 cache. I still have a dream we will get another unlocked Intel CPU with an L4 cache.

For these old games high clocks are absolutely necessary, but now we really need bigger caches with lower latencies. I suggest looking at Skylake X 6 or 8 core and go for max overclock. You definitely need the fastest, lowest latency DDR4 you can afford as well. This is assuming Skylake X's bigger L2 is a benefit in games. If it isn't, 6c Coffee Lake with the fastest DDR4 will be best.

If you can find some really cheap DDR3 3000+ try that instead to gain 1-3 fps. Yay

 

[beginner99]

Watch out for the reviews of the Intel i7-7740X, when released.

Yeah i think we found the sole user that will buy this chip. That chip + running it bare-die with water-cooling is probably the best you can get.

I did play Stalker: COP and in my opinion that game/engine is just fundamentally broken. It stuttered so badly I got sick after 30 min of playing. Nothing helped, even not min quality at very low resolutions. The stutter was always there and googling about it told be it was a fundamental issue of the game/engine. So I doubt even a LN2 cooled 6 ghz kaby lake could solve the problem.

 

[maddie]

Hi guys. So I guess I have a pretty strange request/appeal for help.
...................................................
I am prepared to pay whatever it costs - within the bounds of reason - to get the absolute best performance I can for my application.
............................................

Not trying to upset you, but that provided a laugh.

 

[krumme]

Aren't the STALKER games built on Direct3D 9? Having an AMD card should bring some benefit, as NVidia's driver emulates a hardware scheduler; AMD cards have a hardware scheduler.

Unfortunately, Direct3D performance is often compared in bullshit synthetics, that NVidia dominates due to particular optimizations (same draw call being called multiple times in a row = better synthetic fps) that would never have any effect in an actual game.

I think this is the way to look for major differences in min fps. An amd card might give far worse perf or far better. Looking at cpu is a lost cause in many ways. The difference that makes a difference is elsewhere.

My advice is. Keep the cpu. Its fine. See if vega solves the problems. If not. Give volta a view. Both is radically new especially vega there is a chance for a difference (also to the worrse ...)

 

[krumme]

My current kit is CL10@2133mhz (XMP). Unfortunately everything faster than that seems to be physically too big (tall heatspreaders) to fit under my Phanteks cooler

Do you think that by ditching the cooler and maybe getting an AIO to allow taller RAM to be installed, I'd improve performance/reduce dips?

You could try to increase cas latency and meassure the effect on the dips. Not that i think it matters but it was an easy try to pinpoint the weak link.

 

[Denithor]

If you can find some really cheap DDR3 3000+ try that instead to gain 1-3 fps. Yay

Actually, several games have shown pretty dramatic improvements going to much faster RAM.

http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page6.html

Going from 2133 to 3000 might have more impact that you'd expect. Or none. Won't know without trying though.

Good luck!

 

[MrTeal]

Not trying to upset you, but that provided a laugh.

Does that mean the industrial sized LN2 gas cylinder and live-in manservant for periodic refills are out?

 

[Topweasel]

Yeah i think we found the sole user that will buy this chip. That chip + running it bare-die with water-cooling is probably the best you can get.

I did play Stalker: COP and in my opinion that game/engine is just fundamentally broken. It stuttered so badly I got sick after 30 min of playing. Nothing helped, even not min quality at very low resolutions. The stutter was always there and googling about it told be it was a fundamental issue of the game/engine. So I doubt even a LN2 cooled 6 ghz kaby lake could solve the problem.

It's the same chip as a 7700. Wouldn't it be better to just pay Silicon Lottery the extra money for a already delidded and tested chip, then to get the 7740 and the X299 platform just because the 7740 in theory would be better binned dies?

 

[ZGR]

Actually, several games have shown pretty dramatic improvements going to much faster RAM.

http://www.techspot.com/review/1089-fallout-4-benchmarks/page6.html

Going from 2133 to 3000 might have more impact that you'd expect. Or none. Won't know without trying though.

Good luck!

Completely agree, I just have never seen any STALKER RAM benchmarks. Many old DX9 games benefit though. From RTS games to FPS games, as long as they are single threaded bound, faster RAM helps a lot.

If OP wants,he could try to find the fastest DDR3 his motherboard supports and find the tightest latency he can afford.

Unfortunately this may mess with his overclock settings and he may need to raise his voltage slightly.

These old game engines thrive on low latency RAM so if you can find a good deal on DDR3, go for it.

 

[Adam Saint]

Hey guys, thanks for all the suggestions you've given me, after a lot of thought I think I'm going to go for a siliconlottery 7700k 5.2ghz, with some decent RAM. I will wait for the 7740k reviews to hit first though just to see if that wouldn't be a better path to take (and see if siliconlottery can't make them go even faster than 5.2!)

Getting better RAM that fits is a problem because I have a huge Phanteks air cooler and most performance RAM is too tall to fit underneath it I could get an AIO I suppose?

Someone mentioned Call of Pripyat - that's actually the game that gives the least trouble. There are a few stutters in the first few minutes of playing, and I suspect that it's waiting to load sound effects from the disk, once they are loaded though the stutter is minimal. The game that gives the most problems is Clear Sky. Lots and lots of microstuttering, core 0 pegged at 100% and the GPU utilisation goes in the 50s-60s %.

I sincerely wish my favourite games ever weren't programmed this badly, but it is what it is!

Thanks again guys

 

[MajinCry]

See if you can borrow an AMD GPU. Curious to see how that affects the perf.

 

[ZGR]

See if you can borrow an AMD GPU. Curious to see how that affects the perf.

Probably no effect. All my old DX9 games I played at 4k on my R9 290 ran just as bad on my 1070 when there was lots of AI (Single thread bottleneck; as in Core 0 at 100%).

This was:
- Sins of a Solar Empire
- Supreme Commander
- Fallout 3
- ARMA 2

As for OP, I hope he can get some DDR4 3400+ to match that beast OC. That should be quite the match for these old games.

All my favorite games are like this too. The best games are single threaded bound I like to think.

 

[Adam Saint]

I actually used to have a 7970 and it was ok for 1080p but I still had problems with very high single core CPU use. I don't think there are any AMD cards that are a match for a 1080ti at the moment either, sadly.

If I get fast RAM, will I need to turn the core OC down?

Thanks