Question CPU Upgrade: X-Plane 11 Performance: i7 9700K vs i7 7820X

bevinet

Junior Member
Jan 2, 2019
6
0
6
#1
I'm upgrading my i7 3770 (plus all the bits related) and am considering either the X299 (LGA2066) or Z390 (LGA1151) roads in particular the i7 9700K vs i7 7820X.

I do game, a bit of FPS but mainly Project Cars and X Plane 11. I have a GTX 1080 and run at 21:9 @ 3440x1440

I have an Oculus rift with a dedicated USB controller (so PCI express lanes is something to think about - my current M/B has a limit at x16 and my GPU can only get to x8 due to other hardware installed).

I will be installing 32GB of RAM in either 2x16GB (dual for Z390) or 4x8GB (quad for X299) configuration depending upon CPU and hence intel chipset.

Would appreciate any thoughts.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,493
224
126
#2
Have you considered an AMD system?
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,555
980
136
#3
Since you mention PCI-express lanes and the socket 2066 is mentioned, the threadripper series may be worth looking into, or even the AM4 platform. Is X-plane 11 the only consideration ? Do you do other things with your system ?
 

bevinet

Junior Member
Jan 2, 2019
6
0
6
#4
Thanks for the reply.
Not done a whole lot of research on AMD as I've always been a big blue fan, but will investigate. X Plane is a bit CPU hungry when compared with traditional FPS games through and have used Process Lasso to help with my current setup, which it has but only getting 30FPS at best. Other stuff is generally racing, Project Card and VR (for both XPlane & Project Cars)
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,555
980
136
#5
Thanks for the reply.
Not done a whole lot of research on AMD as I've always been a big blue fan, but will investigate. X Plane is a bit CPU hungry when compared with traditional FPS games through and have used Process Lasso to help with my current setup, which it has but only getting 30FPS at best. Other stuff is generally racing, Project Card and VR (for both XPlane & Project Cars)
Is X-plane 11 single thread ? or good multi-thread ? AMD is currently the best in all venues (value) except single-thread gaming, and then is only 10% behind, and a better value/perf even there unless you need the highest FPS and wanting to pay thru the nose for it.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
67
126
#6
Have you considered an AMD system?
Why, for gaming? I guess it is cheaper at least. Also for gaming, I would not go with the HEDT platform.
Here is a test of the 9700K compared to a good assortment of competitors. 9700k review . (no comparison with HEDT cpus though)

Edit: well, they do test HEDT cpus, but they dont show frametime data, unfortunately.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,555
980
136
#7
Why, for gaming? I guess it is cheaper at least. Also for gaming, I would not go with the HEDT platform.
Here is a test of the 9700K compared to a good assortment of competitors. 9700k review . (no comparison with HEDT cpus though)

Edit: well, they do test HEDT cpus, but they dont show frametime data, unfortunately.
I don't see X-plane 11 on that review, it may be different in nature than other games. He also mentioned that he was concerned with PCI-E lanes, and AMD is far better there.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,493
224
126
#8
Why, for gaming? I guess it is cheaper at least. Also for gaming, I would not go with the HEDT platform.
Here is a test of the 9700K compared to a good assortment of competitors. 9700k review . (no comparison with HEDT cpus though)

Edit: well, they do test HEDT cpus, but they dont show frametime data, unfortunately.
He does some gaming, but it doesn't seem to be a priority given his post.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,555
980
136
#10
Here's an old X-Plane 11 benchmark in German using Open GL. The article says use of multithreading should improve with the Vulkan port that wasn't out at the time.

They put a Ryzen3 1200 (the cheapest lowest AMD) against a 4790k and a 7740x ? Not even close to fair. I am sure a 2700x would fair right in the mix at the top.

Edit: I just saw the 1800x. Add 10% to that for the 2700x.
 

moinmoin

Senior member
Jun 1, 2017
738
234
96
#11
They put a Ryzen3 1200 (the cheapest lowest AMD) against a 4790k and a 7740x ? Not even close to fair. I am sure a 2700x would fair right in the mix at the top.

Edit: I just saw the 1800x. Add 10% to that for the 2700x.
It's odd picking both a 1200 and 1800X but it gives a good impression of the range (and 1200 doesn't fare as bad as one might think). I'm sure 2700x with Vulkan would improve significantly.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,457
67
126
#12
He does some gaming, but it doesn't seem to be a priority given his post.
Well, the title of the post *is* a question about gaming performance. Seems to me that would indicate it is a high priority.
 
Last edited:
Jul 25, 2001
10,188
24
91
#13
You're are better off with the 9700.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=xplane11-amd-nvidia&num=3

"And looking at the CPU usage, there were some spikes to full utilization but for the most part it doesn't look like X-Plane 11 is very well multi-threaded for taking advantage of today's modern processors."


https://www.notebookcheck.net/X-Plane-11-Benchmarks.287550.0.html

"What is interesting is how the Ryzen 7 1800X gets beaten by the Kaby Lake i7-7740X and the much older (2014) Haswell i7-4790K. This is because the rendering process is all loaded on a single core (OpenGL shows threading and object handling problems here), and these two Intel CPUs both have high clock speeds on architectures with good IPC levels. There isn't much separating the clock speeds of the two Intel chips, so we are attributing most of the difference in frame rates to the generational IPC improvements made over time."
 

bevinet

Junior Member
Jan 2, 2019
6
0
6
#14
He does some gaming, but it doesn't seem to be a priority given his post.
Thanks for the update.
Have been looking at AMD, now looking at 1920X vs 7820X, pretty much on par in most respects other than 12 vs 8 core & 28 vs 60 PICe lanes. Torn now, not gone down the AMD road before.
 

bevinet

Junior Member
Jan 2, 2019
6
0
6
#15
Well, the title of the post *is* a question about gaming performance. Seems to me that would indicate it is a high priority.
Apologies for not keeping tack on the thread, been working today and looking after an 8 year old, no excuses, should have kept a better eye on the ball here and thank you for your updates.
 

tamz_msc

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2017
2,214
157
106
#16
How limited do you feel by your GTX 1080 running at x8? Benchmarks show that there is no performance to be lost going from x16 to x8 on a GTX 1080 even at 4K.



I would personally go with the 9700K and overclock it to 5 GHz. X-Plane 11 is one of the most single-thread performance intensive games out there and Project Cars favors Intel architectures over AMD. The 7820X is not as good as the 9700K in gaming because of its architecture, however it can close the gap with a hefty overclock.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,478
813
126
#17
I second @tamz_msc's recommendation. X-Plane 11 just isn't going to fare as well on a 2700x as it will on a 9700k. I would not even consider the 7820X if X-Plane 11 performance is in question.
 

bevinet

Junior Member
Jan 2, 2019
6
0
6
#18
Many thanks to all for your input, it's appreciated.

My only issue with the 9700K & LGA1151 with Z390 chip set is again the PCIe lanes, having only 16 in total since adding any card will drop the x16 of the GTX to x8 (this is what I have now after I removed a WiFi card as at that point the GTX was at x4). I appreciate that there isn't much of a hit going from x16 to x8 but there is to x4 and since I have a dedicated USB controller (https://www.startech.com/Cards-Adap...-Card-4-Dedicated-Channels-4-Port~PEXUSB3S44V) for VR, I would be faced with x8 with basically no room for any expansion, whatever that may be.

Hence the dilemma, but again, appreciate the point made.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,493
224
126
#19
Thanks for the update.
Have been looking at AMD, now looking at 1920X vs 7820X, pretty much on par in most respects other than 12 vs 8 core & 28 vs 60 PICe lanes. Torn now, not gone down the AMD road before.
I think that while gaming may be a little slower with the AMD system, you'd need benches to notice it, and the PCIE lanes and long-term upgrade ability of AMD outweigh the amount you give up in gaming.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,478
813
126
#20
@bevinet if you want to wait a few days, you'll see AMD's new processor lineup for 2019 (probably available in April). But that is the only way I would really recommend AMD for your setup. x8 just isn't going to hold you back that much anyway.
 

bevinet

Junior Member
Jan 2, 2019
6
0
6
#22
For Intel if you want more PCIE lanes there is the 9800X chip and it's brothers.

https://ark.intel.com/compare/189122,123767
Here in NZ, 7820x ~$800, 9800X ~$1100 & AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ 2920X ~$1100, so although at 28 lanes, 7820X seems better value, but see the comparison reports they're the same price - feel like we're getting ripped off somewhere.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,555
980
136
#23
Here in NZ, 7820x ~$800, 9800X ~$1100 & AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ 2920X ~$1100, so although at 28 lanes, 7820X seems better value, but see the comparison reports they're the same price - feel like we're getting ripped off somewhere.
For some reason, the 1920x is the about same price as the 1950x here, ($570) so I would get that. Yes, the 2920x is a little faster, but not at almost twice the price. Here that one is $900. On ebay or on sales its been almost down to 500 regularly, and $550 most of the time.
 
Last edited:


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS