I wonder what the reason for the wider gap between min frame and max is on the high-L3-cache chips vs. the intels?  And does that wider gap REALLY truly give less smooth flight than a narrower gap?

Right now, unless Asobo amps up something like cloud density, satellite imagery resolution etc it seems anything with a single thread performance 40+% over my current performance solves any and all shortcomings I'm experiencing, and that is what 13900K *should* do esp at 5.8Ghz.  May even be able to go from 30 by vsync to 40.

If Asobo would just figure out how to have a dynamic terrain LOD from the ground up to 2,500 feet AGL we could all use reasonably priced CPUs.

I am curious how the 13900k performs in the fenix since it has an iGPU.  Probably helps it outperform the 5800x3D if it’s close.

Overall, it’s been a great ride for AM4 adopters 2 years ago.  If someone goes with the 13900k, sure it might not be the absolute best on pure peak FPS but I am sure it runs the game great.  Flying with the 5800x3D it feels like you don’t need much more aside from big city airports and really we should be on Asobo to find away to improve that.  We can all sit at a gate and lower the TLOD to 50 and never need a bigger processor. 

7 hours ago, Noel said:

Do you have to uninstall mobo chipset drivers and all of the other drivers coming on the mobo CD?  Does this mean I can simply take my bootable storage device out and put in in a new system w/ no need to do anything beyond install mobo drivers?  Thanks 

Yes. Exactly the latter one. I've done exactly that from 10900k to a new board and and 7900x. The only thing I needed to do was turning TPM of in the bios to be able to boot and TPM not avoiding it. 

Very very simple. 

I had to activate windows again because it "asked me if I'm the same computer"....ready and done. 

43 minutes ago, mpo910 said:

Yes. Exactly the latter one. I've done exactly that from 10900k to a new board and and 7900x. The only thing I needed to do was turning TPM of in the bios to be able to boot and TPM not avoiding it. 

Very very simple. 

I had to activate windows again because it "asked me if I'm the same computer"....ready and done. 

Great!  Thanks!

3 hours ago, TravelRunner404 said:

If Asobo would just figure out how to have a dynamic terrain LOD from the ground up to 2,500 feet AGL we could all use reasonably priced CPUs.

I am curious how the 13900k performs in the fenix since it has an iGPU.  Probably helps it outperform the 5800x3D if it’s close.

Overall, it’s been a great ride for AM4 adopters 2 years ago.  If someone goes with the 13900k, sure it might not be the absolute best on pure peak FPS but I am sure it runs the game great.  Flying with the 5800x3D it feels like you don’t need much more aside from big city airports and really we should be on Asobo to find away to improve that.  We can all sit at a gate and lower the TLOD to 50 and never need a bigger processor. 

Good point I was just think this dynamic LOD concept the other day as well. Any programmers know if that would be possible to code ? 

Der8auer did a review and set the power target of the 13900k to 90 watts and still got awesome performance. 
 

You will see the high power load only in multithreading stuff like Cinebench. So I would say the 13xxx is king for now. Until the 7xxxX3D will arrive. 

1 hour ago, wiler said:

Good point I was just think this dynamic LOD concept the other day as well. Any programmers know if that would be possible to code ? 

Everything is possible to code 😉 I mean the setting is already there. That would really be a top feature. 

1 hour ago, MySound said:

You will see the high power load only in multithreading stuff like Cinebench. So I would say the 13xxx is king for now. Until the 7xxxX3D will arrive. 

This is exactly my "issue" now: do I go, like others did, for a "cheap" solution with an AM5 board paired with a R5 7600X with the potential to switch to the 7xxxX3D as soon as they arrive and even further, as AMD will support AM5 up to 2025, or do I go for Intel with the raptor lake setup and the need to replace everything completely the next time I want to do an upgrade? Although decision seems easy, it is somehow not...

@ 8:51 in the video below, the reviewer shows a rarely covered CPU intensive test of MSFS with a take-off from London Heathrow at 1080p (but sadly with the default 747). What is interesting is how little performance difference there is between a 13900k and 13600k. Just 3 frames per second difference (69fps vs 66fps), and the exact same 1% lows (45fps)!! So where is the advantage of the 13900k over the much cheaper 13600k in MSFS in such CPU bound scenarios? I thought it'd be signficant. It's virtually non-existant!

I see the difference between the two CPUs is greater in other reviews but most likely they are testing in non-CPU bound environments. The point is that when the mud hits the fan in MSFS where it matters, i.e. over big cities and complex airports, is there any advantage to a 13900k over a 13600k? What about at 4K? Does it scale even less?

What is missing from this review is a comparison with Zen 4. I'd love to know in the same or similar scenario, what the difference is between a 7700x and a 7950x is, and would also like to see a comparison with Zen 4 and the 13th gen intel chips. As a side note, not mentioned in this review is that the 13700k has double the multi-thread performance over the 7700x in tasks like Blender so it may be a better all rounder than Zen 4 if you are buying a lower tier chip (i.e. not the 7900/7950x) and want to do other things like video editing. Decision, decisions!!

The takeaway question really is though what is the difference between a 13900k and 13600k, and between a 7950x and a 7700x in CPU heavy MSFS scenarios? As of yet, I don't see any true comparisons. Answers on a postcard, please.

 

 

Edited October 21, 20223 yr by steve310002

53 minutes ago, steve310002 said:

The point is that when the mud hits the fan in MSFS where it matters, i.e. over big cities and complex airports, is there any advantage to a 13900k over a 13600k? What about at 4K? Does it scale even less?

A lot of people share your view (although saying the 13700 is probably the best in terms of price / performance). 
And the view seems to be based on the facts of the performance tests as you say.

So to answer your question in bold above, unless you are running video conversion applications or similar, there is no significant advantage for the extra you have to pay for a 13900.

I am looking out for the AMD 7 series X3D chips next year, as the massive cache size does seem to give a significant benefit with MSFS, but that will mean swapping the motherboard and getting some expensive DDR5 RAM.  So if I decide to do a mini upgrade with my Z690 board in the meantime, it will be for a 13700k, which will go in my motherboard after a BIOS update.

6 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

So if I decide to do a mini upgrade with my Z690 board in the meantime, it will be for a 13700k, which will go in my motherboard after a BIOS update.

Wish I had of had that option. I was on an old i9900KS, so really was stuck in a bit of limbo, hence not wanting end of line 13900 stuff. AMD was the only viable option for me at the moment. 

2 minutes ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

Wish I had of had that option. I was on an old i9900KS, so really was stuck in a bit of limbo, hence not wanting end of line 13900 stuff. AMD was the only viable option for me at the moment. 

Well in that case, your decision is definitely the way to go, and I would have done exactly the same in your position. 
I will be watching your situation closely when you swap out your 7 series for an X3D version.    I reckon there could be gains between 20-30% to be had.

2 hours ago, MySound said:

Der8auer did a review and set the power target of the 13900k to 90 watts and still got awesome performance. 
 

You will see the high power load only in multithreading stuff like Cinebench. So I would say the 13xxx is king for now. Until the 7xxxX3D will arrive. 

king of MSFS performance? do you have a benchmark vs 5800x3d ?

Yes we are in desperate need of someone to do a Fenix test at EGLL...

I am running a 6700K with a lowly Nvidia 1070 at 3440 x 1440 and as you can imagine it struggles.. I was thinking 13700 but now with the new AMD 7xxxX3D on the horizon like Ian irt may make sense for me to go AMD 7 series and DDR5 and then swap the CPU mid next year if needed.. Hopefully the next two weeks we will see some more real world figures for MSFS performance.

 

Hamish.