Intel i7-8700K vs i7-2600K (very interesting)

[Benny]

Hey guys, in my quest of willing to upgrade my old but venerable I7 2600K... I again researched a last time before going to the computer store this morning.

And I was not even looking at the 8700K

 

Interesting video 

 

 

 

So I will wait since I'm OC at 4.4ghz

Cheers

Ben

[ve2dgz]

The review is pretty much all right ...But if you're in the 4k world, every bit of performance from the CPU & GPU will be useful.

Cheers

[Mikelab6]

From a gaming point of view, yes, replacing only the video card makes huge difference, but we all know flight sims performance is directly bound to CPU performance. I'd like to see that kind of test with our different flight sims..

 

Mike

[Benny]

Well Mike that is what I did, new SSD, more mem and a 1060 6G

I kept the rest.

 

But I agree, V4 is demanding, what I don't get is that AF2 is not at all even with ORBX stuff.

 

Ben

[Triplane]

But...there is always one of those...with FSX and P3D  by far the most important CPU characteristic (after raw speed) is it's performance with single threaded applications. Looking at it that way the 2600K isn't even close to the 8700K. There is no processor available that will handle a single-threaded application better than the 8700K. The difference is probably best seen in the PassMark benchmarks ( https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html ). The 8700K is at the top of the list at 2731`and 2600K is down the list quite a bit at 1942. I'd venture to say that the performance difference using our flight sims would be significant..........Doug

[Nick Cooper]

Not that I particularly understand these things but the i7 4790K is reassuringly well up the list.

Looking at this list, I have to smile at how some CPUs that are referred to sometimes as "old"

perform in relation to those that are "new".

Remembering that I don't know much about these things.

[Triplane]

And I too love my 4790K  .....  

 

[Smudger]

And a happy little band we shall remain

[Richard Lincoln]

9 hours ago, Nick Cooper said:

Not that I particularly understand these things but the i7 4790K is reassuringly well up the list.

Looking at this list, I have to smile at how some CPUs that are referred to sometimes as "old"

perform in relation to those that are "new".

Remembering that I don't know much about these things.

Hi Nick,

 

             I refuse to replace my 4790K, still kicks butt in the chip department, I have noticed a vast improvement in general updating fro GTX 970 to GTX1080Ti, although cards are being updated far too quickly these days. My 4790K is sure stable and matches the latest chips affordable.

[JimmiG]

For P3D, single-threaded CPU performance is still king. However the multi threaded support and the ability of the sim to offload more tasks to the GPU are improving with every new version. Clearly multi-core and faster GPUs are the future, rather than raw single-threaded performance only. However the development of ESP stalled when Microsoft canceled development, so it has only recently began to catch up to current market trends. The 4790K is still an excellent CPU for most users though.

[lawrence aldrich]

I've used the 4790K for years in FSX with great results.

So, naturally, I just bought an i7-8700 which is currently sitting on my workbench awaiting its new home. (Just got p3dv4 installed and the 4790 handles it just fine.) 

 

I'm not really preparing to be amazed, however we'll soon see.

Mostly, to me,the cpu merrygoround is avoided by just staying out of the big cities.

This is always a good idea, sim or no sim........

 

[Gabe777]

I'm considering upgrading to an i7 as P3D v4 clearly benefits from 4 to 6 threads, leaving 2 or so spare for the o/s and addons.

 

But as good as the i7 8700k looks, it runs very hot even on stock, and really needs fast RAM. (One video on Youtube with P3Dv4, had this guy running it at 93 degrees..... Ridiculous !

 

So, you have to factor in the new z370 m/b, a water cooler and faster RAM..... and then you are likely to find your GPU becomes limiting, especially if you only have a lowly GTX 1060, as I do.

 

So, all in all, it will be an expensive do..... and of course, you will need a complete reinstall of everything. Additionally, you are likely to lose 5 to 10% of the speed, once this blessed patch comes out for the recent security scares.

 

May be better off waiting for Revision 2 to be released in 6 months !

[Stewart Hobson]

I'd like to ask you fellows who run the i4790K cpu, as do I, if you are running with hyper-threading on or off?  For the record, I have HT enabled, and P3D runs fine, even with ASP4 and Little Nav Map running alongside.  Like Nick, however, I know very little of these things--I know enough about computers to get myself into and out of trouble, if you know what I mean!

[Nick Cooper]

Hello Stewart,

 

I have like you read so much contradictory advice on the subject of"Hyperthreading" that

I have become immune.

I once looked at the setting on my motherboard, noted that there seemed to be an on, and off and an auto.

I guessed that the motherboard manufacturers would know what they were doing and left it on its default setting of auto.

 

I am of the opinion that if I need a benchmark to see the difference, it probably doesn't matter.

[Rob Abernathy]

I'm in Nick's camp.   I've put together a number of computers over the year and luckily have never stuffed one up.   Right now I have the i7 4790 @ 4.0 with a GTX970 GPU.   Works well in 97% of situations for P3Dv4.1 with most settings maxed.  I'm saving my money for a trip to Hawaii.      But, I do love hearing about others experience with newer and faster tech!

[lawrence aldrich]

My experience so far with hardware is that if you have to spend a small fortune to get a dimes worth of real performance increase, you're wasting your money.

The holy grail is still missing.

[Triplane]

55 minutes ago, Stewart Hobson said:

I'd like to ask you fellows who run the i4790K cpu, as do I, if you are running with hyper-threading on or off?  For the record, I have HT enabled, and P3D runs fine, even with ASP4 and Little Nav Map running alongside.  Like Nick, however, I know very little of these things--I know enough about computers to get myself into and out of trouble, if you know what I mean!

 

I have HT on Stew. I do lots of stuff besides flight simming and HT is a must. That said, I've also tried FSX and P3D with HT off and I really saw no difference. My advice is to just leave it on and forget about it..............Doug

 

PS: i was out your way a couple of months ago on a California coast cruise. We had a day in Monterey so I decided to relive my past. I took a C172 down to BSR just like in the old days (1959). Great memories. We've sold all the real estate there now but the next time we're out your way I'd really like to buy a dinner, or even just a drink, for you and yours. No promises as to when that may be but I feel the need to return just one more time..........Doug

[Stewart Hobson]

9 minutes ago, Triplane said:

 

I have HT on Stew. I do lots of stuff besides flight simming and HT is a must. That said, I've also tried FSX and P3D with HT off and I really saw no difference. My advice is to just leave it on and forget about it..............Doug

 

PS: i was out your way a couple of months ago on a California coast cruise. We had a day in Monterey so I decided to relive my past. I took a C172 down to BSR just like in the old days (1959). Great memories. We've sold all the real estate there now but the next time we're out your way I'd really like to buy a dinner, or even just a drink, for you and yours. No promises as to when that may be but I feel the need to return just one more time..........Doug

That sounds like fun, Doug.  Just let us know before you come out this way and I'll give you our phone#.

 

Speaking of BSR, I flew the A2A Comanche out of KHAF (was really looking forward to this one--the freeware version was very disappointing) down the coast, past BSR, down to Hearst Castle, then to Morro Bay, then turned inland to San Luis Obispo.  Altogether a beautiful flight along that Pacific Coast you probably remember well.

[Benny]

55 minutes ago, Rob Abernathy said:

Right now I have the i7 4790 @ 4.0

 

Your missing the "K" 

 

I tried my 2600K at 4.7 yesterday and he didn't like that  

Stable at 4.5 and lower.

 

Ben

[Rob Abernathy]

1 hour ago, Benny said:

 

Your missing the "K" 

 

I tried my 2600K at 4.7 yesterday and he didn't like that  

Stable at 4.5 and lower.

 

Ben

Maybe I should look into overclocking mine?  Don't want to muck anything up!

[Gabe777]

 

Don't.

 

Overclocking is for mugs.

 

A ten percent overclock... say from 4.2 to 4.6, will only translate into a 5 percent increase in gaming or simming performance... at best.

 

At 60 fps, that equates to 3... yes... 3  frames per second. Just turn down your sliders: you'll get more gains !

 

This maintains stability, reduces power consumption, reduces heat, and increases the life of your components.

 

Or.... just buy a faster processor, if you can justify it.

 

Many people overclock for bragging rights... seriously, it is not worth it unless you have an old Q6600... (which I still have in one of my PCs !).... they overclocked by like -  30 percent  - then, and only then, is it worth it !

[Triplane]

3 hours ago, Stewart Hobson said:

That sounds like fun, Doug.  Just let us know before you come out this way and I'll give you our phone#.

 

Speaking of BSR, I flew the A2A Comanche out of KHAF (was really looking forward to this one--the freeware version was very disappointing) down the coast, past BSR, down to Hearst Castle, then to Morro Bay, then turned inland to San Luis Obispo.  Altogether a beautiful flight along that Pacific Coast you probably remember well.

The first time I ever flew in an airplane was a flight from KMRY to BSR and back. I was 16 years old and wanted to learn to fly. The guys at Del Monte Aviation (yes, they go back that far) took me for a demo ride down the coast. I was so thrilled. I got to do a 2-minute turn and climb a bit and then descend a bit. I was hooked.  Back then Cessna had a PPL course that guaranteed a license, no matter how many hour it took, for USD$640. But, there was no way I could afford that as a high-school student. Ah, those were the days.............Doug

 

PS: Speaking of Half Moon Bay.....I spent many a Sunday there with my 409 Impala. Fremont on Saturday (grudge races on Wednesday) and Half Moon Bay on Sunday (with an occasional stop in Salinas). Long live The Beach Boys.................

[Triplane]

1 hour ago, Gabe777 said:

 

Don't.

 

Overclocking is for mugs.

 

A ten percent overclock... say from 4.2 to 4.6, will only translate into a 5 percent increase in gaming or simming performance... at best.

 

At 60 fps, that equates to 3... yes... 3  frames per second. Just turn down your sliders: you'll get more gains !

 

This maintains stability, reduces power consumption, reduces heat, and increases the life of your components.

 

Or.... just buy a faster processor, if you can justify it.

 

Many people overclock for bragging rights... seriously, it is not worth it unless you have an old Q6600... (which I still have in one of my PCs !).... they overclocked by like -  30 percent  - then, and only then, is it worth it !

+1. If you OC about the best you can get is 4.8. Since the 4790K runs Turbo at 4.4 there is little to be gained by an OC. Leave it alone........Doug

[Benny]

2 hours ago, Gabe777 said:

Overclocking is for mugs.

 

A ten percent overclock... say from 4.2 to 4.6, will only translate into a 5 percent increase in gaming or simming performance... at best.

 

At 60 fps, that equates to 3... yes... 3  frames per second. Just turn down your sliders: you'll get more gains !

 

Not the case on my rig, at the stock 3.5 speed it's a hog, dipping into the single digit (FPS) in some location (P3DV4).

But I agree that pushing from let's say 4.2 and 4.5 I see no difference.

[Gabe777]

Single digits ?

 

Something is wrong there. Your CPU aint too shabby and a decent 1060. Pull back on the sliders, and all that eye candy ! Bet you're running at 4k ?

 

I'm on FSX at the moment, so there is no eye candy, which is what worries me about switching to P3D... too much temptation...!

[wolfko]

On 14.1.2018 at 8:55 PM, Mikelab6 said:

From a gaming point of view, yes, replacing only the video card makes huge difference, but we all know flight sims performance is directly bound to CPU performance. I'd like to see that kind of test with our different flight sims..

 

Mike

 

That is only correct for FSX, but P3d always was more GPU dependent, at least versions 1-3. I don't think that has changed for P3d4.

[Triplane]

13 minutes ago, wolfko said:

 

That is only correct for FSX, but P3d always was more GPU dependent, at least versions 1-3. I don't think that has changed for P3d4.

Not at all right. All P3D versions are limited by the ability of the CPU to process a single-thread application. Granted, there has been significant progress in off-loading to the GPU but we're not yet to the "GPU dependant" stage...............Doug

[Rob Abernathy]

Thanks for all the info and insights guys.  I think I'll leave well enough alone. 

[Triplane]

Good move. Aloha.........

[Guest Colin M]

Interesting thread for the most part and I agree and disagree with points here in equal measures.

Firstly can I say ... the benchmarks tests OP gave us are not at all pertinent for what we do as Flight Simulation enthusiasts, and you get so many different benchmarks and hardly any are relevant to what we do .... we really do need a more focused hardware benchmark test for what we do and sometimes for each simulation we use too ... often we will see guys saying their 486DX2 CPU can do something a modern multi core hi GHz CPU might do and as well, an exaggeration of course, but you get my drift.

No way can an Intel 2600K compete with an 8700K for FSX or P3Dv4, if it can then something else is the bottleneck, and its usually the graphic card after a CPU ... one common mistake many simmers make is thinking they can upgrade one single part of their rig for Flight Sim, often many will think an SSD will do it, but no ... its all parts in harmony and sharing the workload.

I've owned a 2600K when it was just released, upgraded from that to a 3960X ... went from a quad to a six there, wow, then a 5960X (eight cores) but found the lower clock speed of the oct core was worse in FSX and P3D, by pure bad luck the expensive 5960X died on me after one reboot and almost before warranty expired, so as a quick fix a nice new system of an I7 7700K (back to quad) kept me going ... incidental, Intel replaced my I7 5960X CPU without fuss, even arranged to pick it up from my doorstep, sent me suitable packing labels ETC, got a new boxed I7 5960X back within the week ... I'm not joking, and that was a £1000 CPU in its time ... fair play to Intel, they get a bad rep sometimes but for warranty stuff ... awesome.

Anyway, once the I7 8700K got released, I knew this would be a good FSX or P3D CPU once matched with a suitable graphic card ... my trusty Titan X Pascal , bought a de-lidded one and slightly more extreme water cooling AiO than I have before, 5 GHz on all 6 cores here all the time and its not missed a beat ... FSX and P3Dv4 have never looked better with my add ons and as fluid as you like ... just saying ... I'm a happy bunny.

Not wishing to put down current I7 2600K owners, had one once, but you are not getting the best performance in FSX or P3D no matter what that OP benchie might say, its Horses for Courses and we ride different software than he does ... that might seem hardware snobby, really dont mean to be ... but how it is.

[Guest Colin M]

I7 2600K at say 4.4 GHz ... about what they could do off the top of my head? Say ... compared to an I7 8700K at same speed (if you could underclock it?) it simply does not work like that, yesterdays 1Ghz speed to today's CPU 1 GHz speed increments are not the same, not even comparable ... and especially for Flight Sim and FSX/P3D in particular.

Who really uses Winrar to measure your CPU speed anyway? some of those online tests are so biased and just silly, they all use the same old benchies that are not relevant to any of
us here.

Bit like when AMD had the upper hand a while back with the old Thunderbird CPU's ETC, they had lower speeds than Intels at time but beat them and I was happy to use them ... its good to see AMD back again, what we all really need just now are competition against Nvidia, you thought the price of their high end cards was high already, apparently they are going to raise them 50% or more this year ... its getting crazy ... greedy too

[wolfko]

8 hours ago, Triplane said:

Not at all right. All P3D versions are limited by the ability of the CPU to process a single-thread application. Granted, there has been significant progress in off-loading to the GPU but we're not yet to the "GPU dependant" stage...............Doug

 

Doug, if I remember correctly there are posts of JV here in the forum from the early days of P3d2 saying that for P3d GPU is more important than CPU. Doing a forum search would be interesting.

 

[Triplane]

If he said that he's wrong - IMNSHO. But, opinions are like belly-buttons...everybody has one. Until someone runs a set of definitive tests using both FSX and P3D I guess we'll all just have to continue to disagree...and speculate...and argue about it. But, then again, maybe that's half the fun. Sometimes I wish I spent more time in the air and less time worrying about this stuff.....sigh.....

[xxd09]

Hi Rob

Always looking to improve my rig especially with all the new stuff available now

A follower of your advice and information-very much appreciated 

Interested that your spec is almost the same as mine -which seems to run P3Dv4 OK

Difference is my GPU -an Intel i5 3570K overclocked by Chillblast to 4.5 GHz

Would I see much improvement upgrading the CPU-could go to a i7 8700K  3.7GHz?

Or should I leave well alone?

xxd09

[Guest Colin M]

4 hours ago, wolfko said:

 

Doug, if I remember correctly there are posts of JV here in the forum from the early days of P3d2 saying that for P3d GPU is more important than CPU. Doing a forum search would be interesting.

 

JV may well have said something like that (he knows what he's doing)  but his comments might have been taken out of context too? Sure nowadays a GPU is very important, especially when pushing 4K, but even if you are not at 4K yet .... or even if you are not at current VR tech yet where a fast GPU is even more important ... then it still goes back to raw CPU speed for FSX and P3D, you just cant be throwing in a modern super fast GPU like a GTX1080 Ti or SSD and expect miracles, you need a fully balanced system, otherwise its a compromise and bottlenecks will be found.

We really need a modern hardware guide for flight simulation in general, perhaps even our own benchmarks, there are so many new people joining the hobby and wondering why they cant see fluid results out of the box, ... it could put many folk off forever, what we need is a realistic expectation guide ... and also something to show that you can still get good results with appropriate settings and tweaks on modest hardware.

[scottb613]

Hi Folks,

 

From my experience - an OC is the best bang for your buck to improve performance - I've had my 2700K running @ 4.7Ghz for around five years now (thanks Noctua) - it's like night and day in the sim with OC off... I don't know why anyone would spend the extra cash on a "K" and not OC it... Same box had a top end GTX570 when I built it - on a whim I decided to upgrade to a top end GTX970 mid life - buyers remorse - the performance improvement was negligible... Faster memory seemed to help a little - another mid life upgrade... Clock speed is king in my book...

 

Regards,
Scott