Replacing the 4770K - Build Advice Needed - Intel V AMD?

JGBR

JGBR

JGBR

Associate
Joined
18 Mar 2007
Posts
1,838
I am looking at the last week of September to build a new machine.

The current machine: 4770K OC, 8GB DDR3, 1080GTX, M2NVME Drive, 27" 2560X1440 IPS 165HZ G-SYNC

I only need to replace the cpu, motherboard, memory, cooler.

I am aiming to build a gaming only machine primarily for the new Microsoft Flight Sim, X-Plane and Train sims. The machine will not be used for anything else. I get annoyed at 'tearing, shearing or juddering etc' which I am convinced is bandwidth issues on the current setup.

I am torn between AMD and Intel even after extensively researching.

Budget is sat at between £800-£900 but maybe some wiggle room up.
 
Then get a lighter to burn the rest of your wallet with it, if you wanna go Intel in the current climate. :D
 
Well intel seem to have the edge on FPS still, and wondering how this will benefit the sims, which is my main focus and potential of VR maybe in the future.
 
At the moment Intel aren't expected to get faster CPUs on desktop until next year, they're already a hard sell against Zen 2, so Zen 3 should remove all doubt.
 
JGBR said:
Budget is sat at between £800-£900 but maybe some wiggle room up.
Click to expand...

10700K, random Z490 motherboard, 32GB DD4 3200MHz RAM, and a decent cooler.

They're your go. Now come back in 2 months and ask again when you are ready to click the order button and see what had changed, if anything.
 
Do you really think you need to spend a premium on Intel’s poor value products, to get a few extra FPS to play The Sims smoothly on the CPU end of things? :o
 
Sparx said:
Do you really think you need to spend a premium on Intel’s poor value products, to get a few extra FPS to play The Sims smoothly on the CPU end of things? :o
Click to expand...

He's talking about flight sims and the like, some of which do favour Intel quite a bit.

Whether that trend will continue with the upcoming MS Flight Sim is up in the air afaik, it's out in August though so by the time the OP is ready to buy we'll have performance figures.
 
From what I've read of the specs list you don't need the absolute best CPU.

These are the ideal published specs for FS 2020.
  • PU: AMD Ryzen 7 Pro 2700X, or Intel i7-9800X
  • GPU: Radeon VII, or Nvidia RTX 2080
  • VRAM: 8 GB
  • RAM: 32 GB
  • HDD: 150 GB SSD
  • Internetspeed: 50 Mbps (6.3 MB/s)

It's all about making use of data taken from Bing Maps and Azure cloud platform to create in-game assets, so a good CPU but from what I've read the brunt is taken up by the manipulating of all the data assets in the memory which for good graphics -32GB.

Most important -large memory space and high speed internet.
 
Last edited:
The 4770K has certainly done well but its starting to struggle on many things particularly being held back by DDR3.

I also can't avoid MS has got close to AMD of late and apparently used Ryzen chips to dev Flight Sim on.

However, experience points me towards that intel chips are favoured by sim games such as flight sim and train sim, so the attraction of a higher clocker is appealing.
 
JGBR said:
The 4770K has certainly done well but its starting to struggle on many things particularly being held back by DDR3.

I also can't avoid MS has got close to AMD of late and apparently used Ryzen chips to dev Flight Sim on.

However, experience points me towards that intel chips are favoured by sim games such as flight sim and train sim, so the attraction of a higher clocker is appealing.
Click to expand...

You know that on games you're looking at about a 5% increase in fps at 1080 and above that , no difference?

From what I've seen Intel's dominance isn't like it used to be. Just that. :cool:

Just read this:
For previous flight simulators it was using Prepar3D which uses a very old game engine and can utilize only one core on previous flight simulators so that's why intel had the advantage.

https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/index.php?/topic/23856-intel-9900k-vs-amd-3950x/
 
Last edited:
Single core speed has definitely been a factor in previous flight sims performance.

I am less convinced this time around, it was rumoured the new Flight Sim was built in conjunction with AMD, but either way, I find it hard to believe FPS wise that its going to knock the 10900 or 10700 from the top perch.
 
Last edited:
JGBR said:
but either way, I find it hard to believe FPS wise that its going to know the 10900 or 10700 from the top perch.
Click to expand...

Yet just three short years ago people were saying that very thing about AMD having any impact at all on the market place, now look where we are. The 10900K and 10700K would not exist had it not been for AMD, and every generation they have become faster in every single way, and every usecase.

As I said at the start of the thread, buy a 10700K, Z490, 32GB DDR4 RAM and you are done, don't worry about losing out on performance in the long term, or look at the longevity of the system just concentrate on what matters to you now! It's not going to get any slower once you've bought it, just other things will come out that are faster, cheaper etc. :)
 
JGBR said:
Single core speed has definitely been a factor in previous flight sims performance.

I am less convinced this time around, it was rumoured the new Flight Sim was built in conjunction with AMD, but either way, I find it hard to believe FPS wise that its going to know the 10900 or 10700 from the top perch.
Click to expand...
They will almost certainly do so if the rumours are correct, higher IPC (which is already better) and higher clocks, but I doubt anyone who got a 10700/10900 will be super upset about it.
 
Gamers Nexus has just posted a Video (You Tube) comparing the 4 series to the more modern cpu. Worth a watch. I would keep an eye on any forums you can find for fs, see if there is any indication as to what advantages can be gained with which hardware. I think Ram is going to be perhaps your biggest gain. Intel vs AMD, you want the best for games at the moment, then its Intel, no question. If i had to push the button now i would go 10600k over the 10900k, using the saving for more ram.
 
Yes apt timing by gamers nexus.


I think the only issue with the 10600K is being married with higher end GPU's might boatneck, as I'd like to build a machine to last a few years and replace the graphics card with a 3 series 70 or 80 this is a concern.

I am wondering if OC the 10700K is the sweet spot?
 
Last edited:
JGBR said:
Yes apt timing by gamers nexus.
Click to expand...

Was scrolling down the thread expecting to see it linked to heh.

Which is why I'm no hurry to move on from my overclocked 4820K at 1440p - still holds up fine with anything less than a 2080ti at 1080p LOL.

Sadly not many 1440p results in that video but:

zFisUuc.png


Unlike someone's recent post going from a higher end overclocked 4000 series i7 to a 3900X doesn't produce hilariously higher results for gaming in a lot of cases, some exceptions aside.

And unlike someone else's recent post 4 core i5s, etc. don't hold up well any more for gaming compared to even an i7 of the same era.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom