See my follow up video here… kzfaq.info/get/bejne/a8yYgJmJt83Uf6c.html

The real game changer will be when we get off single core and take full advantage of all the cores modern CPU’s have to offer.

Many thanks. The whole self-emolation thing had me procrastinating on a much needed upgrade. I think I have popped through the confidence threshold :)

Mark after your group flight in April where my PC crashed and BSOD, due to faulty RAM that was the final straw for my struggling i5 system. I switched to the 7800x3d. Like you I have been a Intel convert for years. I am pretty happy with the 7800x3d and seeing better and smoother results in 1440p and VR. It has taken some time to tweak settings and stabilize the system. -Messmeriza

Fantastic video as always, Mark!!! Thank YOU!!!

Thanks for this - a genuinely useful video!

Excellent comparison. Thank you both.🎉

This is why I subscribed = Quality information! Thank you!

What a great video ..thank you mark and also thanks to Dan from wired2fire ! You've helped me emmensly as i've been in a quandry for quite some time in regards to a cpu upgrade, specifically choosing between these two particular offerings . I was leaning towards the 7800x3d chip anyway ( always been intel though) and you've pretty much convinced me to bite the bullet for the AMD chip. Thanks again!

I changed to the 7800x3d a few months ago and I have to say it worked amazing for me. VR is so much better, I would totally recommend this chip

What a superb video guys. Many thanks for all you efforts.

Great, informative , many thanks

Thanks for sharing this ❤

Great video! I’d be fascinated to see something similar including the 7950X3D.

For those querying the VR performance. TDLR there will be a slight uplift from the 13900k. If you notice on the graphs, the GPU is at 50%, giving headroom to render "the other eye", but CPU will lock this to it's bottleneck; ie the 76fps you see will be in VR. The 5800X3D gives similar performance here to the 13900K and I can confirm you will be looking at around 70-80fps peek (fluctuates wildly with the scene though, from around 55fps-80fps). Will the 7800X3D allow 90fps? Probably not yet. You will still hit a number of brick walls, even with the 7800X3d and the 4090. One of the biggest sticking points is having the CPU supply the scene data to both renders (I know its not exactly like this, but it is partly true so the reference is appropriate). ie Turning up Terrain LoD will easily tank your fps in VR. Right now around 100 is suitable to get around 70fps in VR on either 13900K or 5800X3D. I would imagine you could increase this slightly (maybe 150) on the 7800X3D to get similar performance. However, there will still be drops to the 50's from time to time. Overall, GPU's and CPU's of today still are in no way ready to give you that 90fps locked fluid fps rate in MSFS. (by fluid I mean no 5%, 1% or 0.1% lows to the 50's etc). However, with some tweaking, you can achieve mostly smooth 90fps in VR with a 5800X3D and 4090 in DCS World MT with reasonably high settings and foveated rendering. Although you still get the odd stutter down to the 50's when other things are requested of the CPU. Turning of HAGS helps here somewhat too. In all these cases you can tweak the GPU to keep up, with tricks like DLSS and Foveated rendering, but there are no tweaks for current CPU's other than lowering those CPU demanding settings. Like you said this requires brute force of speeds, there is no magic wand. The technology is just not there yet ... but we've been given a glimpse, and potentially, it is coming (soon TM)

Hey Mark, thanks for that video. I actually run into the same question about Intel vs AMD when building my new rig last month. I have to say Im glad that I made the move to AMD form my 10900k. With my Gigabyte4090 and some CPU overclocking my FPS at 1440p are accutaly around 118

Great information, we need a DCS re-run!

I've built about a half dozen PC's over the years and I always used AMD because they were more affordable. With the last build I wasn't as concerned about money but I still went with AMD. I had a 3900x but recently swapped in a 5800x3D. I wish I could give you more info on MSFS performance but I am just completing my flight/driving/space simulator buildout. If I were you I'd go with the 7800x3D build even though I am always cautious of a new chipset and socket. They always start out buggy but then get stable over time. The numbers don't lie and the technology is not hard to understand. Notice how your guest did not recommend the more expensive AMD chip even though it has more cores and is also a x3D chip. It's not because of price that he did this. It's because of the layout and architecture of the current x3D implementation. The 7950x3D has 16 cores split over two chiplets while the vcach resides on only one of the chiplets. So when one of the other cores needs to use the level 3 cache, the processor (sort of) needs to stop what its doing and go over to the other chiplet and use it. This reduces the efficiency of the higher vcach implementation. The 7800x3D has only 8 cores with the cache sitting right on top of it so with respect to level 3 cache efficiency, it's faster. To be frank, the higher x3D model chips' implementation could fairly be described as disappointing and problematic. The 7800x3D is a winner though. It will save you money and noise... AND ... It will wipe the floor with that expensive blue space heater that used to be the best at this sort of thing. Love the videos, cheers !

thank you!

Just ordered a 7800x3d system this morning. Exciting times.

Very happy to have waited until the 7800 X3D released. It runs beautifully with the 4090. Very glad to have the build finished now. I also went for one of those Arctic 360 AIO as a bonus treat. Astonishing performance.

Thank you very much for this video, Mark. Two days ago I ordered an AMD 7950x3d and 64Gb ram 5600 (I’ll keep van rtx3060ti, it’s already expensive enough). It was time to build a new system because my i7-4790 was getting too slow with all these great new payware/freeware heavy aiports and hifi airplanes. As a long time Intel user I decided to go for AMD this time after a long time research. I don’t need 100, 150 or more fps. The most important for me is that I have a fluid running sim without stutters on my 4x 22” monitors and that I can run other fs software in the background. About all the pro’s and cont’s I could read here, it looks like a competition between MSFS vs X-plane, Airbus vs Boeing, Porsche vs Ferrari, BMW vs Mercedes and so on and so on. Sometimes it looks like a “children-garden”. Anyway the best is which you can pay and will never leave you alone. Stay safe mate 😉 and all of you. Don’t forget … keep loving flightsimulation whatever sim you have !

Great test. Next time on the graphics regarding usage/power/temps where you only have the 2 CPUs, make sure to put Intel in blue and AMD in red, it was confusing for a few seconds the other way around 😄

awesome vid.

Not what I was expecting....very good test and the results speak for themselves. Jerry

Eye opening test!! As others have mentioned tho I am also interested in the results when you start throwing in multiple addons and external programs; your virtual airlines monitoring programs, navigraph, multiple web pages, complex airplanes like the phenix or pmdg, AI or Vatsim traffic, streaming and/or recording..and of course your watching youtube or netflix on the other monitor as well right? lol. I had a similar issue when I was big into playing Eve Online, sure just a low core high speed CPU was great for the single game. But I was running 10 accounts at the same time..there weren't so many tests for that lol.

Really appreciate this video. I guess I’m getting my first AMD processor. Just got the Varjo Aero and a 4090, no point in cheaping out now. I was just going to upgrade from the 13600k to 13900k, but that is an immense gap in performance.

such a coincidence as I was looking up cpus yesterday. Thanks to Dan for the insight. Hope to see how you decide (wink wink nudge nudge).

Thanks for putting this together. It would be interesting to see the results from X-Plane 12 as well.

This might be your best video yet. Because of this video I put a R7 7800 X3d upgrade over my I9 10900k and the results were amazing... RTX3080ti is now my bottleneck.. FS2020 has never looked this good.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! I’ve been hanging out for just this comparison as I have suspected the AMD would do better, just not this much better.

THANKS....I was ready to purchase a new system w/I9 & 4090 GPU and saw your video. As a result, I chose the 7800 X3D / NVIDIA 4070 combo. Saved $1K and XPlane runs with max graphics options and excellent results as you showed.

I’m still rocking a 7700k @5.1 ghz and a 11gb 1080ti ! It’s gives an ok representation of the sim , brought to its knees depending on the scenery load .

And me with my I7 and RTX 2080 Super ;) Holds up well so far eh! :)

Wow 100 videos later I finally find my answers. Go AMD. Thanks.

Ok i have one 7800X3D and it awesome - Sim arcing MSFS - it runs everything (with my 4090) great price - Just updated the bios too ( very easy and no issues!)

13:30 One factor to consider is the cost difference between Intel and AMD motherboards. Although cheaper AMD motherboards have recently been released the cost differential can be $50 or more.

Upgraded my 10600k @ 5ghz to the 7800x3d after seeing this video. Huge performance uplift with the 4090.

Arguably the 5800 X3D holds the best bang for your FPS at the moment, so these results on the 7800 X3D make my next upgrade deserving of more thought and consideration.

The sim runs great on my pc with the 5800x3d and 32mb ram at 36000 on am4 board. very happy i changed my chip from the 3700x to the 5800x3d well worth it.

Great idea for a vid Mark and bringing in an expert…I’m in the market for an upgrade also, so very interested in this topic ❤

i9 13900ks (more v-cache) is running everything beautifully maxed-out with an Asus MB & 4090 Strix. Doesn’t even break a sweat and runs between 50-60deg on most demanding games and sims. Ignore the naysayers 🤫

Thank you Mark. very informative. Holding off building an MSFS VR rig until the dust settles. I think AMD is the way to go though🙂. Cheers for all your good work and exceptional detail.

I just picked an R9 7900 non-X 12 core, for this sim and my DCS. along with an rx 7900XT and new 4k LG monitor ; )

I can't get over how well it runs on my I5 6600K with a GTX980Ti. Obviously not maxed out but looks very pretty still. VR would be out of the question as well I guess.

I wish you could have included DCS in the benchmarks.

finally I Found a video that talks about hardware dedicated to F.S.

Just went 7800X3D + MSI 650 Tomahawk + 64GB GSkill with Hynix chips. Absolute beast of an upgrade from the 11600k @ 5Ghz. Bought 3x 7800X3D's and tested all of them. Kept the golden sample. Also tested 4 kits of RAM and holy hell am I skint until all the refunds come in :D

Thought about the 13900K and the 4090, but since i heat my house electrically i had to tune the idea a bit down to a 13600k and a 4070 ti or else the fuses would blow, while simming in wintertime or sim in the cold with the electric heating off. Life can be quite complicated sometimes, but i managed to solve it. Happy simmer overhere and happy heated.

Intel 13900k for a content creator, without a doubt. As a raw MSFS use AMD has a few more FPS, but once you start recording videos at the same time, running scripts, addons and more outside of MSFS, Intel has the lead for sure. I went back to 13900k and couldn´t be happier at the moment, at a cost of a few fps i have a very stable system, no matter how much multitask. Power, Temps etc... always comes up, how many do actually really care outside of Benchmarks? 100DEG is not an issue for Intel, mine runs at 65DEG and is absolutely fine. My recommendation: Focus on stability with headroom instead of pure fps, the experience is the most important.BTW, I have turned off fps preview in all my games, super smooth and i really dont care what the number is, Smooth is key and much more enjoyable.I would challenge anybody who can tell me the difference between 90fps and 117fps in MSFS (outside of VR)

1stly I preferred to build up a system based on i7 13700 & 64GB DDR5 on DDR5 MoBo but meanwhile Ryzen 7800X3D could make the difference...hmm?🤷‍♂️very nice&useful content to make your decision👏👏👍

Thanks for this. In the middle of designing a new build. I was planning on the i7-13900K. This has put a cat among the pigeons.. Moving from Intel to AMD. for me is a huge wrench. I know this is for MSFS, I'm aware the AMD doesn't do well in X plane 11 as for 12.. given up on that.

I have the i9 paired with a 4070Ti and I'm very happy with the performance.

It will be really interesting to see how the new msfs2024 will run with the new tech. From what I have heard they are optimized to run on the newer generation hardware unlike msfs2020. Have you heard the same thing @SimHangerFS? I am like you chasing the fps in msfs since the mid 80s. I think I'm going to wait until 2024 comes out to see if I need an upgrade or not.

Interesting video as always Mark I’m just going through the same process at the moment I am running a Ryzen 9 5900x What I am wondering now is if I should just buy the 5800x3d which will just slot strait into my existing motherboard or go the 7800x3d which means a rebuild. It might give me less bottlenecking and save me around £650

How would the 7800X3D perform in flight sim when enabling addons like FSLTL, GSX, FS2Crew and others along with a PMDG 737 or say Fenix A320? I think this test would be interesting as most avid simmers wouldn't be flying around in the Asobo A320 with minimal addons. If I am not mistaken, I think these addons would definitely make a difference and more cores would be a huge plus here.

If one can afford top tear CPU I would wait for the 14th intel gen CPU that’s breaking the 6Ghz barrier, that’s going to announced in the Intel event in 20th of September. Nothing worse than spending a lot of money in a new computer and a couple of months later a brand new and better tech comes out.

What I’m seeing from dcs with multi threading is where we should be focusing our money for future builds because msfs can’t stay single core for the next 6 years they have to recode and release the game

Great video! I've somehow missed it. I'm on a 4090 and an i7 13700k and I will be getting my Crystal in a matter of days. My motherboard is a ASRock Z790 PG Lightning, so I'm not sure if a 7800 X3D will fit? If anyone who sees this knows, I'd appreciate an answer. The 7800X3D sounds like a great choice for MSFS. Thanks again, Mark. Love from Norway ♥♥♥♥♥

Hello Mark!! I watch your videos all the time. I have a conflict. I am buying all the components to build a super gaming PC specifically to run MSFS with the PIMAX CRYSTAL and I wanted to ask you about the AMD Ryzen™ 9 7950X3D 16-Core, 32-Thread Desktop Processor vs the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D 8-Core, 16-Thread you talk about in this video. Is the 7950 better than the 7800?

Thanks for this test! I am about to build my first pc rig for flight sims but I am wondering if the AMD 77800x3d would be the right choice also for DCS, over a i7 14700K. And also, do you think 4090 as the only good option to achieve such good performances or a Radeon 7900xt could do (given that CPU does most of the heavy work) ? Any input will be much appreciated! Thanks!

@dboss7239 got the point. It would be essential to run i9 13900K at overclocking to have a true comparison with R7 7800 X3D. @dboss7239 "I'm late to this review, however I have a very important question which affects all of us thinking of upgrading. Both MSFS and XP12 are essentially single thread operations regards the primary flight model and graphics functions. Hence the primary attribute is the CPU clock speed. Were these benchmarks done at the max continuous overclock of each processor? Because if not then I suspect the 13900K will meet or better the 7800 X3D as their max overclocks are nowhere near each other. I seriously doubt he ran at the max overclock speed of the 13900K, as it draws over 250 watts when overclocked. The problem is the base and OC frequency of each is: 3.0 GHz for the 13900K and max overclock single core is 5.8 GHz 4.2 GHz for the 7800X3D and max overclock is 5.0 GHz So if you ran them at their base clock freq, then the 13900K will be performing at 71% of the speed of the AMD, but at overclocked the AMD runs at 86% of the Intel. Hence if not overclocked this was not an apples to apples benchmark, as for optimal flight sim of any kind (they are all single thread) you want to overclock, which means hefty cooling and lots of heat and somewhat noisy machine to obtain the cooling of both the CPU and the RTX4090.... I have a Ryzen 5600 now and overclocked it runs at 4.65 GHz which isn't enough to run at decent settings. I also have extensive experience running actual simulation software and the nature is that for simulations whether for mechanical stress or electromagnetic attributes and behavior, you are limited to single thread as is the case for the physics and aerodynamics of flight simulation. Yes a bigger cache helps, but the main driver is the clock speed. (and flight sim has the added burden of the speeds and relative motions of all the graphics relative to the moving aircraft which the CPU must generate before the graphics card can render them, you cannot parse out any of these tasks as all are dependent upon the aerodynamics so it's a linear process - you can't really split it up into different parcels that a bunch of cores can work on separately - it is iterative maths that have to run through a gazillion iterations of the basis or root parameters to generate a solution for the next frame) "

Pity that you guys did at least started also DCS as from what the community reports there the situation is in favor of 13900.

Good video. Why did you perform the test in DX12 for both platforms? In VR, DX11 performs better when using Nvidia GPUs? Curious why not run the test in VR and DX11?

Something told me they would eventually start using more than 8 cores in games at some point in the future.

I was going to upgrade my RTX 3080 to a 4090 but may getting a 7800X3D CPU might be a good first step?

I'm late to this review, however I have a very important question which affects all of us thinking of upgrading. Both MSFS and XP12 are essentially single thread operations regards the primary flight model and graphics functions. Hence the primary attribute is the CPU clock speed. Were these benchmarks done at the max continuous overclock of each processor? Because if not then I suspect the 13900K will meet or better the 7800 X3D as their max overclocks are nowhere near each other. I seriously doubt he ran at the max overclock speed of the 13900K, as it draws over 250 watts when overclocked. The problem is the base and OC frequency of each is: 3.0 GHz for the 13900K and max overclock single core is 5.8 GHz 4.2 GHz for the 7800X3D and max overclock is 5.0 GHz So if you ran them at their base clock freq, then the 13900K will be performing at 71% of the speed of the AMD, but at overclocked the AMD runs at 86% of the Intel. Hence if not overclocked this was not an apples to apples benchmark, as for optimal flight sim of any kind (they are all single thread) you want to overclock, which means hefty cooling and lots of heat and somewhat noisy machine to obtain the cooling of both the CPU and the RTX4090.... I have a Ryzen 5600 now and overclocked it runs at 4.65 GHz which isn't enough to run at decent settings. I also have extensive experience running actual simulation software and the nature is that for simulations whether for mechanical stress or electromagnetic attributes and behavior, you are limited to single thread as is the case for the physics and aerodynamics of flight simulation. Yes a bigger cache helps, but the main driver is the clock speed. (and flight sim has the added burden of the speeds and relative motions of all the graphics relative to the moving aircraft which the CPU must generate before the graphics card can render them, you cannot parse out any of these tasks as all are dependent upon the aerodynamics so it's a linear process - you can't really split it up into different parcels that a bunch of cores can work on separately - it is iterative maths that have to run through a gazillion iterations of the basis or root parameters to generate a solution for the next frame)

There is also a Question about running additional programs with MSFS. Wish that could be answered as well. Im talking about FS Realistic, Simshakers, spad next etc. Do you know if that has any impact on CPU give amd has 8cores vs Intel 16c

What are your thoughts on a R5 7600x and 7800XT? Or even upping it to a 7900 GRE?

Do we know if frame gen was used in these tests?

@simhangarfs Can you guys try DCS and report on the performance there between Intel and AMD?

How about performances in VR? Curious about that, because I also am looking to upgrade with the pimax in mind (have a reverb atm)

Hey Mark, I am struggling with my MFS2020 after last update. I have used the backup Nvidia driver 5.31.29 and with my specs are I7 8770 CPU RTX3080 GPU and 32 GB ram. I only get 22 FPS in my HP Reverb G1 VR. No matter what i do, i can only get 22 FPS, and sometimes only 2 FPS, which kills the MFS2020. Would a better CPU like the R7 7800 have a noticeable change for me, or will a new HP Reverb G2 has any effect?

8:50 i'm kinda surprised the 7800x3d is running only 39c during game play. is this correct? that sounds more like a normal idle temp. are you sure it's not instead +39c above ambient temp of say 22c making it around 61c?

Hi Mark got a quick question to have your input I still run xplane 11 with a lot of orthos just found out by accident when I fly GA my fps is great actually I have it capped at 50fps But when I fly airliners I get 35 fps and if flying on the east coast at high altitudes sometimes it drops to like 15fps briefly then the CPU load is pretty high 80 percent so I found out my CPU is bottle neck. I have a 17 8700K I just ordered a amd 7900x you think I should see improvements I think I will but what you think? it will be the same setup as I have 64 gigs of memory and the 3080 super faster CPU and ddr5 memory I do run lot of programs on a single computer.

I am wondering How this mill compare with The 79OO XTX and all else the same

“Astonishing Miracle Deliverer” - Drunk Acer Computer representative on stage with Dr Lisa Su

the most interest part you miss, what about VR? I can't play msfs on the screen for the last 3 years, i think in VR the things change a lot for intel.

Hello, good video, I have an i7 9700k with RTX 3080, the question would be, should I update it to the 7800x3D?

AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D 4.2GHz Socket AM5 💜💜💜💯💯💯

What about 7900X3D vs 7800X3D?

With Microsoft flight simulator 2024 being designed for multi threading. Does that completely change the question here about what CPU might be better? Will we have to find the CPU that has the best hyperthreading like thread ripper?

If you play MMOs, 7800x3d is indispensable, that 3d v cache or whatever it's called is simply magic.

I've got an RTX 3090 paired with a 7800x3d but my average fps at 4k ultra is 60 for some reason. and in the profile viewer it's saying it's a mainthread issue so I'm trying to figure out why my 7800x3d seems to be bottle necking (definitely not a heat issue either)

how is the performance difference in VR

The 7950X not X3D is very good too for msfs

So should I get a amd plus 4070 ti super for quest 3 or i7

1. What is the best cpu nowadays in the end ? 2. What will happen when mfs24 comes out with multicpu support.... i feel like intel 13900k should be the way to go ... good overclocker, better than amd alternative nowadays it looks and stronger for mfs24... I m.right?

Just Built my 7800x3d from a 5800x3d with a RTX 4090, and its smooth as butter in VR, just the bing servers causing lag.

for who dont know 7950x3d is a bit faster due to higher clock but it have to use parking cores in games similar to intel E cores, so it use only chiplet with 3d cache in games, but you have the advantage of much faster productivity performance

Wish you guys would have added the 5800X3D to those benchmarks. Pretty sure it beat the 13900K in MSFS as well

Nice video but is this still valid with 2024 right around the corner? I’m getting close to getting a PC for 2020 but want to make sure it can handle 2024.

I upgraded from a 5800X and a 3080 with 16GB RAM to a system with a 5800X3D, a 4080, and 32GB RAM, and oddly enough, the most noticeable difference is the CPU performance vs the normal 5800X

7800x3d Mark rather than say the 7950x3d. The 7950x3d only has v cache on one side of the chip and thus leads to xbox game bar and drivers having to decide which side to use for the game. The 7800x3d only has one die with the v cache on it and so negates the rigmarole with software work arounds.

Any thoughts on MSFS 2024 changing these results significantly? I'm a current X-Plane on a Mac user prepping to move to MSFS 2024 on a PC when it's released.

More xp12 processor tests kzfaq.info/get/bejne/i55-Z7J1x9uRdKM.html

Hello and the ryzen 9 7900x3d with 140mb cache would be a better option than the R7 7800 X3D ?

As an owner of a 5800X3D playing MSFS, you won't be disappointed by going with an X3D.

What is the best GPU for DCS. Is it RX 7900xtx or RTX 4090?

_Why was the GPU utilization higher when running the Intel chip_ ? If you look at 9:20, you can see that the GPU is working harder. If the same graphics card was used, then one would expect the GPU utilization to be the exactly the same and yet the GPU was working about 15% harder when the 13900 was tested. A higher GPU utilization suggests that it was producing different graphics and different graphics suggests that the CPU itself was having to do more.