Pilotasso

No competition from AMD does this, the same way Intel kept pushing quad cores as their flagships for 12 years until AMD released Ryzen.

interesting article. yeah you might want to hold off those pre-orders. The guy could be wrong though. NeCPvQcKr5Q

AMD's new cards won't be competing with NVIDIA's at the high end no matter how much clocks they increase from the 7nm process, because it's not a big die GPU and because it's same architecture as previous generation (they are VEGA, and not NAVI) . They are behind at the moment and that won't change until NAVI comes later, an this one we don't even know what it is exactly.

Another hidden pearl as someone mentioned before would be to use ray tracing for calculation of radar returns as the same laws of physics apply. That would be unprecedented. But I'm not optimistic that it can be done within a year.

they'll do that as long as AMD cannot offer competition. Vega 20 in 7nm early next might still be another midrange product like the RX580 is today.

Architecture differences between a 1080ti and a 2000 series card makes it difficult to compare cores or speeds directly. We simply need benchmarks.

Ray tracing basically is a new functionality aspect that allows GPU's to calculate light reflections on objects in real time that gives graphics near photo realism, quite literally. This requires games to be specifically to be written for it so expect some time before this tech is widespread. May take years. That being said I also expect the new cards to be faster in today's games. We dont know how much yet. There are alot of conflicting rumors.

Just a note for those wondering to get either a 8C/8T I7 9700K or the 8700K 6C/12T, dont bother waiting and get the latter. they are both cofee lake arch and the difference in gaming is frankly negligible and thats due to games engines not being well optimized for logical threads. The interesting chip is the 8C/16T I9 9900K part. So if your not going to get that one you should get any of the 8 series right now.

try running a dogfight over downtown Nellis, and whatch that CPU usage. benchmarking grass and trees is not a challenge. ;)

A bit too costly for pure gaming, only worth getting if you want to get multi GPU one day (when it finally is enabled in API's), and its a bit too soon for 16c/32T yet. if you really want similar core counts on the gaming desktop without paying near 1000$ price tag for the CPU alone I suggest waiting 6 more months for AMD's 7nm CPU's, although I think 8c/16t threads is already on the bleeding edge right now regarding gaming. Intel will be offering a faster CPU next October albeit for a predictably higher price.

There's more to it than range. More important than that is target descrimination. You can't fire a missile without knowing what those blips are. This capability is not directly proportional to range or power output. This affects tactics planning. If the radar picks up a contact at 400km but only determines the nature of the target at 30 the pilots will be scrambling their attention into an imminent merge. If the radar has half that range but sorts the contacts at 90km they have the advantage as this allows first shot. There is a debrief of a red flag where the mki's radar was more like the former example given and they had a few fracticide kills. I expect that was a limitation of being an export radar, as countries keep certain capabilities for themselves and sell off downgraded equipment for export (this is the norm for arms sales) , but this serves just an example. Regarding the topic, the Eagle-x is just on paper. There are no formal proposals just nice intentions and we do not have definitive specs. Right now the su-35 fleet is a silver bullet force. The opposition silver bullet force is... The F-22, not the f-15 in any variant.

The speed of different components cannot be compared. It's a question of reading enough reviews that the best cpu+gpu matchmaking will reveal itself. Sometimes memory speed comes in that equation but is less important (no matter what speed you choose always consult the manufacturer qualified vendor list to make sure the memory kits are compatible) . Any ssd will give you enough speed, it's a question of picking the best deal and warranty.

This is a piece of art. An Airwolf+Blue Thunder+Knigh Rider crossover movie! :D YNWsj6FHbiY

CPU: nothing quad core. You better have at LEAST 6 cores 12 Threads. Like 2600X, 8700K, 2700 (X or non X) will be fine. GFX: nothing below 1080 from NVIDIA. Although a Vega 52 or 64 will work well but the extra power requirement and heat makes them not recommended IMHO. Cheaper alternate: 1070Ti RAM: 32GB of 3200Mhz memory (see if you can afford 4 8 GB sticks at 3600 for the Ryzen machine) Storage: Any SSD with 512GB

the new CCX's allegedly are either 6 or 8 core, but yeah at some point these monster CPU's will be starved of memory bandwidth. I hope the IMC is good enough to reach 4000Mhz.

That is a killer system but the best part is you can change the CPU cheaply without changing nothing else. There is talk that AMD will release a 12 or 16 core CPU next year for this platform that will have IPC close to Intel's Kaby lake. Im salivating over it (yeah, not yet usable in DCS but I have other stuff in my mind)

Save money for a new system. DCS to perform has 4 pillars right now. The Mhz, the cores, GFX and LOTS of RAM. I mean LOTS. But each pillar of performance has different influence. Once you hit the swettspot of available threads (7 for me) and enough RAM the only thing that will matter is a better GFX. If you had an I7 6800 exacore I would say yeah get just the 1080Ti. At this point You need at least an AMD 2600X minimum or a Intel 8700K. If you can wait for 9000 series 8 core thatll give you more room for game growth (same for an AMD 2700X). Thats because quad cores are a no go anymore and this was a very recent change (like from last year to this year). You can expect the optimal specs to only increase as Vulkan API is implemented.

Well it's the coldest July in 30 years here in Portugal, we even sent our assets to Greece and Sweden to help fire fighting. Strange weather patterns this year, last year we were the ones facing this disaster.

yes, in your case you it's worth having a new CPU along with that 1070Ti. If you had any of the processors I mentioned above you only needed a better graphics card.

DCS already uses elements of Vulkan API. you shouldn't build for DX11 anymore.

Not so sure about this anymore. When I changed from a 2500K to a Ryzen R7 I only say a 14% improvement when using the same card (a GTX 970). Changing to a 1080Ti there was a whopping 68% jump performance jump, but I also know my 2500K wouldnt feed that monster fast enough. With the R7 I noted a 43% CPU usage over crowded cities which means its taxing the equivalent of 7 full logical cores. The take away from this is, as long as you have enough threads on any modern CPU, the bottleneck shifts all the way to the GPU side. if you have this, then all you need is a better GPU to get better performance (i.e. changing the CPu at this time will get you rapidly diminishing benefits). The game is now using Vulkan which might explain my observations. The game right as is, needs at least a I7 7700K, or 8700K optimal. Older CPU's like the 6800K or 6900K should be more than adequate. On AMD side, needs a 2600X or better in order to fully max the GPU. And I dont think we are going to stop at 7 threads, hence why I went with the 2700X (could not afford a intel 8 core chip, not that Skylake-X was any faster for gaming, the 8 core I9 9900K might be).

Save for a totally new system. FX processors wont hold a candle these days.

that will be a tremendous upgrade, enjoy!!!

cannot view it :)

what I meant is that the cheap TIM of the CPU will make it impossible to max out the custom waterloop.