EightyDuce

I was dangerously close to pulling the trigger on a MORA. In the end, form over function won out, coupled with OCD, I ended up with what's above. I'm very tempted to go black soft tubing and compression fittings (they've been sitting in my closet for a year now) when I drop the 9800 in; still cant bring myself to use QD fittings even thought they've come a long way. Just can't shake the irrational fear of them failing. But the whole loop needs service so may be the perfect time to make the switch. Trying to talk myself out of a de-lid and going direct die...

I actually prefer buttons not on the board in my builds if there is a need for one; much prefer the rear I/O panel, or as I mentioned, wiring the reset switch to the bumper (temporarily or permanently). In this case I had to wire a micro switch and mount it in rear I/O I always thought of my builds as more on a mild side of custom builds as compared to many other loops; some amazing builders out there. But yes, they're a bit more niche when compared to a build where someone throws an AIO in a case and call themselves a custom PC builder.

Like this.... Jumper is bottom of the board and is covered by radiator and fans.

Worth is subjective. If you already have the means, desire and know-how, I'd argue that any performance gained is worth it. 3% increase in FPS/frametime in VR for example could be the difference between smooth gameplay at unlocked frames and having to rely on reprojection.

Its not a given indeed, I simply mean it is one of the main factors to drive ME to a high end board rather than the difference between a mid and high-end board. I may have not been terribly clear. As for clear CMOS button, it is very much a necessity, at least in my case. Due to the radiator and hard tubing placement in my case, I can't get to the CMOS jumper. While testing overclock stability it is not at all uncommon for me to have to reset CMOS. Would be dang near impossible without breaking down the while loop. Cases like these are why it's hard to generalize, and honestly should be avoided where possible, when recommending hardware as we often don't know ones needs. Except for maybe X870 over X670 where it's 99% the same chipset outside of mandated USB4 lol.

Biggest deciding factor in the high-end boards would be availability of an external clock generator and voltage/granular overclocking controls (clear CMOS button!!! So i don't have to wire my own or rewire the reset switch to clear CMOS jumper). Other than that, most mid-high to high-end boards have similar features. Most if not all AM5 boards outside of the "budget" selection have massively overbuilt power delivery. If you don't need those features, you can get a quality board with plethora of connectivity and features for $200-250. I'd rather take the saved cash and play silicon lottery with CPUs for best overclocker with the best memory controller.

If you've been holding out, this is probably as good as it gets. If you're on a 7800X3D probably doesn't make a ton of sense to make the jump, unless you got money burn, want to overclock, or just want absolute performance at any cost... Or a combination of the three. Now just need pricing to hold up.

Looking pretty good....

Buying today, and you've already gotten several recommendations, but I (no-personal experience with either card) would once again say 4080S over 7900xtx if the cost is not a sticking point and the primary focus is DCS VR. Reason being: DCS VR is historically performs better on Nvidia (difference may be negligible now with AMD driver improvements), 16Gb vram is sufficient today, DLSS upscaling in VR is objectively better than FSR. Someone who owns a 7900xtx and plays in VR posted their experience above and appears to be happy with it. It is upto you to decide if that is worth the $200-300 difference and if your goals/expectations align with those who are replying.

Looks like a nice build. What are your plans for cooling? Unlike the 7800X3D, the biggest boon for 9800X3D is ability to overclock and boost higher. Both scale with cooling (within voltage constraints).

Considering that 7800X3D already beats 14900k in gaming overall and 9800X3D at a minimum is 4-8% faster stock for stock (before any OC headroom), then logic would dictate that 9800X3D will also handily beat out 14900k in gaming. Throw it into a half decent b650E or X670E board and you're off to the races. Interesting part will be how vcache being under the CCD effects signaling/latency and vdroop, which will bleed over into overclocking. Direct die cooling could make things more spicy.

As mentioned above, lack of a standardized benchmark and control over hardware/software variance between two systems makes this very difficult to do in a meaningful manner. It is almost impossible to do this without someone having identically configured systems. Otherwise you're not getting apples to apples comparison.

Using LG OLED C3 42" and love it. No DP but HDMI 2.1 is sufficient for 4K HDR at 120fps and is Gsync/FreeSync compatible. Can be had on sale fairly often. Grabbed mine for $650+tax. Also has a ton of color controls for calibration purposes, but looking at CALMAN, factory calibration on mine wasn't terrible.

Guess that makes my VPForce Rhino decision that much easier....

Ah, good to know. Every day is a school day.

Both matter, but for different reasons and under different conditions. Bus width is the derivative of total vram capacity of a card. Each GDDR6 and GDDR6X chip has 2Gb capacity with 32-bit bus width. 16GB will result in a 256-bit bus and 24GB results in 384-bit bus. GDDR6X is faster GDDR6 so all things the same X variant is superior due to clock higher speed. However, if you are hitting a VRAM limit then a higher capacity will edge out bandwidth as was an issue with 4070s in certain games with higher graphical settings due to the 12GB capacity.

There you go. Some feedback from someone who actually plays with the card vs theory. To be honest the biggest downwall of 7900XT(X) is the price AMD launched it at. Its a solid card with good mid-high end range performance and at something like $800-850 is a solid contender.

Confusion of terms... "Bit Rate" is a measure of speed of data being sent and "256"-bit is the bus width of the 4080, which is a number of lanes between the memory and the GPU core. They are two different things. Interestingly, 7900XTX has a 384-bit bus vs. 256-bit on the 4080, but it's just a part of the big picture. To OP: Historically nVidia cards tend to do better in DCS VR and DLSS is a better implementation of upscaling. Focusing only on DCS today, between 7900xtx and 4080S I'd say go with nVidia. Outside of DCS VR, AMD is a solid card in its own right. If you don't need ray tracing. Extra VRAM is useful for higher resolutions and asset resolution/size, 16Gb on the 4080 being sufficient today. With either card you will hit a wall with GPU compute capacity before you hit a wall with VRAM avaiability in DCS. If you can hold out for a 50XX cards, they could be a good alternative if the price is right and you aren't in a hurry to upgrade.

Go into the settings and create a new tab, then you can specify a file or folder. It's the only way I was able to add my own stuff in, like adding Chuck's guides. null

Not sure about his specific setup, but in mine, I have no defined keys for left and right. Simply turning your head (left, right, up, down) to the set limit at which NS kicks in is sufficient. Only key I have bound is Center command. Hopefully makes sense.

I did not mean to imply anyone being an "idiot", simply made a conjecture based on the terminology and the manner in which it was used. It appears I may have misunderstanding what you're trying to get across. Carry on. I wish you luck and hope you get your question answered.

Think there is some conflating of terminology and lack of basic understanding of refresh rates vs fps. The 60/90 Hz you keep referring to is the refresh rate, measured in Hz. Refresh rate is how often the physical display panel refreshes, for example, at 60Hz would be 60 refreshes per second. FPS is how many frames your PC is able to render per second and then send to the display. When your PC isn't able to keep up and render the frame before sending it to the display, you get artifacting such as screen tearing/stutters. The % (ie 80%) is the resolution scale of the image rendered. That being said not sure what "it worked before but now it doesn't" actually means, but there isn't a reason why it wouldn't work in a traditional binary sense, there would be a performance difference because as the resolution (render scale) increases the PC has to work harder to render the frame, if it can't render enough frames fast enough within a given refresh rate (Hz) then final result suffers in form of stutters/tearing.

Not sure how much has changed over the years, but PassMark scores used to be of little-to-no-indication of gaming performance. It used to be just a cut above the dumpster-fire that is UserBenchmark. I wouldn't use that score for anything other than predicting weather.

I will preface this by saying that mine is not a 5700X3D and it has been a while since in-made the switch. Now, I switched from a 7700X (system specs in the signature,only thing changed was the CPU) to a 7800X3D amd I saw a noticeable improvement to frametime pacing in VR using my G2. I may dig through some old threads if i have time, as I wanna say in ran some numbers at the time. Again, not an apples to apples comparison but maybe close enough to paint at least a bit of a picture. To be perfectly honest, if you're going for a big upgrade when 50XX series GPUs come, I would hold your $$ and upgrade the CPU/mb/ram then too; but that is an individual choice based on ones own tolerance. Not a fan of half measure "upgrades", especially at full price and on an aging socket, but I am also pretty sensitive to stutters in VR so I went all in. IMO don't plan your system on what the next shiny MIGHT be, guage whether your needs are being met and make the call from there based on tech avaliable. AM6 could be another large leap or it could be a meh side-grade. There are a lot of unknowns in your original question and it's hard to make a more detailed suggestion without knowing current setup, budget, and desire/expected performance result. Some folks here play in VR with settings and performance I would find unplayable, but they are happy with it. All subjective. PS, not sure if it's an option where you are located, but might be worth to get the X3D and return if it doesn't pan out as expected...YMMV based on return policies .

We will eagerly await your comprehensive benchmark suite analysis of these modern CPUs, such as the 5700X3D compared to 5800X. Excited to see the fruit of your years of formal training and first hand, real world experience and the contribution they would bring to the scene.