BitMaster

I guess "high" since the Editor Tool is anything but easy to work with, it's a study job that you need a lot of patience for imho.

Man, Have fun with it !

You can try, if you like overclocking, the kit that I use, 3200 14-14-14-34 and set it to 1.48v and go 3600-14-14-14-34 Either way, I would only pick a B-Die module 3200 or faster, CL16 or lower.

At which resolution do you intend to use that card ?

Gen5 makes sense if the price is right, temps are manageable and the drive supports Direct Storage too for future games, maybe even DCS some day. For most cases tho, a good Gen4 is all you need.

+1 8 years here, still trusting it. Paid for itself

I wpuld not pick the twelve core but go for the 1-tile 8-core 7800X3D instead. A: It has 2 more cores that can use the bigger cache B: there is no scheduler cleverness needed here, it's only 1 type of core, avoiding headaches. If you need more cores, go for the full 16 core 7950X3D so you have 1 tile with 8 cores on 3D cache but may have to tweak affinity here and there, depending on the cleverness of the software involved.

R.I.P. Don You passed away on my birthday, don't have words.

Haha, just saw your sig. I just watched that Episode on YT and had a laugh. Oh man, what a difference to most of today's comedians. "Hick's, noch 'nen Pahlgruber !?"

Cinebench R24 does use both; CPU and GPU. The tests run for 10min each, so it's kind of a little stress test per default benchmarking, no more "1 good run and hopefully not crash before" ( for the LN guys ). https://www.maxon.net/en/downloads/cinebench-2024-downloads

Beirut's attitude is the most important part, it's not only hardware and software and bugs and frustration, It's about forgetting it all and FLY

It doesn't actually matter what exactly causes your RAM to be eaten up like cheesecake. Is it dcs.exe, some cache, who knows...if it screams for more give it more. When playing online on busy servers, some F2 and F10 and ooops 48-56GB, repeatingly. No, it's feasible, more than 64GB might come as the new Go-To capacity over the next 2-3 years when newer, more complex modules, newer maps etc... they all seem to add CPU load and increase RAM requirements, slowly creeping upwards

You will need to either move C to a bigger drive or delete some apps and/or files. You may need someone to help you to do that, I don't know but it needs to be done ASAP. There could be a Bios setting to control shared VRAM or a setting in Nvidia control panel for Max-Q series / Laptop. YOu should be able to google that. Either way, C drive is imminent to fail, act now.

Well, then, that's not good because you will force DCS to it's knees if you take some 8GB away from the already minimum capacity of 16GB total system RAM. Change that setting to it's smallest setting or even 0. With 1080p your onboard 8GB are enough. Have you fixed the C-drive issue ? With 5GB free space, you are bound to crash hard pretty soon.

With the Radeon 580 you won't see any difference between them as you will be GPU limited. I like my 5900X but the 5800X3D might be the better choice if you look at your VRM. Depending on how robust your VRM you can support more Cores and more ampere. I just flew a test round with the new patch, my CPU is constantly between 85-100w when flying DCS. It's not overclocked, rather the opposite, it's undervolted. The 5800X3D will not pull that much. I just built a 7800X3D with a 7800X and that drew less watts than mine in most games I tested. The more cores you have the higher the idle and overall power draw, keep that in mind. My CPU idles with 40-60watt up&down. That a waste just because of 12 cores idling along. The X3D counterparts stay much more in a sane limit while the still deliver the punch in DCS and most other games too. I'd take the X3D if you don't heavily multithread otherwise and can make use of the cores.

yes to the above but I would aim at 64GB system RAM and either a bigger drive or 2x 1TB. My DCS is well over 500GB already. If you have Win, Apps and DCS on a 1TB drive, you will soon find out..heck..I need way more space. A 2TB is a good option but I would rather pick 2 independent 1TB drives

There are a few things that I would pay attention to: 1: C:\ 5GB free space -- you must act, your OS will stop responding all over pretty soon, not only in DCS. 2: I am not sure what that Memory config in Dxdiag means with this: Display Memory: 16153 MB Dedicated Memory: 8002 MB Shared Memory: 8151 MB If that pulls 8GB from System RAM away then that is not good with 16GB total RAM. But I could be totally wrong with this. What I am certainly not wrong with is your C drive. You gotta clear it out, move data or move to a bigger drive !

But if I pull out 1 channel I am left with 32GB only Seriously, I could accept it as a compromise but not a recommendation. There are 5-10% to gain in most of the test in the vid you posted, some where tie and only 1 was 2% slower ..and that was DDR3 back in 2014 with 3-4GB tested. We are talking 30-50GB in use with DCS these days, tendency going even higher. If there is 5-10% on the table not only a few would do a lot and even pay some cash to get them 5-10%. I would like a to see 4k or 8k video render, that should show some bigger difference. The more memory is needed the wider the gap. edit: if you aim for 64GB minumum for DCS, there ain't no single 64GB desktop DIMM yet, you have to go dual channel. Only if you were to go 32GB, which is regarded as not enough for many scenarios, you could get away with 1 channel. LoL

That NVMe-Card card comes with a caveat you should be aware of if you call a 4090 your own. Your 690 chipset does not have enough PCIe lanes to feed those extra drives, or better said feed that PCIe-Slot with enough lanes directly from the CPU ! Page 2-23 of your manual states the modes the TWO ( not four ! ) NVMe can run in and if both or only one can be used. what that doesn't tell you is what you sacrifice, that is stated in the technical documentation. You have to READ & UNDERSTAND BOTH paragraphs to know what you are facing. If you plug it in the 2nd PCIe-slot you will force BOTH PCIe slots #1 and #2 into 8x mode, before it was 16x and 0x, now it's 8x + 8x. That means your 4090 only has 8 lanes instead of 16, if that matters a lot, maybe..the more data you need to send across, aka the higher the resolution the more it does matter. Try it out. The second option is slot #3, which does NOT link up to the CPU as #1 and #2 does but links up to the Southbridge chip, which usually forces you to sacrifice 2 Sata drives and maybe a 4th PCIe slot if you have on. The lanes must come from somewhere and if you opt to run more devices than there are lanes you need a PCIe switch that can switch lanes between connectors, between ON and OFF. Mind that when you start a build. I have 4 NVMe in my rig, 1 from CPU and 3 from the chipset. For #3 and #4 I had to sacrifice Sata 5+6 and my fourth PCIe slot, they got deactivated when I put #3 and #4 NVMe in. If I wouldnt need all 16 lanes for my GPU I could have used #2 slot with a AddOn card and put two NVMe there but I do not want that unless the GPU has PCIe v5 itself and can shuffle enough data at only 8 lanes. All GPU's out there now have PCIe v4 and if you cut that in half you end up at PCIe v3 16x speed and that I think is too little for an unleashed 4090. If the 4090 was a v5 card then 8x at v5 might still be plenty.

I disagree totally for many reasons. Maybe the most non-technical is that everybody seeks for the best performance and there you throw it away. When a system needs that much RAM like DCS I highly doubt, tho I cannot proof it, that going from 128bit to 64bit bus width won't hinder performance. The thing about DDR MHz is about bandwidth, you can settle with 2133 if you doubt that dual-channel, quad- hexa- octa- channel systems give any benefit. Guys, I cannot believe you throw away 64bit's of bandwidth.. left in disbelief...I need a beer.

I run my 5900X in stock power settings ( 200A max iirc ) but have set the Curve Editor to -26 All Cores, which is undervolting the cores per se with a -26 value if you are new to tuning 5000 series AMD chips. I have pumped immense Ampere and heat through this CPU, cores up to 5.15GHz but in the end, it all was slower than this simple setting. Enable XMP, edit your Curve to minus 20 or lower and call it a day. *You have to spend some time to find the value that your CPU can work with, a too low value, max is -30 will almost certainly not feed enough volts and cause instability. Start with -25, most can run this, and see if it runs stable. If it does, you can try -26..... Once you have found the lowest it can go stable you will likely see higher sustained boost speed. If that fixes your DCS Apache issue, I highly doubt it tbh. But a better (less volts, less heat, higher speeds ) running CPU is a good thing, nonetheless. edit*: This is all done in Bios, you do not need Ryzen Master but you could, I just dont like that GUI and how it handles things, I prefer Bios.

Depending on what "a lot of other things" is, the 16 core 7950 may make sense ( lots of MT ) or not ( Gaming ). I would at least get the X3D version of any AMD 7000 chip if gaming was involved. If you need the cores for heavy MT, get the 7950-X3D, if it's mainly gaming and if 8 cores are enough, get the 7800-X3D and save some money. PSU wise you can't do much if you stick to the promo, for such expensive parts I would preferably choose Platinum or Titanium grade PSU's. I don't do VR anymore but from following the forum I think with Nvidia you do yourself a treat if you want to go VR.

The build looks great..and I love excellent PSU's, Platinum or Titanium... but that 1600w looks almost overkill to me but let's do the math. Say the GPU will go 400-600w in a realistic scenario and the CPU will take up 100-150w permanently in DCS, plus 100w everything else, fans, pump, LED, Board, Drives, RAM, USB peripherie ( Hotas ... ) etc.. that quickly adds up to 600~800watts. Aiming at 50% PSU load under full game load you end up looking for a 1200-1600w PSU. So yes, it fits the bill on the upper end, as desired. Headroom. So, yeah, it's a big fat PSU, hopefully titanium efficiency for high efficiency under very low load too, under 10% is where you will mostly be while watching hours and hours of YT content and reading the web, daily stuff. Look for a tower with at least a 360 or 420 radiator option and bear in mind, a AIB 4090 card may block the front radiator, fans may clear it but if there is another inch or two for the rad can be tricky for some AIB 4090 SKU's and more than a few cases, not even talking having a front rad in there. Those 14th-gen need proper cooling, may own 5900x meanwhile sucks up around 90-100w in DCS, so I wonder what a 14900k will pull, that heat loads many 240 rads in no time and fans will need to spin like mad cause most AIO's have 2-3cm thick radiators only, that's next to nothing for100+watts permanent draw and wasn't designed with such CPU's in mind. The size of the 4090 somehow is important to match GPU + Case + AIO360-420. I wouldn't go small, 240 or 280 AIO, rather the other direction and go DIY and include that 4090 in the loop, that makes the most sense since that card eats the wattage and pumps the heat into your case. If you consider the cost for a 360-420 AIO you can already go DIY without too much extra cost and stay flexible. Start with the CPU and may add the GPU months or years later, do external or internal rads or both etc etc. many options I have a DIY loop for many years myself and it's been the best investment in cooling and PC parts in general in years. My external rad MoRa3 overall has more surface than most cases can have with all the rad options filled out, but mine is also 5cm/2inches thick and it has options for 4x200mm fans that are way way quieter than 9 x 140mm...and cost less too btw. Less hassle insider the case, easier tubing, external pump too...soo much less stress and better to service than any in-Case solution...and hey..it looks cool too may wanna check watercool.de website for their MoRa3 and waterblocks as well, you can buy that in the US too.

I may add that where I live, Germany, I can't complain about DL speeds, it's not always 112MB/sec but mostly above 80MB/sec...even Steam doesn't always give me a full Gbit DL, just happened the other day. You can keep using Steam for those that are on Steam while you can also use them on Standalone same time. The problem arises when you switch where you buy them, because if you buy Standalone you cannot use them in Steam since they changed that few years ago. So if you have 3 modules in Steam and then buy 3 modules in Standalone you can use all 6 in Standalone but only the first 3 in Steam. Which may not play a role for most to be fair. One example would be DCS in Linux, it works best via Steam, I know of no other way but it works in Steam on Linux. That's where I can fly my first few modules before I went Standalone for any purchase after that.

It's why they shouldn't even sell any AM5 2DPC boards at all and avoid this Fiasco. It's not the dumb user here, it's companies selling stuff that by all means is not mature in some specific sense, here 2-DPC ( Dimms per Channel ). Why don't they stick to 1-DPC boards until that issue is solved. I doubt that future AM5 CPU's will run 2-DPC in those current boards w/o issues. If they would deliver what's been promised we could still do a 1-DPC - 128GB with 2x64GB but avoid the 2-DPC signal integrity pit. They should throw in ~500 new Pins for the CPU and do a 4-Channel 1-DPC layout on Sockel ~2300ish ( 192 pins per Dimm ? forgot LoL ). This "will it or will it not" is not what you want with a rig that's many grands, you want assurance it's solid and stable and works as advertised.