LucShep

I think it's pretty much a given that these requirements are borderline fantasy. Can we please have some honest, realistic hardware requirements ? Also, can we have it mentioning the respective resolution and framerate/refresh that they're recommended (f.ex, 1080P 60fps, etc) ?

Perhaps a bit too late (hope not). If it is, maybe this tutorial will help others with same issue: FWIW, I had the same problem (jittery on rthe X52's rotaries and throttle, also in X56's rotaries), now solved.

Do not put the PC tower directly on the floor, as it will gather dust very, very quickly. It'll be a dirty mess inside the case in no time. You can, however, place it over something that lifts it above the floor, at least 25cm (10 inches), then it's ok. That, or place it on the desk/table. For example, I reused a speaker case from an hi-fi stereo, merely as a "base/platform", to place the PC tower over it. Mine sits right beside at the left, where the desk ends. Anything similar (shelf, box, short table, etc, etc) for that "base/platform" effect, can do trick. I used to have it on the desk for a couple of years, and much prefer how I have it now. No more dust problems than I'd have when it was on the desk, space and weight over the desk is better saved for other things, and it's also not susceptible to any damage from motion or sudden movements.

Yep. Such a shame it's not a commercial product...

Bitwit has the best review of the RTX4080 so far:

That is also one of the best alternatives, yes, though to get those at such prices is a bit optimistic. You can already get RTX3090 in second hand on Ebay for 680 Euros or so but, again, you'll have to go through auction/bidings, or have luck with those accepting offers ("buy it now" prices still a bit inflated). They're there for sure, be patient.

...I mentioned USED, as in "second hand"...

Forget the RTX3060 12GB, it's much slower than the GTX1080Ti 11GB. Forget the RTX3060Ti 8GB, performance increase is minimal compared to GTX1080Ti 11GB and has less VRAM (important for DCS), not worth the cost. 500,00 Euros? For that budget I'd only recommend a used (as in, second hand) RTX3080 10GB or (AMD) RX6800XT 16GB. Plenty found on Ebay, though you'll have to go through auction/bidings, or have luck with those accepting offers ("buy it now" prices still a bit inflated).

Fully agreed. 2nd hand stuff is absolutely worth it - if in the right price and condition, which is actually often the case in the used market for controllers and peripherals (as well as other PC hardware components).

HEH?? Did you even bother to simply read the title of the thread, and whats on topic all this time? (SPOILER ALERT ---> Video Card Rumours) Who the frak is talking about CPUs? (not me, that's for sure...!) ...is it just me sensing some AMD fanboyism there? hmmm I didn't even remember that very important detail, thanks for refreshing my memory! The decade old disapointment comment is about GCN1.1 being the start of the disapointment era, exactly because it was merely a soft update (rebranding, really) on what was there prior to it, which was utterly pathetic. The stupid high temps and wattage on the R9 7970s was/is legendary, and it was kept onto the following (rebranded) models .... and only to disapoint again with the R9 Fury, and again in summer 2016 (after huge hype going for months) with the top GCN 4.0 model (RX480) that, in fact, could only compete with GTX1060 6GB mid range model of Nvidia. ...and then over a year later the forever hyped and delayed "Polaris", the Vega 56, Vega 64 and (...omg...) the Radeon VII...! *SHIVERS* Please, let's stop now.

Obviously not refering to processors (Zen is a success, and a much welcome one by AMD). I'm refering only to AMD graphics cards, which indeed have been disapointing, even if they have insisted and improvements have been done. It just hasn't been enough to bring them up to parity, hardware or software wise. The Hawaii 290/290X and Tahiti 280/280X (GCN1.0) were less of a disapointment than the two following generations, but they too were trumped by Nvidia (GTX780, GTX780Ti, GTX Titan). RDNA 1 (and I had a RX5700XT) was a better return to form after VEGA and RDNA4.0 before but, gosh, it was a god awful experience for quite a while (over eight months of the worst graphics drivers and workarounds I've ever had the displeasure of handling). Everybody I've successfully convinced to invest in an AMD GPU even before GCN4.0 (RX470, RX580) to RDNA2 (RX6800, RX6900XT) have regreted it and already gone back to Nvidia, and all gladly so, unfortunately. Look at these forums and you too may sense there's a good ammount of people using them, who would have prefered Nvidia after the experience (even if better these days). Oh, absolutely. I agree with you, yet the huge lines of fools paying thousands for single units of GPUs that actually sell out, and helping what used to be considered a problem become the norm, seem to disagree with us...... I'm glad you didn't went through the VEGA generation and the early 8 months of RDNA 1. Regret and "wasted time that I'll never get back" wouldn't even start to describe the feeling... The same metric of any other competing brand for whatever type of product - to make a product that can compete at the same level or better. If the drivers keep being "OK, but not as good", and if they're unable to create a direct competitor to the rival's flagship (as has been for the last 10 years), it just means what it is - defeat. They're a second tier. Which means the competitor (Nvidia) won't (re)adjust pricing on their semi-perceived "superior" products (because there's no need to), and have now adopted strategies of making hugely cut down versions of the flagship at utter hilarious prices (hello RTX4080 16GB... ) unlike previous generations, while laughing all the way to the bank.

Come on now.... "being better" ? If you're a 25yr system builder (like I am as well) then you're aware of these three realities: AMD is running on 10 years of overhype and disapointment (if these fail, it'll become 12+ years then). Passing a blank cheque to NVIDIA regarding top performance and drivers quality (basically saying "we can't compete there"), allowing NVIDIA to make their own products more expensive. People want AMD GPUs to compete, sure - so that NVIDIA is forced to lower prices on their own GPUs. NVIDIA drivers have been, and probably will keep on being, MUCH better. That's a huge part of a GPU ownership experience (FWIW, just the NVIDIA drivers team is bigger than the whole AMD corporation!) I agree that we need to see the reviews first, and then maybe we can say if "it's better", or not. Better yet, let's see the real prices on the market (not "MSRP" BS), and concrete feedback on user experience with these new GPUs after a couple of months. Then we can see if they're really better.

And they shouldn't be pretty... In Europe the RTX 4080 16GB is going to sell between 1600 and 2200 €uros (serves also to force sales of RTX3000 series old stock)... And same will happen to the AMD RX7000 series (likewise, also to force sales of RX6000 series old stock), you'll see. We thought it was the mining craze and the lockdown creating the price gouging on GPUs.... BS! This is now beyond stupid, sorry. Nvidia and AMD can go fly a kite with these new GPUs (as good as they may be). Used Market, for higher end Nvidia RTX3000s and AMD RX6000s, is where it's at (while you can). Be patient and look for those from trusted sellers and at the right price.

Unfortunately there's no mention about BIOS specific settings on the user Manual. https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/SocketAM4/TUF_GAMING_B450M-PRO_II/E17210_TUF_GAMING_B450M-PLUS_II_UM_web_updated082820.pdf If not possible throught the motherboard BIOS, I believe one can disable a select number of CPU cores using AMD Ryzen Master software: https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master See page 20 of its manual: https://www.amd.com/system/files/2017-03/AMD-Ryzen-Processor-and-AMD-Ryzen-Master-Overclocking-Users-Guide.pdf

Yes, indeed. He says the obvious about a 4-phase VRM motherboard, which is what is - usually fit for a six-core Ryzen at most, eight-core Ryzen being already over borderline limit. Note that the OP is using a sixteen-core(!) Ryzen in it.... Watch that video at 4.44... it's all there.

I respect your opinion, but if that system is hitting 95ºC in the VRM with some simple Cinebench R20 or R23 benchmarking, then it is not fit for any heavy gaming use (even DCS with it's limited one/dual core use). As said, it could be it and/or other factors (combined or not) as already listed previously. Like the PSU having the OCP triggered, RAM instability, could be even wrong BIOS settings (or BIOS version), or even faults in cooling causing system shutdown due too high temps.

Sure, no problem. I forgot to add this to my previous post - if you wish to monitor your motherboard VRM temps you have the already suggested HWINFO: https://www.hwinfo.com/ Among all the values listed in it, there will be one, down in the motherboard section, called "VR MOS" (some motherboards list it simply as "MOS"). That's the VRM temperature, though you need to add 15ºC to what appears there (value is usually offset that way for reasons I don't know) for "real" temperature. You may wish to try some stress test on CPU with HWINFO open, and monitor the temps value in that "VR MOS" (some use Prime95 for stress test but it may be excessive, so four or five consecutive rounds of Cinebench R20 or R23 all-core benchmark may also work, for example). Add 15ºC to the maximum value that appears in there, and you have the real temperature in the VRM - my bet is that it'll surpass 95ºC if CPU is stressed!

Ok, understood. FWIW, I completely disagree with your dealer there. If you're buying a higher wattage PSU, definitely get 1000W instead of 850W, prices now got too close between them to not get the bigger wattage one. There are some good quality and very reasonably priced 1000W 80+Gold PSUs worth looking for. For example, and among others, check the Corsair RMX 1000w, EVGA SuperNOVA GT (or G6) 1000w, Seasonic Prime (Gold) GX1000 and SuperFlower Leadex (Gold) 1000w. For the motherboard, there are good mid range B550 and X570 motherboards with which that Ryzen 9 5950X will work great, and not outrageously expensive. I'm a sucker for MSI, so recommend the MSI B550 Tomahawk and MSI X570 Tomahawk, but the Gigabyte B550 Aorus Pro and Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro are also good choices.

The way I see it, there are three redflags just looking at your systems specs. I could be wrong but, reading your description and looking at those specs, it makes all the sense to me that at least one of these, if not a combination, is causing your problem: B450 motherboard with Ryzen 5950X The ASUS TUF GAMING B450M-PLUS II is, from memory an 8x46A VRM, which means it's a really bad combination with that Ryzen 5950X. For your to have an idea, it seems even the older Ryzen 3900X was making the VRM temps pretty darn toasty on that motherboard, so not recommended... and that's a CPU that seems to pull similar power as yours does (identical TDP).... That motherboard is simply not prepared nor meant to run that Ryzen 5950X. At some point that VRM hits really high temps that system is not prepared to endure, causing BSoDs and shutdowns (until sometime later it eventually "Kaputs"). Corsair RM750 750W 80+ Gold PSU While in theory you should be able to run that hardware with that PSU (which is a good one, make no mistake), you have a power hungry CPU, and if added with (ocasional) transient spikes from that also power hungry RTX3080 (which I'm sure will be running quite hard with DCS as it is these days), then you'll run at the PSU limits, even if just for brief moments, and probably trigger the OCP on that 750W PSU - causing CTDs and shutdowns (until sometime later it eventually "Kaputs").. That CPU+GPU combination should be running on a good 850W+ PSU, not less. 4 x Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR4-3200 RAM It should run fine but, sometimes, stability is not there without some small tweaking. Running four sticks of RAM can require a 0.05v increase (if it's set at 1.35v, increasing to 1.40v then) in the DRAM VOLTAGE, in the BIOS respective setting. Either doing that, or decreasing the speed of the memory to the imediate degree below (for example, yours are 3200, turning down the speed to 3000) will ensure far better stability with the XMP/DOCP based settings of that RAM kit. With all this said... easiest solution, in my opinion, is to sell that Ryzen 5950X and get a Ryzen 5600X. "Whaaaat??" Yes!! Swapping for a Ryzen 5600X you will likely solve two of your possible problems in one go, the 1) and 2) points that I mentioned above (motherboard VRM issues and PSU limit), instead of spending ($$$) on a better motherboard and stronger PSU in an atempt to solve issues. Your motherboard will run the Ryzen 5600X beautifully. At same time it'll also aliviate a bit that 750W PSU, giving it more margin. And no, it's not really a downgrade as it's a great gaming processor - quite frankly, I think it's same identical performance in any and all games (also in DCS, I suspect). If you decide so... heck, maybe consider opening an offer to fellow DCS'ers, some kind of deal where you can be given a fair sum of money AND a Ryzen 5600X, for your 5950X? Regarding the point 3) that I mentioned above (RAM instability), it could or not be related, but you should try it anyway, regardless of CPU in use.

VKB has its own section in the controller part of these forums (other manufacturer products too), you'd better posting there: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/158-vkb-sim-flight-gear/

I'm presuming you're on about this for Intel 12th or 13th gen, and not AMD Ryzen 7000 series (DDR5-6000 is the sweet-spot for those). I think if you're interested in RAM, maybe spend some time understanding how it all works, Speed vs Latency, as well as the main timings and other parameters, such as Command Rate and tRC, etc. There are many guides on the web. For example, GN's is a popular one, and very thorough: https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3333-memory-timings-defined-cas-latency-trcd-trp-tras Maybe this other one can serve better, although it's very old (dates back to DDR3), also a long read but it's divided in comprehensive sections: https://hardwaresecrets.com/understanding-ram-timings/ Anyways... let's imagine you have DDR5 6400 32-39-39-102 So, you already understand that the 6400 (Mhz) listed there is about the speed of the memory. But what about the other four main timings (not three as you mention), the 32-39-39-102 and what do each of those represent? So in that "32-39-39-102" order.... CL: CAS Latency. The time it takes between a command having been sent to the memory and when it begins to reply to it. It is the time it takes between the processor asking for some data from the memory and then returning it. tRCD: RAS to CAS Delay. The time it takes between the activation of the line (RAS) and the column (CAS) where the data are stored in the matrix. tRP: RAS Precharge. The time it takes between disabling the access to a line of data and the beginning of the access to another line of data. tRAS: Active to Precharge Delay. How long the memory has to wait until the next access to the memory can be initiated. As you can realize, the shorter these timings are, the better. Ideally, you want the highest speed and shortest timings, but that does not come cheap (or easy, if you're into RAM overclocking). In reality, it's not like very small differences will be perceived in "real world usage" by the user (most times they're not). OK, now let's imagine a quick and basic p!ss-match between two DDR5 modules that you can find on the market: 6400 CL32 (32-39-39-102) versus 6800 CL34 (34-45-45-108) 6400 CL32 At 6400, a cycle takes (1000/3200 = ) 0,3125 ns 32 of those cycles then totals to 10.0 ns 6800 CL34 At 6800, a cycle takes (1000/3400 = ) 0,2941... ns 34 of those cycles then totals to 10.0 ns Hmmm... curious, eh? ...the latency is the same. People looking into one and the other will think that the latency in the 6800 CL34 kit is higher (versus the 6400 CL32 kit), but it isn't. You see, there are more cycles (34) on the 6800 CL34 kit - but then those cycles happen at a faster rate. In the end...... "but between the two kits, if it was my money??" Honestly, I'd get the cheapest of the two. Period. I really think people overthink the subject and overspend too often. For example, in this particular "versus" that I just mentioned, yes the 6800 CL34 is the better one, but I doubt anyone will be able to tell a single difference between those two kits (none, nada, zilch) in real life usage or gaming, perhaps not even if registering and noting down average FPS to units and decimals like an utter nerd. ...I don't now, in this case, and instead of splitting hairs, use the rest of the money on beer (I like beer!).

You need to wait for this...

A lot of people are waiting for the AM5 Ryzen 7000X3D chip and, because of that, are passing on current deals for the AM4 Ryzen 5800X3D. I think some things should be realized before deciding to wait for that upcoming chip, such as: The new AMD Ryzen 7000X3D chip won't be unveiled before CES 2023 (January 5th-8th), and noone knows how long after that it'll be on market (at full price... $500+ ?). https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7000-x3d-zen-4-3d-v-cache-cpus-ces-2023-unveil/ The current AM4 Ryzen 5800X3D is among the best (if not the best) all around gaming CPU today, and is currently being sold at >25% discounts (under $350 right now). It also runs cooler (than AM5 7600X or 7700X, also than AM4 5800X, and equivalent Intel) and therefore is not as picky on cooling. For example, a Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 is a great option at $45, with room to mess about with OC, PBO and etc on that CPU, if ever desired. Motherboard prices... There's plenty good (AM4 platform) B550 motherboards for the AMD Ryzen 5800X3D, all of which are far more affordable than the newer (AM5 platform) B650 motherboards meant for the new Ryzen 7000 chips. For example, you can go as low as the MSI B550-A Pro, currently selling at $115. And there are plenty other great sub-$200 B550 motherboards to choose... Same can be said of the higher-end (AM4) X570 motherboards vs (AM5) X670 motherboards. DCS wants 64GB of RAM... DDR4 3600 CL16 (B-Die) is most recommended for the (AM4) Ryzen 5800X3D, and you can now get 64GB kits (4x 16GB) of that mem under $330. DDR5 6000 CL30 is most recommended for the (AM5) Ryzen 7000X chips, and 64GB kits (2x 32GB) of that mem are pretty hard to get under $500. Yes, the upcoming (AM5) Ryzen 7000X3D should be faster the current (AM4) Ryzen 5800X3D but, as you imagine, price will fit accordingly, plus you'll have to wait. The thing is, there's always something newer and better around the corner, such is the world of PC Hardware. As to say, something faster than the 7000X3D will be out just months later, and there it goes all over again... So, at some point, one has to draw the line and decide when and how much is enough. It depends if you're on a budget or not, and if you want to wait or not. Just my opinion but, considering costs of everything for a new system, little by little on this and that, it all adds up. In the end, there can be considerable savings by going with the current Ryzen 5800X3D (a killer deal right now, IMO). And that may also make that painfully expensive new GPU purchase a bit more digestable....

I've been a big advocate of Intel i7 1*700KF series for years but, have to say, I think the Intel i5 13600KF and AMD 5800X3D are definitely the best purchases of the moment. 64GB of DDR4 (3600 CL18, for example) are still far more affordable than the equivalente DDR5 - any 64GB kit better than DDR5 5600 CL40 will be a lot more expensive. Most gaming rigs are currently being done considering 32GB, but for DCS you reallly should go for 64GB, which makes things a litte more complicated (different) for final prices, and most tech reviews and techtubers are not considering this. All of which makes it a very compeling case for the AMD 5800X3D + B550 mobo + 64GB DDR4 RAM choice, not the latest AMD Ryzen 7600X, nor the Intel i5 13600K.

Yes, I'm located in Portugal and it's the same problem here (I think as it'll be for most of the E.U.), makes perfect sense what you describe. That's same as new, and therefore not a bad deal at all. EVGA is worth it in the case of RTX3000 series because of the best warranties and post-sale services in the GPU business (for already produced cards), even if they're no longer producing new Nvidia GPUs.