AMD or Intel?

[BlueCanary]

I'm looking to build a new pc mainly so I can finally actually play DCS, but I'm struggling to decide what CPU to get.

 

According to PassMark on my budget AMD cpu's offer better performance for much less money, but it also says they have far worse single core performance than intel.

 

I can't find anything recent on how DCS uses cores, so I'm unsure if it would be worth getting an 8 core AMD cpu or if 4 of those cores would go to waste and a 4 core intel would be a better choice?

 

Also, would choice of CPU affect what I should choose in other hardware (other than motherboard)? Would an AMD cpu work better with an AMD Radeon graphics card?

[RoflSeal]

Avoid current AMD CPUs unless you are strapped for cash.

 

Intel all the way for now.

 

AMD GPUs are competitive with Nvidia GPUs.

[BlueCanary]

Avoid current AMD CPUs unless you are strapped for cash.

 

Intel all the way for now.

 

AMD GPUs are competitive with Nvidia GPUs.

 

Wait, what's wrong with AMD CPU's? Are they unreliable or something? I am strapped for cash though (an AMD build would fit my budget just fine, intel kicks it to pieces and leaves it crying in the corner).

[dburne]

Intel hands down.

4 cores are plenty.

Either an I5 or I7 will do nicely, if you can swing it get the K processor - very easy to overclock with the unlocked multiplier.

 

I5 is good for budget minded, I7 has couple of features that really do not do much for the gaming end of things - Hyperthreading ( I actually disable this on my I7), and a slightly larger L2 cache. Hyperthreading allows one to run 8 virtual cores on a 4 core processor. No real benefit to gaming, more help to things like video processing.

The I5 will overclock nicely like the I7 does as well.

 

GPU - your choice, for a while Nvidia had the edge but I think that has gone away. I myself still prefer Nvidia, but really just personal choice.

[Demon_]

DCS use one core for the sound, and one core for the rest. Or one core for all.

Check for the speed of the core. And overclocking...

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html

[RoflSeal]

Wait, what's wrong with AMD CPU's? Are they unreliable or something? I am strapped for cash though (an AMD build would fit my budget just fine, intel kicks it to pieces and leaves it crying in the corner).

 

AMD architecture (Bulldozer, Pipedriver) cannot compete against older Intel architecture like Ivy Bridge (which were direct competitors at time of release in 2011/2012)

 

Intel's chips architecture pretty much have shorter pipelines, more IPCs, smaller transistors (e.g. Ivy Bridge had 22nm transistors while Piledriver has 32nm) which leads to significant better performance/core

 

Since DCS doesn't really take advantage of multi-core especially once you get past 2 cores, an Intel i5 Haswell/Skylake is the much better option.

 

Alternatively you could wait till AMD Zen microarchitecture comes on the market and see how that compares to Intel's Kaby Lake in 2016. Both will have 14nm transistors and AMD have said that they have prioritzed single core performance in Zen.

Edited December 25, 2015 by RoflSeal

[rrohde]

Haven't had an AMD CPU in ages. Back then, they ran super hot compared to Intel. Is that still the case?

[BlueCanary]

AMD architecture (Bulldozer, Pipedriver) cannot compete against older Intel architecture like Ivy Bridge (which were direct competitors at time of release in 2011/2012)

 

Intel's chips architecture pretty much have shorter pipelines, more IPCs, smaller transistors (e.g. Ivy Bridge had 22nm transistors while Piledriver has 32nm) which leads to significant better performance/core

 

Since DCS doesn't really take advantage of multi-core especially once you get past 2 cores, an Intel i5 Haswell/Skylake is the much better option.

 

Alternatively you could wait till AMD Zen microarchitecture comes on the market and see how that compares to Intel's Kaby Lake in 2016. Both will have 14nm transistors and AMD have said that they have prioritzed single core performance in Zen.

 

So I guess this means my best bet is wait until I have more money to spare or an Intel CPU is on special offer and I can get it for a nice friendly AMD style price?

[dburne]

So I guess this means my best bet is wait until I have more money to spare or an Intel CPU is on special offer and I can get it for a nice friendly AMD style price?

 

I would suggest not skimping on the CPU, at least get an Intel I5.

You can save some by cutting corners on some of the other hardware, like video card and ram, the heart of your system is that CPU.

[RoflSeal]

I would suggest not skimping on the CPU, at least get an Intel I5.

You can save some by cutting corners on some of the other hardware, like video card and ram, the heart of your system is that CPU.

 

Technically the heart would be the PSU? since that is what supplies the energy to unit. You also shouldn't skimp on PSU, buy something with Japanese components, not Taiwanese/Chinese

[BlueCanary]

I would suggest not skimping on the CPU, at least get an Intel I5.

You can save some by cutting corners on some of the other hardware, like video card and ram, the heart of your system is that CPU.

 

I'm definitely going i5, it's just that while an AMD build would comfortably slide neatly into my budget pretty much perfectly with an OS thrown in, an i5 one pushes well over it even without the OS.

 

You mention skimping on graphics and ram, is this likely to cause problems? I've been told that anything under a 4gb card is not really DCS suitable, is that true? I guess if I go for less ram I can always easily add more later, although I won't be able to save a huge amount that way.

[dburne]

You mention skimping on graphics and ram, is this likely to cause problems? I've been told that anything under a 4gb card is not really DCS suitable, is that true? I guess if I go for less ram I can always easily add more later, although I won't be able to save a huge amount that way.

 

You can get by on a 2gb video card. You will need to crank some settings down to keep that vram usage below 2gb, especially scenery. 4gb would be best if you can swing it. A GTX 970 runs it beautifully, but you can get by with a 2gb 770 just realize you will need to make some concessions on graphics details. I am not that familiar with the Radeon cards so really can not comment on that.

 

System ram - 8gb should get you started, remember you can always add another 8gb down the road when you can swing it. I am running SP only, and currently my system ram usage stays around 5gb or little over. 16 gb would be a nice cushion.

 

My vram usage in the Caucases is around 2.3 gb, over Nevada around 3.4 gb, but I have most graphics maxed out.

[BlueCanary]

You can get by on a 2gb video card. You will need to crank some settings down to keep that vram usage below 2gb, especially scenery. 4gb would be best if you can swing it. A GTX 970 runs it beautifully, but you can get by with a 2gb 770 just realize you will need to make some concessions on graphics details. I am not that familiar with the Radeon cards so really can not comment on that.

 

System ram - 8gb should get you started, remember you can always add another 8gb down the road when you can swing it. I am running SP only, and currently my system ram usage stays around 5gb or little over. 16 gb would be a nice cushion.

 

My vram usage in the Caucases is around 2.3 gb, over Nevada around 3.4 gb, but I have most graphics maxed out.

 

Thanks for the advice, I think I'll try and bite the bullet and go 4gb VRAM then, I guess it'll be better than buying a 2gb one now and maybe having to get an upgrade soon after. I was looking at a GTX 960, which I guess will be not too much worse than yours if I turn some settings down?

 

Ram looks like the place to make cuts then, if I get 8gb now it'll just be a matter of adding, not replacing, if I want more.

 

I don't suppose anyone knows a cheap way to get an OS? Is there any way to run DCS on linux or something?

[dburne]

I don't suppose anyone knows a cheap way to get an OS? Is there any way to run DCS on linux or something?

 

I don't know if there is a way, but you are really going to need a windows version.

[BitMaster]

I dont think you should ask such questions in public forums !

 

Usually anyone has a Win7 flying around....and those do fine for a Win10 Upgrade, even if you stay on 7 you should get your copy of 10 for later times.

 

I would personally check for a good used SandyBridge CPU if money is low, those CPU clock higher than any other yet made by Intel unless you take the heatspreader off.

 

2500k/2600k i5/i7 they all go 4.5GHz-5GHz if properly cooled...and may be available for 25$

along with a proper P8P67 board and some DDR3 RAM

[tombeckett2285]

AMD or Intel?

 

I've used AMD chips for both FSX and DCS over the past five years (I've currently got a X4 965 Black Edition OC'd to 3.8GHz) and have had benchmarked equivalent performance to friends with Intel chips that cost twice as much - I picked up the X4 for £79 3 years ago and (touchwood) it has run solid, cool and with great performance. I'm definitely sold on Nvidia GPU's though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fishbed64]

I'm looking to build a new pc mainly so I can finally actually play DCS, but I'm struggling to decide what CPU to get.

 

According to PassMark on my budget AMD cpu's offer better performance for much less money, but it also says they have far worse single core performance than intel.

 

I can't find anything recent on how DCS uses cores, so I'm unsure if it would be worth getting an 8 core AMD cpu or if 4 of those cores would go to waste and a 4 core intel would be a better choice?

 

Also, would choice of CPU affect what I should choose in other hardware (other than motherboard)? Would an AMD cpu work better with an AMD Radeon graphics card?

 

Well,the answer is easy,the basic rule for good performance in any current flight sim is avoid anything with AMD sticker on it.AMD FX CPUs have horrible gaming performance(due to the module architecture and shared FPU) if you need brute force performance like in flight sims.The same thing is with AMD GPUs they run normal games very well like Nvidia GPUs ,but for flight sims Nvidia is much better choice because of much better drivers and support especially in flight sims.What you need is Intel + Nvidia combo,best budget choice for flight sims is i5 4590+ cheap B85 mobo +Nvidia GTX960.

[cichlidfan]

I don't suppose anyone knows a cheap way to get an OS? Is there any way to run DCS on linux or something?

 

DCS requires Windows. AFAIK, there is no legal way to get a cheap version of Windows. It is the base of your ability to play most games and it costs less than the price of two modern games.

[SkateZilla]

:music_whistling: