12900k to 9800x3d/9950x for DCS: Seeking Advice on CPU Upgrade with RTX 4090 and Pimax Crystal

[Raiden85]

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for some advice on upgrading my CPU and motherboard for DCS. I currently have a 12900k, 64GB DDR4 3600 RAM, and an RTX 4090. I'm a happy Pimax Crystal user, so I play at resolutions above 4K.

I've already purchased 64GB of DDR5 6000 CL30 RAM, and I'm now trying to decide on a CPU and motherboard. I know that the GPU is important for high resolutions, but I've seen firsthand how much the CPU can impact minimum FPS, spikes, and overall smoothness in DCS.

I'm considering the 9800x3d or the 9950x. I know the 14900k is a good option, but I'm hesitant to invest in a platform that's already at the end of its life cycle.

Has anyone here made a similar upgrade? Any insights or recommendations would be greatly appreciated!

[speed-of-heat]

9800x3d is basically the king of gaming performance right now... 

[LucShep]

On 2/18/2025 at 3:34 PM, Raiden85 said:

Hi everyone,

I'm looking for some advice on upgrading my CPU and motherboard for DCS. I currently have a 12900k, 64GB DDR4 3600 RAM, and an RTX 4090. I'm a happy Pimax Crystal user, so I play at resolutions above 4K.

I've already purchased 64GB of DDR5 6000 CL30 RAM, and I'm now trying to decide on a CPU and motherboard. I know that the GPU is important for high resolutions, but I've seen firsthand how much the CPU can impact minimum FPS, spikes, and overall smoothness in DCS.

I'm considering the 9800x3d or the 9950x. I know the 14900k is a good option, but I'm hesitant to invest in a platform that's already at the end of its life cycle.

Has anyone here made a similar upgrade? Any insights or recommendations would be greatly appreciated!

I'd be carefull if chosing a CPU+motherboard platform just by longevity arguments...
AMD's roadmap indicates that Zen 6 is going directly to 2nm and is expected in (late) 2026. It is also been noticed that AMD is retiring AGESA for OpenSIL. 
This means that the firmware, which tells the motherboard how to communicate with the CPU, is being replaced right about the time that the new CPUs are expected to launch.
It could be that the socket will not be replaced, and that every motherboard currently in service will require not only a new BIOS but a new BIOS type, in order to function.
But it also could be that AM5 will be a two-generation socket (Ryzen 7000 and 9000 series). Meaning, it's unclear if the next AMD Ryzen (10000 series?) will be supported on current AM5 motherboards, and perhaps it's better to expect it not to be.

The Intel i9 14900K is a really good CPU that has proven to perform on whatever single or multi threaded task (8c/16t P-Cores and 16 E-Cores), great for everything.
But its outrageous power-consumption and hot temperatures at full load, and especially the infamous degradation issues (which may or may not have been mitigated with latest bios/microcodes updates), makes it somewhat of an insecure investment now, even if its lowered prices (because of all this) are tempting.  

The AMD Ryzen 9800X3D is currently the best CPU proposition if gaming is the sole priority, thanks to a specific feature it has - the 3D V-Cache.
Which for now (as in, "great today but unknown in the future") imediately gives a performance advantage with many games - DCS included.
It does result (unfortunately) in a higher price, very much so considering its limitations with multi-threaded demanding tasks - it has "only" 8 cores / 16 threads.

The AMD Ryzen 9950X is rather interesting, for its performance and given the price (lower today than at launch).
While not as fast for gaming as the 9800X3D (because it lacks the 3D V-Cache) it's not that far behind, it's still really good. And having double the cores/threads (16 cores and 32 threads) makes it much better for multi-threaded tasks for years to come (if important) and is at an identical price. It is AMD's direct competitor to Intel's i9 14900K.

If willing to upgrade, I'd wait for the upcoming AMD 9950X3D, see reviews and decide. Promised as the best of both worlds (gaming and productivity) but expect a salty price.
And, honestly? ...I'd not disregard your i9 12900K yet, it's still a very good CPU, better than what recent benchmarks may suggest.

from https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d/

 

Edited February 21 by LucShep
added image and link

[Raiden85]

Thank you for your detailed answer.
and I agree with you.
About AMD I didn't know what u said to me. Thank you

The topic that makes me think about the 9800x3d vs 9950x is that: 
DCS is not very well optimized.. and I was surprised to see this video... 
Does DCS have a logic like productivity software or game? Because how we can see in this video for example DCS took benefit from the IPC of intel i think

About the 9950x3d.. i m a bit worry about the price

 

[LucShep]

I'd take that video with a grain of salt.... I look at it as somewhat of an anomaly (related to specific mission or game version).

What you should notice, because it's important, is that AMD inverted the CCD+L3D stack for the 9800X3D (and upcoming 9900X3D and 9950X3D), which resulted in corrections to the IPC issues seen in past X3D chips (so, it has higher clocks now), which is where most of the performance improvements come from.

In the past two generations of X3D desktop processors, namely the 7800X3D and the 5800X3D, the 3D V-Cache die was stacked on top of the CPU complex die (CCD), which then required lower CPU clocks than their non-X3D CPU brethren, due to thermal constraints. 
With the 9800X3D, AMD has inverted the CCD+L3D stack. The CCD is now on top, and the L3D is below it. What this does is make the CCD's thermals behave like they do on the regular Ryzen 9000 series processors without 3D V-Cache (much improved now), which is how AMD was able to increase the base frequency significantly. And it's considered to have the same overclocking capabilities as the regular 9000-series processors (not the case before).
 

Edited February 18 by LucShep

[Panzerlang]

7 hours ago, speed-of-heat said:

9800x3d is basically the king of gaming performance right now... 

Yeah, at 1080. At 4k, nothing in it worth mentioning.

[diego999]

You can't go wrong with a 9800X3D.

[Tshark]

Yesterday, I updated from an i9-10900K to the AMD 9800X3D.  I have a 4090 GPU and use a Pimax Crystal.  My default DCS benchmark is the F/A-18 Supercarrier Cold start mission in the Persian Gulf.  With my Pimax set at 90hz, DCS Fps cap of 60, and using Mbucchia dynamic foveated rendering I was getting 42-43 fps (using the DCS frame counter).  After upgrading to the 9800X3D, with no other changes, my Fps went to rock solid 60 fps.

I changed the Pimax to 72hz and took off the DCS cap.  I now am at 72fps with an occasional dip to 71fps.  Definitely a game changer for me and sooo smooth.

Hope this helps

[71st_Mastiff]

I'm looking at the AMD's 9950XT chip and think of moving over to it with my RTX 4080 Super.

 

currently for some reason I have gone through 2 sets of 128GB Gskills, and keep getting an IRQL error when going that big. so I have to keep puting back the warhawk 64GB ram.

 

anyone have advise on why I cant use 128gb, when it states it can?

 

signature has the specs.

[LucShep]

1 hour ago, 71st_Mastiff said:

currently for some reason I have gone through 2 sets of 128GB Gskills, and keep getting an IRQL error when going that big. so I have to keep puting back the warhawk 64GB ram.

anyone have advise on why I cant use 128gb, when it states it can?

signature has the specs.
 

We're getting way off topic, but anyway...

I personally don't have experience with 128GB kits (4x sticks of 32GB), so can only speculate about it.

Looking at your sig, that's DDR4. And if it's Gskill it's most likely 3200 CL16-18-18-38 1.35V (is it?).

My guess is that with such high mem density, you may have to adjust DRAM voltage (slight increase) and/or frequency and/or timings (to relax them a bit). 
That's not uncommon with 4 sticks of RAM, even with Intel 13th/14th gen CPUs (which are a bit more memory agnostic if compared to AMD Ryzen).

For example, and just supposing that memory is DDR4-3200 CL16-18-18-38 1.35V, one quick method could be atempted.
Once in the BIOS, I'd try loading XMP first (or set that to Auto if all else fails, then repeat following procedure), then manually adjust things as below, one section at a time:

DRAM voltage ---- 1.35v (increase to 1.40v, should be safe to go upto 1.45v but not more)

Get into the DRAM timing control settings (for manual timing adjustments) and drop down a step or two in the main ones, something like this

CL --------- 16  (drop it to 17, if it fails then try 18)
tRCD ------- 18  (drop it to 19, if it fails then try 20)
tRP  -------- 18  (drop it to 19, if it fails then try 20)
tRAS  ------ 38  (drop it to 39, if it fails then try 40)
CR  -------- 2T  (because 1T is pushing it with 4 sticks of such high density, IMO)

Last resort (IMO) would be dropping the mem speed a notch. 
DRAM Frequency ---- 3200 (decrease to 3000)

Edited February 24 by LucShep

[71st_Mastiff]

55 minutes ago, LucShep said:

We're getting way off topic, but anyway...

I personally don't have experience with 128GB kits (4x sticks of 32GB), so can only speculate about it.

Looking at your sig, that's DDR4. And if it's Gskill it's most likely 3200 CL16-18-18-38 1.35V (is it?).

My guess is that with such high mem density, you may have to adjust DRAM voltage (slight increase) and/or frequency and/or timings (to relax them a bit). 
That's not uncommon with 4 sticks of RAM, even with Intel 13th/14th gen CPUs (which are a bit more memory agnostic if compared to AMD Ryzen).

For example, and just supposing that memory is DDR4-3200 CL16-18-18-38 1.35V, one quick method could be atempted.
Once in the BIOS, I'd try loading XMP first (or set that to Auto if all else fails, then repeat following procedure), then manually adjust things as below, one section at a time:

DRAM voltage ---- 1.35v (increase to 1.40v, should be safe to go upto 1.45v but not more)

Get into the DRAM timing control settings (for manual timing adjustments) and drop down a step or two in the main ones, something like this

CL --------- 16  (drop it to 17, if it fails then try 18)
tRCD ------- 18  (drop it to 19, if it fails then try 20)
tRP  -------- 18  (drop it to 19, if it fails then try 20)
tRAS  ------ 38  (drop it to 39, if it fails then try 40)
CR  -------- 2T  (because 1T is pushing it with 4 sticks of such high density, IMO)

Last resort (IMO) would be dropping the mem speed a notch. 
DRAM Frequency ---- 3200 (decrease to 3000)

"For example, and just supposing that memory is DDR4-3200 CL16-18-18-38 1.35V, one quick method could be attempted."

 

yes that's the latest ram I just bought, I tried to get them to exchange from the 18q which I bought, returned and they refused to exchange for this; Trident RGB F4-3200C-16Q-128GTZR DDR4-3200-32GBx4 CL-16-18-18-38 1.35v, (GSkill), they said they couldn't. So I had to buy them.

Ill give your suggestion a top priority. So I have 18Q and no use for them, Ill guess Ill put up on EBAY.

 

 

Edited February 24 by 71st_Mastiff

[BitMaster]

To test if they work at all, start with JDEC settings, which should be 2666MT/s with your kit, might even be 2133, doesnt matter, DEFAULT is now needed.

Dial them in to JDEC, apply 1.2v and GO...if it fails to start, you can try 1.25v but anything else is a waste of time and effort.

If they start and work ( hammer them hard for hours and hours ) you can THEN AFTERWARDS work your way up the ladder to 3xxxMHz and best achievable timings.

 

But honestly, DDR4 2Channel/4Slots is a BAD START to have 128GB, either way you look at it. Those systems, if they have 128GB, stay strictly JDEC, slow but safe and

are called Workstations with a limited set of tested and approved HW, Dell, HP, etc....

For a better 128GB setup, go DDR5, but even there...it's not fully ripe yet.  I'd stick with fast 64GB DDR4 until DDR5 has 64GB modules at ~10kMT/s...that's when the show takes off and DDR4 is left behind in the dust, till then... not much to be gained but stress and grey hair for a premium price as early adopters.

 

RAM takes 2+ years to overcome childhood problems....DDR-DDR2-DDR3-DDR4-DDR5   same game every iteration

 

*and before you dial in 1.45v or more...verify your DIE can take it, Samsung B-Die can do so ( I run mine at 1.48v for 2 years now btw ), but some DDR4 dies die right away at 1.45v on the moment you flip the switch. Read your die, google it and make sure it can take the volts you aim to dial in !°!°!

Edited February 24 by BitMaster

[71st_Mastiff]

34 minutes ago, BitMaster said:

To test if they work at all, start with JDEC settings, which should be 2666MT/s with your kit, might even be 2133, doesnt matter, DEFAULT is now needed.

Dial them in to JDEC, apply 1.2v and GO...if it fails to start, you can try 1.25v but anything else is a waste of time and effort.

If they start and work ( hammer them hard for hours and hours ) you can THEN AFTERWARDS work your way up the ladder to 3xxxMHz and best achievable timings.

 

But honestly, DDR4 2Channel/4Slots is a BAD START to have 128GB, either way you look at it. Those systems, if they have 128GB, stay strictly JDEC, slow but safe and

are called Workstations with a limited set of tested and approved HW, Dell, HP, etc....

For a better 128GB setup, go DDR5, but even there...it's not fully ripe yet.  I'd stick with fast 64GB DDR4 until DDR5 has 64GB modules at ~10kMT/s...that's when the show takes off and DDR4 is left behind in the dust, till then... not much to be gained but stress and grey hair for a premium price as early adopters.

 

RAM takes 2+ years to overcome childhood problems....DDR-DDR2-DDR3-DDR4-DDR5   same game every iteration

 

*and before you dial in 1.45v or more...verify your DIE can take it, Samsung B-Die can do so ( I run mine at 1.48v for 2 years now btw ), but some DDR4 dies die right away at 1.45v on the moment you flip the switch. Read your die, google it and make sure it can take the volts you aim to dial in !°!°!

I got them to work after doing the auto setting and they set to 1.35v, and the board turned on some sort of "game mode initiated"? I don't know what that was about, it seems to be stable for day 1 so far. and DCS World hasn't crashed in the Afghanistan map either. I haven't tried MP yet.

sorry for hijacking this thread, but it looks like Ill be going after; 20 years with green team, back to team red. intel has left a bad taste in my mouth after there i9 14900k fiasco. and seeing all the hype about the AMD 9950XT and married with a NVIDA GPU, seems more efficient now.

change my mind?

opening a tech thread about this.

Edited February 24 by 71st_Mastiff

[BitMaster]

Am 24.2.2025 um 21:46 schrieb 71st_Mastiff:

I got them to work after doing the auto setting and they set to 1.35v, and the board turned on some sort of "game mode initiated"? I don't know what that was about, it seems to be stable for day 1 so far. and DCS World hasn't crashed in the Afghanistan map either. I haven't tried MP yet.

sorry for hijacking this thread, but it looks like Ill be going after; 20 years with green team, back to team red. intel has left a bad taste in my mouth after there i9 14900k fiasco. and seeing all the hype about the AMD 9950XT and married with a NVIDA GPU, seems more efficient now.

change my mind?

opening a tech thread about this.

Be happy that it works !

None the less, I would investigate at whjat specs your RAM is running atm. CPU-Z or HWinfo can tell you that, both are free.

My assumption is, the "Game Mode" also triggered XMP/EXPO and thus the Volts went up to 1.35v, which is the most common voltage used for XMP/EXPO settings across DDR4.

Now check the Speed and Latency, maybe it's all there, all that you paid for. Maybe the settings are a bit lesser, then you can try to tweak them even more, if you want.

 

The CPU-Z screenshot with the "Memory" tab shows the actual present settings

The screenshot with "SPD" shows all XMP/EXPO settings stored in your RAM, not saying any of that is applied, see "Memory" tab for this.

The other 2 screenshots are from HWinfo, showing the present settings and DRAM Voltage, yeah, mine is dialed to 1.488v resulting in actual 1.50v...but it's B-Die and that can take it 24/7/365 full tilt.

[corbu1]

Am 19.2.2025 um 19:32 schrieb Tshark:

Yesterday, I updated from an i9-10900K to the AMD 9800X3D.  I have a 4090 GPU and use a Pimax Crystal.  My default DCS benchmark is the F/A-18 Supercarrier Cold start mission in the Persian Gulf.  With my Pimax set at 90hz, DCS Fps cap of 60, and using Mbucchia dynamic foveated rendering I was getting 42-43 fps (using the DCS frame counter).  After upgrading to the 9800X3D, with no other changes, my Fps went to rock solid 60 fps.

I changed the Pimax to 72hz and took off the DCS cap.  I now am at 72fps with an occasional dip to 71fps.  Definitely a game changer for me and sooo smooth.

Hope this helps

I changed from 10900k to 9800X3D a few days ago as well. And I‘m also very happy with the new cpu.

[Raiden85]

Hello guys! thank you for your feedbacks.
Anyone upgraded with 9950x?

[speed-of-heat]

if you were going to see improved performance in DCS you would also see it in other games in 2d , but, more cores is always "better" just to provide other CPU's to run operating system and other tasks... but given what the reviewers have been saying i would be surprised if the 9950X3d would offer much additional performance  

[Raiden85]

yes sure!  but the 9950x3d here is around 300 euro expensive than 9950x.  
So i think i will upgrade from 12900k to 9950x

 

[LucShep]

1 hour ago, Raiden85 said:

yes sure!  but the 9950x3d here is around 300 euro expensive than 9950x.  
So i think i will upgrade from 12900k to 9950x

 

300.00EUR is a huge difference between those Ryzen 9 chips  
It shouldn't be more than 150.00EUR between 9950X (~660€) and the new 9950X3D (~810€).

You sure to be searching for best prices?
But maybe it's the "novelty factor" of the 9950X3D inflating prices(?), and the 9950X appearing with discounts....
 

Edited March 12 by LucShep

[speed-of-heat]

1 hour ago, Raiden85 said:

yes sure!  but the 9950x3d here is around 300 euro expensive than 9950x.  
So i think i will upgrade from 12900k to 9950x

 

i would upgrade to a 9800x3d over a 9950x

especially if you are looking at a pure gaming workload 

[Raiden85]

Hello @speed-of-heat & @LucShep
I'm a photographer and video editor.
I need a mixed configuration.

After many checks, I ordered the 9950x. 580 eur from bpm now is 577. 
The less price I found that the 9950x3d available is 894

but i have to tell you.. About the 285k i learned that is more than 200% faster in VULKAN than 14900k and other AMD chips.
When DCS is updated with the Vulkan API, trying the last intel CPU will be interesting. We will see.

By the way.. i will try to do some benchmarking between my actual 12900k ddr4 and 4090. then 9950x and maybe another 14900k.
For me is not important to have the max fps like 150,   but the lower stable with less spikes possilbe.

 

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, Raiden85 said:

but i have to tell you.. About the 285k i learned that is more than 200% faster in VULKAN than 14900k and other AMD chips.

There is no way that this is true.

[Raiden85]

nullHello @Aapje,

I noticed that in this video: 

anyway... i ordered the 9950x instead than the 285k 14900k 

 

Edited March 15 by Raiden85

[STRYC]

I have the Pimax Crystal.   I just upgraded to the AMD 9950X3d on an MSI X870E Carbon Motherboard and a AMD 9800X3d on an  Asrock X870E Taichi motherboard.   I  Can't get the headset to connect on either system.  I have the lastest PIMAX software installed and the latest headset firmware.  I bought and built these systems to keep up with the Pimax Super I have on order.   I have done a fresh, clean install on both systems, trying both windows 10 and 11 with the latest updates and chipset drivers.  But the headset won't start on my AMD systems.  It does however start right up on my Intel 10900k System.   Is this a cable issue similar to what the G2 had with AMD?   I contacted AMD and they said PIMAX is just not keeping up with new hardware.    I tried changing the USB power settings in windows.  I made sure the USB settings in the BIOS are always powered.  I changed PCIe settings from GEN 4 to GEN 3  but no luck. 

[Simulatu]

On 3/15/2025 at 11:38 AM, Raiden85 said:

nullHello @Aapje,

I noticed that in this video: 

anyway... i ordered the 9950x instead than the 285k 14900k 

 

That's the performance difference when benchmarking the integrated GPU, which nobody uses when gaming, especially in DCS.

It says "Geekbench 6 iGPU" on top of the image you posted.