Intel i9-14900KF or Ryzen 9 9950X3D for a new DCS VR rig? (RTX 4090)

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Qcumber said:

To expand on this CPU or GPU limited is just a binary toggle in DCS. The reality is much more subtle. It's like 50 shades of grey. It's better to look at the CPU and GPU latencies and variance of overall frame time. 

I’m not sure how correct the DCS counter is but I’ll take it at face value. I do see a boost if I enable DLSS so that would confirm that I’m GPU limited. 

[Hootman9104]

One hope I have for the "AI Frenzy" is that sooner rather than later, AI will be able to generate and maintain a massive database of every possible PC configuration, and be able to have a user go to a site, select a game, and read off of something like current system specs tools and immediately provide you with an precise list of settings and optimizations for both VR and monitor setups for each and every sim/game.

It could sort of be done by hand now I guess, but I can't even imagine the amount of work that would entail to keep up with every single piece of hardware and calculate the tens of thousands of combinations to come to a final settng.

Maybe one day soon

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Hootman9104 said:

One hope I have for the "AI Frenzy" is that sooner rather than later, AI will be able to generate and maintain a massive database of every possible PC configuration, and be able to have a user go to a site, select a game, and read off of something like current system specs tools and immediately provide you with an precise list of settings and optimizations for both VR and monitor setups for each and every sim/game.

I think Nvidia has been doing that for a while now.

https://www.theverge.com/2012/12/6/3735904/nvidia-geforce-experience-a-tool-to-automatically-optimize-pc-game
 

Edited May 13 by SharpeXB

[LucShep]

5 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I think Nvidia has been doing that since about 2012 

https://www.theverge.com/2012/12/6/3735904/nvidia-geforce-experience-a-tool-to-automatically-optimize-pc-game
 

Nvidia’s GeForce Experience   ...yeah, no. 

That's one of the things to erase/debloat before installing new drivers from Nvidia (which always comes massively bloated) by using NVCleanstall (link here).
If you never done this, there's a tutorial here (there may be others around) to see how it works.

[darkman222]

Alright. Thanks again for all the useful hints. For everybody who interested in the outcome. Here are the system specs of both systems. Note that the Intel system always was running around 8ms to 9 ms CPU frame time. Also see the yellow spikes in fpsVR on the CPU frame time graph that go up to 12 ms or more. This creates the annoying stutter in VR.

In comparison the AMD system I have now stays well below 4ms CPU frame time most of the time. It even goes down to 2.5 ms. Which the Intel sytem never managed. Over all the money was well spent. No long lasting stutters. There are some micro stutters from time and again. But I dont see them on the CPU or GPU graph. But in general its a real smooth ride now using the Varjo Aero.

 

 

*******************************************

 

 

*********************************************************************************************

 

 

*********************************************************************************************

 

 

Edited May 13 by darkman222

[Dawgboy]

20 hours ago, C3PO said:

What was your system before? Your new one will last years!

I had a 7-8 year old I7 intel MoBo that wouldn't go Win11.  Had an AMD Vega GPU, which I really loved for years.  It was so easy to setup and use.  It was powerful enough to get me into VR for a few years, but end of Win10 and needing more power for retina-quality VR forced an much-needed upgrade.  My old system served me well for many years.  

[Hootman9104]

On 5/13/2025 at 10:18 AM, Dawgboy said:

I had a 7-8 year old I7 intel MoBo that wouldn't go Win11.  Had an AMD Vega GPU, which I really loved for years.  It was so easy to setup and use.  It was powerful enough to get me into VR for a few years, but end of Win10 and needing more power for retina-quality VR forced an much-needed upgrade.  My old system served me well for many years.  

7-8 Years, wow. I would have went nuts. The only PC I ever bought was first one back in early 90's, think it had a 650MB hard drive.

After that, started building, and  rebuilt a new one every 2 years, moving some hardware from old to new PC.

The current build from last year, I finally decided to start building each new one from scratch, and use the "old" one for other things like as a server for DCS.

However, I'm single with no kids, so nobody on my back about spending money on my toys. Not everyone has that luxury I know. I'm in the process of retiring, and anticipate spending a lot of time gaming, so the new PC builds may even go to once a year

[Qcumber]

Just now, Hootman9104 said:

The only PC I ever bought was first one back in early 90's, think it had a 650MB hard drive.

If it was early '90s it was probably a 386 or 486 with a 40 or 60 MB HDD. That was my first desktop PC. 

[draconus]

On 5/13/2025 at 1:51 PM, darkman222 said:

Alright. Thanks again for all the useful hints. For everybody who interested in the outcome. Here are the system specs of both systems. Note that the Intel system always was running around 8ms to 9 ms CPU frame time. Also see the yellow spikes in fpsVR on the CPU frame time graph that go up to 12 ms or more. This creates the annoying stutter in VR.

In comparison the AMD system I have now stays well below 4ms CPU frame time most of the time. It even goes down to 2.5 ms. Which the Intel sytem never managed. Over all the money was well spent. No long lasting stutters. There are some micro stutters from time and again. But I dont see them on the CPU or GPU graph. But in general its a real smooth ride now using the Varjo Aero.

Was this tested with the same track in DCS? The difference is crazy. You won't see it in any other game or benchmark I suppose.

[darkman222]

I could not use the same track because my previous Intel PC just died without a warning.

But its from a recording from DCS dogfighters. From days with comparable amount of users online.

But I can say for sure, with the intel it has been like around 8 ms CPU frame time occasionally breaking the 11 ms barrier, creating VR stutters. And with the AMD the CPU frame time NEVER goes higher than 4ms. Most of the time 2.5 ms.

Same on other servers or huge SP missions. The difference is massive even without a technical perfect comparison.

[draconus]

Technically one doesn't need any better times than 10ms for 90Hz but it usually means that spikes can easily go over it in some situations/settings/missions and give you stutters. The better the CPU the further the limit to push it over. Just have to find a balance between what you need and how much money you want to pay for it. Having $500 GPU can jutify having $500 CPU to pair it with.

[darkman222]

Yes. Technically it does not matter if I have 2.5 ms of CPU frame time now or much more. But having headroom is a good thing for sure, and you can see in the frame time Graph in the comparison that it just does not stay below 11 ms it goes above it. And its not only just a spike. Its like 2 seconds or sometimes even more of just immersion breaking stuttering.

I think that the architecture of the AMD processor is much more suited for DCS. Also bad things like DCS processes being calculated by the slower non X3D part of the processor or core parking issues seem to be sorted out by the most recent generation of AMD processors. I can highly recommend to switch to AMD if someone considers a new PC or even if you are the lucky ones that have their decision already taken by a faulty i9 processor that killed itself. In my case its more likely that the mainboard killed itself, but lets see what Intel and Asus Tech Support will tell...