AMD Ryzen For Simracing?

[callumjtc]

I build PCs so am fairly well acquainted with computer hardware, and my mate has asked me to put together a new PC for him. Usually I would recommend an i3-8350K or an i5. Obviously sim racing is CPU intensive, and an i7 is preferable, but expensive. Having long been an Intel fanboy, with the rise of Ryzen I am thinking it is time to at least test the waters with AMD and a Ryzen 7 1800X/2700X? The alternative for the budget is an i7-5930K used. Any users currently on Ryzen that could give me some feedback of their experience?

 

[RasmusP]

I build PCs so am fairly well acquainted with computer hardware, and my mate has asked me to put together a new PC for him. Usually I would recommend an i3-8350K or an i5. Obviously sim racing is CPU intensive, and an i7 is preferable, but expensive. Having long been an Intel fanboy, with the rise of Ryzen I am thinking it is time to at least test the waters with AMD and a Ryzen 7 1800X/2700X? The alternative for the budget is an i7-5930K used. Any users currently on Ryzen that could give me some feedback of their experience?

Ryzen 2 are great CPUs but they are lacking single thread performance. Sadly all current Sims run at 1-3 threads maximum so it's all about single thread performance!
However more real cores do help the single thread performance a little so the ryzen and the i3 would probably be the same fps but the ryzen is a lot better for anything else than pure sim racing.
I5 with a k would probably be the best bang for the buck!
I don't really know how high that used i7 would clock but MHz = single thread boost so a 5 GHz i3 is better for sim racing than a 4 GHz i9! More cores do help but while the i3 will have decent fps at 80% overall load before it gets stuck in the single thread limit, an i9 will get stuck at only 20% overall load.

Currently the performance is:
1. I7 9700k due to 8 real cores and very high clock speeds!
2. I9 9900k with not so high clock speeds due to heat
3. I5 9600k and i7 8700k, hyper threading equals the better per-clock-performance
4. I5 8600k
5. I3 and ryzen 2700x. The ryzen has lots of cores + "hyperthreading" which makes it quite fast whereas the i3 has a really good single thread performance but the moment it needs to multi task it will become very slow in comparison.

My recommendation would be the 9600k or 8600k or wait for ryzen 3. If it's for simracing! Would be good for quite a few years! The cheaper CPUs or not so highly clocked CPUs or ryzen 1/2 would be only good for now but not future proof...

My 2 cents

 

[callumjtc]

Cheers for that! Was not aware of current limitations on CPU core usage in sim titles. I have been using the i3 or other clients on a budget for pure gaming (not simracing). 8600K it is!

 

[callumjtc]

Just checked pricing and the 9600K is the same price too.

 

[RasmusP]

Cheers man .
Have a read here:
https://www.racedepartment.com/threads/cpu-and-gpu-not-fully-utilized-why.162601/#post-2880340

I once asked all my friends and internet friends to run cinebench with single to max threads.
Got a lot of data back and can now interpolate pretty much every cpu when I get the single thread benchmark result.
In that post I linked another post of mine where I did some "bang for the buck" calculation. 9600k wins clearly! Last year the 8700k was better though... Prices exploded

 

[callumjtc]

Thank you very much, will go after a used 8700K if possible, if not then 9600K. I may uprade myself because my i5 4690K suffers in ACC.

 

[RasmusP]

Thank you very much, will go after a used 8700K if possible, if not then 9600K. I may uprade myself because my i5 4690K suffers in ACC.

Your very welcome
Is your 4690k at 100% cpu load or does it limit before being at full load?
Not being at full load but the graphics card also not being at full load would mean your i5 is hitting its single thread limit too. My old I7 2600k struggles a lot these days.. Mostly before reaching 60% overall load

 

[callumjtc]

I haven't monitored that yet, I will do soon. Definitely the CPU as I have a 980ti on 1920x1200, at 60FPS average on ACC with full AI grids. That said I haven't tried the last 2 releases so maybe performance has improved? I have not overclocked yet.

 

[Terry Rock]

Ah!... what?
I just built a Ryzen5 2600x and it 'churns' through every title I own...on desktop and in VR mode.
I'm cranking through ACC with every single setting at ultra and no stutter or slowdown. Assetto Corsa...with a track full of cars is netting me upward of 180 fps... again, this is with every setting maxed.
Ryzen is more than capable.

 

[John-Eric Saxén]

Ah!... what?
I just built a Ryzen5 2600x and it 'churns' through every title I own...on desktop and in VR mode.
I'm cranking through ACC with every single setting at ultra and no stutter or slowdown. Assetto Corsa...with a track full of cars is netting me upward of 180 fps again...with every setting maxed.
Ryzen is more than capable.

Ryzen is surely capable, but the per core (IPC) performance is on par with 5th gen Intels, so it's mainly an upgrade in terms of more cores, not so much the performance per core.

 

[Terry Rock]

When I go on track, I look for a 'fluid experience. I don't get too hung up on outright frame rate.
That 2600x is a 'monster' where smoothness is concerned.
It surprised even me with its outright performance.
There is no need for manual over-clocking either...just put a good cooler on it and watch it work its magic.
I have not owned an AMD processor since the Opteron days.
This one does not disappoint in the least and it doesn't break the bank either.

 

[RasmusP]

Just search for some benchmarks with games that aren't nicely multithreading and you'll see what my post was about. Of course the ryzens are great CPUs. I'm waiting for ryzen 3 myself
But it's just a fact that in counter strike for example the fps are like this:
2700x = 220 fps, 8700k = 370 fps.

So yeah, of course the ryzens are "enough" for pretty much everything but compared to a haswell i7 you gain basically nothing for simracing.
I have 2 friends upgrading from a 4.8 GHz i7 4790k to a 8700k and 9600k because their Sims couldn't hold steady 90 fps with their Oculus VR headsets.
A ryzen 2700x at maximum overclock would only give about 5 fps more whereas their new Intels give about 25 fps more.
It's just a fact. Search for single thread performance benchmarks and you'll see the numbers nice and clear.

You can't bend the facts but you're right with stating that the ryzens are great. No one is saying something else.
I tell you though, if you would've grabbed an i3 8350k you would have the same "nice and fluid experience".

 

[Durge Driven]

My 2 cents

I think non K should be in the list
With 65W TDP and no overclock you can spend less on cooling, motherboard, memory. They lose little in game benches to overclocked K's

My 8700 cost me $415, today they are $529 same store
K is another $70
https://www.pccasegear.com/category/187_1903/cpus/intel-1151-8th-gen

Yeah, you can easy add extra $150 min.for better hardware for overclocking which evens out the bang for buck

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-8700-cpu-review,5638-5.html

Fair dinks the only thing they whined about was a "alloy cooler" lol otherwise basically mirrored performance
Both K and non K need coolers you can just spend less with the 8700

 

[Dave Stephenson]

FWIW my 1700x has zero issues in any sim or games in general to be fair to it. While gaming wasn't my only concern when deciding to buy there's zero regrets here and I don't miss my 6700k one bit.

@RasmusP If you're waiting for Ryzen 3 you'll be waiting a long time, Ryzen 2 didn't even drop yet

 

[RasmusP]

@RasmusP If you're waiting for Ryzen 3 you'll be waiting a long time, Ryzen 2 didn't even drop yet

*3rd gen Ryzen

 

[RobertR1]

If you have a CPU with hyper threading, you can bios disable it and use the power and thermal overhead gained to get more clock speed.

 

[RasmusP]

If you have a CPU with hyper threading, you can bios disable it and use the power and thermal overhead gained to get more clock speed.

Very true. I tried this though and running 4.8 GHz vs 4.4 + HT was barely the same fps in assetto corsa which barely uses more than 2 threads.
Windows manages to gain performance with more cpu threads although there are no multiple application threads.

 

[Terry Rock]

I tell you though, if you would've grabbed an i3 8350k you would have the same "nice and fluid experience".

That is certainly true for gaming but there is no way I'd purchase an I3 'anything' over that Ryzen5 2600K.
I do quite a bit of video encoding and the thing gets fairly close to the I7-8700K in those task...at almost $130 less.
For less than the cost of that Intel chip, I was able to pick up a nice gaming motherboard, CPU and 16GB of DDR4-3000.

 

[RasmusP]

That is certainly true for gaming but there is no way I'd purchase an I3 'anything' over that Ryzen5 2600K.
I do quite a bit of video encoding and the thing gets fairly close to the I7-8700K in those task...at almost $130 less.
For less than the cost of that Intel chip, I was able to pick up a nice gaming motherboard, CPU and 16GB of DDR4-3000.

Absolutely! There's also no way my next cpu will be an Intel
I'm waiting for the next amd generation and I'm sure they now their problems so I really do hope they will come up with something of the single thread performance of an 8700k while sticking to their philosophy. Then it'll be a no brainer really!

 

[Dave Stephenson]

Absolutely! There's also no way my next cpu will be an Intel
I'm waiting for the next amd generation and I'm sure they now their problems so I really do hope they will come up with something of the single thread performance of an 8700k while sticking to their philosophy. Then it'll be a no brainer really!

Some of the 'leaks' indicate quite an uplift in IPC and if you factor in potential clock gains if the achieve half of what some are speculating it should be pretty competitive, especially given Intel's pains in getting reliable 10nm fab running and out of the door.