Upgrading to an i7-12700 2.1ghz (4.9ghz) suffice for the cause ?
i7-12700 is a very good chip. If you are considering it it means you are also considering a brand new MB, memory, etc.
I concur with @HugeMercury163 that 5800X3D is the best chip on the market today strictly for MSFS, at a price point that is similar to 12700.
With AMD 7000 series and Intel 13th gen releasing soon, unless the upgrade is really urgent, best is to wait a few weeks before pulling the trigger.
I have a i710700 and switched from a gtx 1080ti to rtx 3080ti. I had very little improvement in smoothness with VR but no gain in fps at all. I still have stutters at Heathrow with liners like fenix or pmdg for example. So I think a powerful cpu comes first and Iām considering to get a 12/13th gen later this year. Donāt buy anything less than 12th gen anyway.
@crisk73 thatās very unusual and not typical, your cpu is good enough for msfs its well above min spec and better than my i7 7700k which handles the sim ok with a 3080ti (i saw a big leap in fps going from a 1080 to a 3080ti).
what is your cpuās core speed?
how much/what speed ram do u have?
which vr headset ru using?
Cpu speed is 2.9 base, 4.8 turbo boosted, 32 gigs of RAM at 3200. Using the RiftS as headset at 100% res in game and x1.3 pixel density in ODT. Fps capped at 30 (27) in ODT. Still having some stuttering with liners, quite ok with GA planes.
sir, you wonāt have any fps increase if you have an fps cap 
your specs are pretty good, better than mine overall.
Wellā¦I do it to avoid stutters but doesnāt always work in complex sceneries or planes. If I let fps free they donāt improve though.
Thatās interesting, how you say KS models are āgolden chipsā.
I thought the KS models vs the K models indicated the KS models donāt come with the built-in graphics you find in the K models.
Could you expand a bit on in what scenarios you saw the night and day difference between your old 8086K and the new 12900K? Regardless of where youāre flying and what aircraft youāre in?
Also, what GPU do you have?
I have the 8086K running at 5 GHz and a 3090. Just took delivery of a Varjo Aero headset and obviously, I want to make sure the headset is performing at its best and not being hindered by slow hardware.
Iāve been using OpenXR Toolkit which tells me my GPU is the limiting factor, not my CPU.
9900KF= no integrated graphics
9900KS= golden chips, with UHD Graphics 630
12900KF= no integrated graphics
12900KS= golden chips, with UHD Graphics 770
On the ground mainly, at this point of upgrading to the 12900k i was running a 3090, which was limited by the CPU (at 4k), I solely fly the Spitfire, maybe occasional GA aircraft.
Months back I slapped a 3090ti in there, some places I am still limited by CPU, but coming from the 8086k which was struggling pretty hard, I saw a decent increase in frame times and smoothness overall.
Not now imho. I would look out for an good delidded/liquidmetalled 9900k and the fastest RAM your current mobo can run, give the 9900k good cooling and then spurs. A good one will go to 5.3ghz.
Except your wallet is bursting, then buy the best and newest you can get.
Ah, of course. I mistook KS for KF - my bad.
Thanks for setting me straight!
Thanks for the input!
Earlier tonight, I did some more testing and using the built-in advanced FPS counter in OpenXR Toolkit, I did see exactly what you describe, how my CPU was the bottleneck showing up with red numbers occasionally when I was in dense areas and in particular, when flying at low altitude.
Most likely, Iāll be replacing my 8086K in the near future. Right now though with Raptor like around the corner which is set to be an evolutionary upgrade over 12th Generation Alder Lake processors, itās probably wise to wait for a bit. To see what turns out to be true and how big of a difference it will be IRL.
If I may offer a suggestion: like you I have been on Intel for a while, but I will be switching to AMD 7000.
For me there are 3 reasons:
-
iGPU:
Unlike previous Ryzen high end gaming CPUs, AMD 7000 chips will offer integrated graphics, and I need that (I do virtualization, so it is a hard requirement for me, I need 2 GPUs, one discrete, one integrated). -
Performance:
At least some versions of AMD 7000 will likely be much better than Raptor Lake for MSFS due to the size of the L3 Cache. -
Investment protection:
Raptor Lake will be replaced by a new socket.
If you get a motherboard for Raptor Lake, you will need to upgrade the motherboard to upgrade the CPU to next gen chips.
By contrast, the AMD AM5 platform is expected to last a few years.
If you invest in AM5, future upgrades to a next gen CPU will not require paying for a new motherboard.
Hope thatās useful information, apologies if you already knew about that.
A follow-up question if I may, are you running your 12900K at stock speeds, letting it do its own thing or did you overclock it manually?
Also, what motherboard and cooling solution are you using? My understanding is the 12900K (not to mention the KS) is running very hot.
I run at stock speeds (overclocking these CPUās are pointless), but I undervolted it by 0.07v, which brought the r23 full power draw down from 220w to 180w, no loss of performance, but brought the temps down from high 80ās under full load to mid 70ās (also depends on BIOS version). This is on a 280mm AIO.
The performance cores (which FS mainly uses) will sit around 4.9ghz - 5ghz.
Motherboard: https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-z690-a-gaming-wifi-d4-model/
AIO: iCUE H150i ELITE CAPELLIX Liquid CPU Cooler
People say 12th gen runs hot, yes it does, but if you are running 24 cores all maxed out, any CPU with that will run hot.
Just have to make sure cooler is seated correctly (LGA 1700 needs specific stand-offs to work).
Many thanks and Iām happy to hear youāre confirming what Iāve kind of understood, how thereās little to gain by trying to overclock these CPUs manually. That takes away a lot of time and effort for the exercise replacing my current system.
When it comes to cooling, you mention how youāre using a 280mm AIO. That was also great to hear since thatās what Iām planning to use as well. Having it mounted in the top of my case in the same way I have right now. I could get a 360mm AIO as well and mount it in the front of the case. Where I today have 3 120mm fans as intake. However, the link you provided in fact takes me to a 360mm AIO rather than a 280mm AIO as you mention using?
What Iām thinking right now is if the 280mm AIO will be enough or if I would have anything to gain by doing the extra work and get a 360mm AIO instead. Logically when I think about it, a 360mm AIO should perform better than a 280mm AIO. On the other hand, when the 360mm AIO would be mounted in the front of the case vs the 280mm AIO which I can fit in the top of the case, Iām not so sure how big the improvement would be using a 360 over a 280.
Also if using a 360 in the front, I guess I would have to try mounting it ābackwardsā, to allow it to be exhaust rather than intake. Because I donāt want the radiator to blow hot air into my case. Or am I missing something? The way I have it now with 3x120mm intake in the front, 2x140 in the top and 1x120 exhaust in the rear to me feels like a good way doing it when it comes to achieving the best possible airflow and ventilation of the case. My case is the Corsair Obsidian 500D SE.
Many thanks in advance for your input and advice!
Itās the same product page for all 3 AIO sizes, just in a drop down.
I have a pretty large case, old school Corsair 750D (full tower).
The 280 does fine, not had issues cooling the CPU. I mount it at the top of the case, fan wise I have 2 x 140ās on front pulling air in, 1 x 140 on the back exhausting and the 2 x 140ās on the rad pulling air out.
The 3090TI FE chucks majority of its heat out the back so keeps it pretty cool in the case.
Thanks, sounds like our systerns are quite alike.
Still havenāt decided if Iāll go with a 280 AIO in the top or a 360 in the front. Will have to do some more research.
Good to know though the 280 in the top provides adequate cooling for you.