Hi everyone. My current pc is Aorus z390 pro wifi i7 9700k rtx3060ti 32gb DDR4-3200
. I want to upgrade my motherboard and cpu. Im not looking for all best here. Im on 1080p 32 in monitor. How would a new board with a i712700k and 32gb of ddr5 perform?
1 Like
I asked the same question at microcenter a few months ago and they totally convinced me to go with a Ryzen 7800x3d. I’m so glad I listened 
LouP
2 Likes
Are you currently encountering any issues? What are you looking to achieve?
For 1080, an i7-12700k is way overkill. works fine at 4k and is available at a good discount.
12700k is overkill? No.
Overkill would be an RTX 4090 for 1080p.
1 Like
FS is more CPU-bound than GPU-bound at 1080p. So get the fastest CPU you can afford. Even at 1080P, more CPU is going to let you have more detail, more traffic, etc.
Keep in mind that FS24 is going to be better multi-threaded than FS2020. So while there wasn’t a ton of difference between a Core i5 and Core i9 with 2020, that may very well not be the case wth 2024. A Ryzen X3D chip is likely to be your best bang for the buck,
1 Like
Thank for the advice. I guess i just want smoother play. It runs fairly well now just the stutters once in a while and would like to turn visuals up a little bit. Im already prepared foe the new motherboard some new ddr5 ram an a cooler as my 212 evo wont do the job any longer. Just confused on the cpu. I hear wonderful things about the 7800x3d…ive never owned or reallt been a fan of AMD. May have to explore that option further. Appreciate the feedback guys,have a wonderful day.
Not true. While MSFS is generally CPU-limited even at 4K with high terrain LOD, running 1080p will always be a CPU bottleneck and CPU choice matters significantly for performance in this case.
A 12700K is not overkill for 1080p.
Im looking at the 7800x3d also as I keep hearing such good things. Ive never had AMD before. How do you feel about amd? I already need a new motherboard and memory so nows the time if I do it.
It’s the best (no hassle) gaming CPU out there. That may change with FS24. We don’t know.
I built my first system with a 5800X3D. I’d never had an AMD CPU before. It was great. I’ve since upgraded to a 7950X3D. Awesome CPU, but you’d better LOVE tweaking/ testing/ tweaking/ testing and then tweaking some more.
The 7800X3D is much less ‘needy.’
Wait for the release of the new Intel and AMD CPUs; there’s no need to rush into a purchase 
That is SO wrong. If an i7-12700K isn’t bottlenecked at 4k, it certainly won’t be bottlenecked at 1080 at the same settings.
1 Like
Running at 4K typically results in a GPU bottleneck, and 1080p almost certainly a CPU bottleneck. Why do you think they do CPU gaming benchmarks at 1080p? It’s not there to confuse you - it’s there to induce a CPU bottleneck.
As somewhat of a side note, MSFS can be a different beast where high terrain LOD will induce a CPU bottleneck even at 4K, but this is largely dependent on GPU.
1 Like
Sorry, but that’s simply not true.
1 Like
You really don’t understand, do you. A game that is not cpu bottlenecked at 4k also won’t be cpu bottlenecked at 1080.
Not everyone is running 10-year-old hardware. People do benchmarking at 1080 because that’s what the majority of people run at. They can’t run at 4k because both their cpu and graphics cards can’t do it.
Lies, ■■■■ lies, and benchmarks. What counts is real-world performance. If a cpu isn’t the bottleneck at 4k, it certainly won’t be so at 1080. 4096x2160 is 4.26 times the pixels, so the cpu is handling a lot more data. It’s also why people notice improved graphics performance with a cpu upgrade. Otherwise, why not dig out that old 8088?
You’re repeating the biggest misconception about the reason for running CPU gaming benchmarks at 1080. Hardware Unboxed did an entire 25 minute video on this subject for exactly this reason.
Here’s a summary: we run at 1080p to force a CPU bottleneck to proper compare CPU performance.
Regardless of what misconceptions you’ve repeated, the message is still the same: the 12700k is not overkill for 1080p.
That video is a little misleading if that was the lesson you took from it.
A CPU would help with things like LOD and stuttering in and around big cities and airports. Like KJFK.
But with a 3060, you would just swap a CPU bottleneck for a GPU bottleneck.
The incremental graphics improvements at 1080p might not be that noticeable, as the improvements would be in the distance where they would be pixelated by low resolution.
And if the cpu never gets close to bottlenecking, ths whole argument falls flat on its’ face. Most games won’t bottleneck either the cpu or the gpu no matter what at 1080p.
And in the future (3 years) all the folks who bought AM5 for upgrade compatability will be crying how it’s not fair they have to toss their motherboards to use ddr6. But there will still be people running 1080, because that’s all they want to spend.
Dual cpu motherboards for consumers are also coming, same as we went from 32gb maxvram to 192gb in a decade. Good luck bottlenecking the cpus at 1080 then.
Hardware will continue to advance - it’s what vendors do to make money.
5 years from now most people will be 4k minimum. 8k is coming. So are 86" screens. 1080 looks cartoonish in comparison.
There’s nothing misleading here. At 1080p, you force a CPU bottleneck necessary for comparing CPU gaming benchmarks.
Yes, but no one here is arguing against that point. That would especially be the case with terrain LOD >200 regardless of resolution.
Not sure I understand. At 1080p, upgrading to a 3060 wouldn’t make a difference in bottleneck.
Kind of.
Like I said, it is misleading.
But since you aren’t curious as to why, explaining why would likely waste my time and yours.
I don’t make points to argue. Usually I make points just to make points that haven’t yet been made in a thread.
They have a 3060 as per the OP which is why I mentioned it. A CPU matters but so does the GPU. One of going to be the bottleneck no matter what.