According to official Intel slides, Gracemont Cores offer single threaded performance on par with 10th gen Comet-Lake-S and up to 40% faster than Skylake.
So these are low powered ‘eco’ cores, w/o HT, but they are still potent, performance wise, even compared to current gen Ryzen.
https://overclock3d.net/gfx/articles/2021/10/28140251179l.jpg
The simple answer to your question is to buy the most expensive Intel CPU and motherboard, with the chipset appropriate for the cpu, that you can afford. If not, you will always wonder “What If”.
That’s not quite how it works, and it seems you’re going down the path of borderline misinformation here. The Gracemount cores still contribute to the overall performance and IPC increase from prior generations, just not at the same performance level as the Golden Cove cores. I’m not sure why you would “discount” them in a comparison with AMD - these are still cores, just less powerful.
The first independent benchmarks are starting to appear.
12600k is head and shoulder above 11900K, 5800X and 5900X in single core Cinebench R20 benchmark. It is also very close to 12900K in single core performance. In line with what I had anticipated.
So far so good.
What remains to be seen is how it performs in MSFS exactly.
Will it perform well out of the box?
Is it going to require a game update?
Can’t wait to find out.
Source:Intel Core i5-12600K review: a gaming CPU worth waiting for | Rock Paper Shotgun
here ya go. looks like msfs isn’t coded like other games. lol
Thanks for the vid.
Here is the MSFS Chart Linus showed, he called it an outlier though, says they almost did not include it:
This following review provides FPS readings for each competing chip on MSFS at various resolutions. Alder Lake is looking good.
Word of caution here: across platforms, these are also comparing DDR4 to DDR5. Surprisingly, there is a performance uplift at DDR5 over DDR4, even with the higher latency on DDR5. This uplift is minor, but seems to be within the +5% range.
A better review that actually tries to control for DDR4 vs DDR5 differences:
Would you guys recommend the i7-12700k?
Yes, the 12700k and 12600k offer more impressive performance at their respective price range.
Usually I always try to go for the highest performing chip my budget allows. In this case, I would factor in the higher cost of DDR5 and corresponding motherboard.
In order of preference (more desirable first), my choice would be:
12900K DDR5
12700K DDR5
12600 DDR5
12700 DDR4
12600 DDR4
Then the 5950 and 5900 should be there too. Given there isn’t a huge performance differential, the conclusion from Steve is fair:
Intel Did It: Core i9-12900K CPU Review & Benchmarks vs. AMD - YouTube
I’m going for a 12900K DDR5 , MSFS is my only game (but I need power for stock market and other programming) …
so how’s this look (Alienware or IBP if the offer similar)
is the 3070 enough for me
is 32G RAM enough
2TB NVMe M.2 PCIe SSD
Avoid Alienware…and spend the money on a better GPU.
I agree with @HRHighness4588 .
Try to budget for a 3080++
32Gigs is fine, so is the 2TB NVMe.
Normally I would say if you can spare an afternoon, you could build the computer yourself, and use the money for the higher spec card, but nowadays, with the shortages, I am not sure it’s cheaper. The components will be better if you handpick, vs a branded product.
I looked at the Steve video. Fair indeed. He is focusing on 12900K though.
What single core CPU Benchmarks tell us is that 12700K/12600K are very close to 12900K.
And Alder Lake scheduling optimizations are going to improve further.
Bottom line, for gaming, I would stick with Alder Lake until the next AMD chip release.
Of course 5950x still comes on top in some professional use cases, other than gaming, due to the higher core count.
Take a look at the Eurogamers link above, if you are interested in a real life comparison for MSFS specifically.
If cost isn’t an issue then an i9 12900k Alderlake system is the best you can get right now. As you’re only planning a 3070 or 3080 however I assume you are operating to a budget and want a fairly high spec machine without breaking the bank.
In that case I’d recommend you get an intel i9 10850K. It is identical to the 10900k apart from a 100Mhz underclock, which isn’t noticeable in gaming at all, and will save you around £100 against the 10900k.
It’s a 10 core 20 thread CPU, which I’d much rather have over the 11700k which is an 8 core 16 thread chip. Cores aren’t everything, clock cycles matter too, but the 11th gen of Intel really should never have been released.
However, if you ONLY game, ie. load up MSFS and close all your other applications then the 11700k will probably be marginally faster than the 10850K as it has a faster per clock cycle, and you won’t need the extra 2 cores.
If you do a lot of multitasking, streaming, run multiple monitors etc, I’d get the 10850k.
On the AMD side I think the 5900X is the best current gaming chip, but the 5800X is perfectly adequate if you don’t want to spend the extra. Honestly, betwen the 10850K, 11700k and 5800X I’d see what builds you can get and go with the best deal as they will all be pretty approximate in performance in MSFS.
I’d definitely go 3080 over 3070 as a minimum for MSFS if you can, especially for VR if you’re into that.
I have a 3090 rig and a Reverb G2 and still limit FPS to 32 to get a smooth experience.
First actual feedback from a fellow simmer:
Subjective reviews are a bit pointless. I would not peddle these any further.
As are the tests performed by gaming sites.
Fortunately we have a couple of ardent computer freaks on here (you know who you are 
) who will really get the best out it in a meaningful way. 
I get zero stutters on my 5900X. I am running with a 3080ti on a gsync panel though (and those two made more of a difference than the CPU) - I actually disabled OC on the processor, and just enabled DOCP, as it’s already boosting to 4.95).
