New Computer Time

[Erwin]

Would appreciate some feedback advice re what to be looking at these days.  While I play CM2 mostly, I do also may dabble with high end flight sims like DCS A-10 etc.  Want to make sure the system can easily power 4K/UHD TV/monitor.

What I know:  

1)  CM2 only requires single core, so if one gets multiple cores it would be preferable to have them able to function like a single core for games like CM2.

2)  Get an SSD (1TB-2TB+) for primary drive.  But, is it worth getting a 2nd BU internal drive, or are SSD's so reliable that one internal HD is all one needs these days?  If not... would you get an SSD or conventional 2nd HD?  Is an internal 2nd BU drive even needed if one has an external BU drive?  

3)  Does CM2 have a "processor limit"?  ie: No matter how much faster/more powerful the computer may be, CM2 will load and run at the same speed regardless.

3)  How much RAM is good b4 one gets into overkill?  

4)  I have a 30" monitor and can't seem to find anything larger than 32".  Can one get similar results from a 35"-40" UHD/4K TV?

Cheers...

 

[com-intern]

49 minutes ago, Erwin said:

2) HDD/SSD

Generally one is going to be sufficient. Drives are reliable enough that age rather than random failure is going to get you. Personally I run 2 SSDs but bought them two years apart. Partially for cost reasons, but also so that one is significantly younger.

 

50 minutes ago, Erwin said:

(3)  Does CM2 have a "processor limit"?  ie: No matter how much faster/more powerful the computer may be, CM2 will load and run at the same speed regardless.

I've recently heavily upgraded my computer and while nearly every game I play loads in seconds CM still takes quite a while to load. It also doesn't run nearly as well as I would think given my performance any other games and the relative power of my PC.

CM's engine is quite old at this point '06? or whenever CM:SF was first laid down and at this point I don't think it can really take advantage of hardware gains.

 

52 minutes ago, Erwin said:

3)  How much RAM is good b4 one gets into overkill?  

16gb is fine, if you want to go to 32gb for some reason sure but anymore is definitely overkill.

 

52 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Can one get similar results from a 35"-40" UHD/4K TV?

In my experience no, but my only use case was plugging into a friends for 2-3 hours one weekend. I'm not sure where you reside but checking Microcenter I can see a 49" monitor if you want to spend $1,200 https://www.microcenter.com/product/608117/samsung-c49rg90-49-dual-qhd-120hz-hdmi-vga-dp-freesync-hdr-curved-qled-gaming-monitor

[Erwin]

Thanks...  Will check these things out thoroughly. 

Am still really curious if one gets comparable results to a computer monitor with a small 35" (if they even make em that small) to 40" 4K UHD TV.  

 

[Schrullenhaft]

1) For a vast majority of CM's functions it only utilizes a single core. There are actually a few functions that utilize multi-core (scenario loading and a few others... believe it or not), but in actual game play a single core is what is utilized. So CM doesn't generally benefit from more cores in the CPU. For a CPU you want one with a higher clock speed that is capable of higher IPC (Instructions Per Clock-cycle). AMD Ryzen and Intel CPUs are pretty close in terms of IPC when it comes to the latest generations, though Intel has a small advantage with better memory/cache latency (which might result in a mildly noticeable performance difference in games). Typically the more cores a CPU has, the more likely that it is going to run at a slightly lower clock speed. The 'turbo' clock speed will be a speed that often can only be run with one core (all others running quite a bit slower or idled).

2) SSDs tend to be quite a bit more reliable than your standard spinning-metal hard drive. If you're truly concerned about backups, then an external backup drive (that isn't constantly attached - preferably) would be the best solution. The external backup can be an SSD or a hard drive.

3) CM is "CPU bound", which means that the speed of the CPU is the largest determinant of performance, which includes a significant impact on graphical performance (a limitation with the way that OpenGL 2.x functions). While there have been a lot of improvements to CPU performance over the years, you're generally only seeing 5 - 10% improvement between most generations (some less, others more). Some of the significant differences have been the addition of more cores and improvements in cache/prediction, but these aren't enough to bring the performance of CM up to what many might expect. With videocards a lot of performance has come in terms of 'shaders' (which aren't necessarily 'shadow generators'),  but OpenGL 2.x's routines don't really utilize them in the manner that you can with newer graphical APIs, thus limiting graphical performance improvements.

4) 16 - 32GB of RAM should be plenty for most computer users. Beyond that it is only useful for people doing development, databases, extensive video or image editing, etc. CM is a 32-bit game on the PC and it can only access/address up to about 3GB of memory/address space.

5) I think one of the bigger differences between large TVs and computer monitors is that the TV's will likely have a larger 'dot pitch', meaning that the pixels may be more visible on the TV compared to the computer monitor. While I haven't used CM on a large TV, a computer that is driving a 55" Samsung TV at 4K at my house looks pretty nice in my opinion in comparison to 1920 x 1080/1200 computer monitor displays. The quality of the backlighting and color can be other differences (so you may not want to 'cheap out' on your TV if you go that route).

[Erwin]

Very useful.  Thanks...

Re the screen:  I want to use this on my desktop with the screen around 2-3 feet in front of my eyes.  Hence ideally I want something in the 35"-40" max range. 

Since the monitor/TV is close to my eyes, I need a 4K UHD to provide a small enuff dot pitch to make the image better.  That issue is exactly what am concerned about.  If a 4K TV will have a larger dot pitch than a comparable monitor.  The question is whether a 35"-40" 4K TV would or would not provide a noticeably superior/better/sharper/image than my current 30" 2560x1600 monitor when viewed from 2-3 feet away.  

 

[Dynaman216]

I use a 4K 49" TV 3' away and generally leave it at 2560x1440 instead of the higher resolution.  For general usage the text is too small at the higher resolution and the text magnification feature does not work properly with enough software that I don't want to use it if I don't have to.  I think the CM titles are included in that - the interface bar at the bottom being too small in the higher resolution.  That may have been updated in a patch over the last couple years but I wouldn't know since I don't even try the higher resolution any longer.

[Erwin]

That is good information Dynaman.  While my 30" monitor is set to 2560x1600 for most purposes, I have to set all the CM2 games' display.txt to 1920x1200 in order to read the interface easily at 2-3 feet away from my eyes.  (I don't wear glasses, but maybe I need em?)  It's a puzzle why BF has never made it possible to scale the text.  But perhaps it's more difficult to do that than it sounds.

I can't see needing more than 35'-40" since this will sit on my desk.  Less than 35" would be hardly any difference, over my 30", and over 40" takes too much desk space.  How does your 49" 4K TV compare with a computer monitor re graphics quality?  Does your 4K TV have a larger dot pitch that degrades the quality and makes it counterproductive?  Have you compared it side by side with a large monitor?

I found this info re Dell monitors (from 2006):

20" is .258 pixel pitch

21" is .270 pixel pitch

24" is .270 pixel pitch

30" is .250 pixel pitch.   

 

From the current Dell site re 30":

Pixel Pitch
0.251 mm x 0.251 mm

Pixel Per Inch (PPI)
101
Contrast Ratio
1000 to 1 (typical)
Aspect Ratio
16:10
Backlight Technology
White LED edge light system
Brightness
350 cd/m² (typical)
Response Time
6ms (FAST mode)
8ms (NORMAL mode)

Edited March 18, 2020 by Erwin

[Erwin]

I got a proposal from the guys who build my systems.  Let me have comments and suggestions if you think it overkill, or weak in areas:

00013 Xi® MTower™ PCIe Workstation (Base Configuration) 01326 Intel® Core™ i9-9900KF 3.6/5.0GHz-1C Turbo Boost-Hi-Perf. Liquid Cooled Single Fan-16MB Shared L3 Cache DMI3 Eight-Core 9th Gen.14nm (Req. Z390 Motherboard) 02343 32GB DDR4 SDRAM @ 3000MHz w/High Performance Aluminum Heat Spreader 04718 NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1660 6GB GDDR5-HDMI 2.0/DisplayPort 1.4-Multi-monitor supp. No DP/DVI Adapter included   03266 1TB Solid State Drive NVMe Samsung® 970 EVO Plus M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 3500/3300MB/s Seq.R/W Shock Resistant 1500G. 17012 On-Board SATA controller - accordingly to motherboard specifications 06061 DVD+RW/DL/+R-R/CD-RW Double Media 4.7/8.5GB 18x Drive w/o SW 41031 No 2nd Optical Drive Selected 09007 On-Board Sound or accordingly to motherboard specifications   12001 On-Board Ethernet LAN Port(s) accordingly to Motherboard specifications   16118 Genuine Microsoft® Windows® 10 Professional 64-bit Fully installed, configured and updated, includes original DVD media and COA 21084 Genuine Microsoft® Office Home and Business 2019 Edition PKC License Key Distribution included (Download & Installation is required by End User)   35028 Google® Chrome® for Windows 35029 Mozilla® Firefox® for Windows  35030 Adobe® Acrobat Reader® for Windows  35031 Microsoft® Windows Defender Antivirus – A built-in antivirus helps guard your PC against viruses, malware, and other malicious software and downloads (Included with Windows 10 by default)  (I currently use AVG and SPYBOT.  Which do you guys think is better?) 35032 NVIDIA® GeForce® Experience for GeForce GPU and Windows only 22399 MSI® MPG Z390 GAMING PLUS Intel® Z390 Chipset for 9th Gen CPU-2xPCIe 3.0 x16(x16/x4)-4xPCIe 3.0 x1-DDR4 to 64GB RAM-1xGbE LAN-2xM.2 Slots-6xSATA 6Gb/s RAID 0/1/5/10-HD Audio-2xUSB 3.1-6xUSB 3.x/2.0-DVI-HDMI-ATX M/B 44030 850W Gold Certified 80 Plus Corsair® RM850x Fully-Modular 135mm Thermal control Fan ATX12V/EPS12V 90% efficiency Active PFC PSU 27388 Xi® MTower™ CM-MasterBox NR600 with ODD Tempered Glass Side Panel-2x12cm Fans-Front Grid-2xFront USB 3.0-Audio out-1x5.25" 2x2.5" 1x3.5" Drives-ATX M/B(Dual Fan Radiator for O.C)-Dim.(DxWxH):18.60"x8.20"x18.80" (HDD cage will be removed to fit longer PSU)

[com-intern]

What exactly are you doing with this computer? Just flight sims and CM?

Both of these seem like you are paying way too much while your card is subpar.

Quote

Intel® Core™ i9-9900KF

With an i9 I'm almost certain you are in the land of diminishing returns for the cost.

https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-3600/p/N82E16819113569?Description=ryzen 5&cm_re=ryzen_5-_-19-113-569-_-Product&quicklink=true


 

Quote

1TB Solid State Drive NVMe Samsung® 970 EVO Plus M.2 PCIe

While the NVME drives are faster I'm not certain that is functionally important for you.

https://www.newegg.com/crucial-mx500-1tb/p/N82E16820156174

Can a 1660 drive a 4k monitor? My rx5700XT sometimes struggles at 1440p with Unreal Engine 4 games on ultra.

[Erwin]

Your response is appreciated com-intern.  But, please clarify what your suggestions are. 

Note that I don't play RT FPS "wrist twitch" games, maybe occasional stuff like Call of Duty and GTA stuff is all.  Am mostly concerned with CM2 (obviously) and maybe flight sims like A10 Warthog by DCS etc.  So...

What is wrong with the i9?  

I thought the higher speed SSD would enable faster loading of apps like CM2 now that that larger maps and scenarios are available.

What video card are you recommending?

PS:  What monitor are you using?

 

 

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Erwin

[z1812]

I have played CM on a large Screen TV and it was fine. I did find the atmosphere different on a TV to a Monitor, not any better or worse, just different.

What I finally decided upon for a monitor was 34 inch curved widescreen. It really works well for games and CM looks great on it.

Here is a link to the one I bought. https://www.msi.com/Monitor/OPTIX-MAG341CQ

[SlowLarry]

4 hours ago, Erwin said:

I got a proposal from the guys who build my systems.  Let me have comments and suggestions if you think it overkill, or weak in areas:

00013 Xi® MTower™ PCIe Workstation (Base Configuration) 01326 Intel® Core™ i9-9900KF 3.6/5.0GHz-1C Turbo Boost-Hi-Perf. Liquid Cooled Single Fan-16MB Shared L3 Cache DMI3 Eight-Core 9th Gen.14nm (Req. Z390 Motherboard) 02343 32GB DDR4 SDRAM @ 3000MHz w/High Performance Aluminum Heat Spreader 04718 NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 1660 6GB GDDR5-HDMI 2.0/DisplayPort 1.4-Multi-monitor supp. No DP/DVI Adapter included   03266 1TB Solid State Drive NVMe Samsung® 970 EVO Plus M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 3500/3300MB/s Seq.R/W Shock Resistant 1500G. 17012 On-Board SATA controller - accordingly to motherboard specifications 06061 DVD+RW/DL/+R-R/CD-RW Double Media 4.7/8.5GB 18x Drive w/o SW 41031 No 2nd Optical Drive Selected 09007 On-Board Sound or accordingly to motherboard specifications   12001 On-Board Ethernet LAN Port(s) accordingly to Motherboard specifications   16118 Genuine Microsoft® Windows® 10 Professional 64-bit Fully installed, configured and updated, includes original DVD media and COA 21084 Genuine Microsoft® Office Home and Business 2019 Edition PKC License Key Distribution included (Download & Installation is required by End User)   35028 Google® Chrome® for Windows 35029 Mozilla® Firefox® for Windows  35030 Adobe® Acrobat Reader® for Windows  35031 Microsoft® Windows Defender Antivirus – A built-in antivirus helps guard your PC against viruses, malware, and other malicious software and downloads (Included with Windows 10 by default)  (I currently use AVG and SPYBOT.  Which do you guys think is better?) 35032 NVIDIA® GeForce® Experience for GeForce GPU and Windows only 22399 MSI® MPG Z390 GAMING PLUS Intel® Z390 Chipset for 9th Gen CPU-2xPCIe 3.0 x16(x16/x4)-4xPCIe 3.0 x1-DDR4 to 64GB RAM-1xGbE LAN-2xM.2 Slots-6xSATA 6Gb/s RAID 0/1/5/10-HD Audio-2xUSB 3.1-6xUSB 3.x/2.0-DVI-HDMI-ATX M/B 44030 850W Gold Certified 80 Plus Corsair® RM850x Fully-Modular 135mm Thermal control Fan ATX12V/EPS12V 90% efficiency Active PFC PSU 27388 Xi® MTower™ CM-MasterBox NR600 with ODD Tempered Glass Side Panel-2x12cm Fans-Front Grid-2xFront USB 3.0-Audio out-1x5.25" 2x2.5" 1x3.5" Drives-ATX M/B(Dual Fan Radiator for O.C)-Dim.(DxWxH):18.60"x8.20"x18.80" (HDD cage will be removed to fit longer PSU)

Well, to be honest, that looks like a rather average build, some stuff is too much, some is a bit lacking imho.

CPU is an amazing piece, but pretty powerhungry. Same goes probably to the RAM, 32 GB, as said before, right now its more a neat have, definetly no must have. Interestingly there is no brand mentioned for the RAM. Oh, and just to be safe, make sure its 2*16GB, if you go for it. The Samsung drive is a decent one, though there are even faster drives out there.  

Coming to the "bad", the GPU is rather mediocre. Nothing wrong with it per se, just in combination with one of the best gaming CPUs makes little sense to me. Im also not sure if it can do 1440 gaming with reasonable framerates( outside of CM). Same can be said about the mainboard. The PSU on the other hand is a pretty hefty one, again, makes somewhat sense given the CPU, makes less sense given the GPU. You could probably power twin 2080s with that unit.

So it all comes down to pricing. Truth is if you can somehow manage to screw a couple of screws for yourself, building your own pc is always the better way. Will save you a couple of hundreds probably, gets you the pc you want and delivers a truly satisfactory experience, when your done building.

BTW i play CM on a 55 Samsung 4kTV in 1080, because in higher resolutions i cant read any texts and the UI is really really small. Still looks good enough, and in its best moments its like im right in the middle of an awesome war movie.

[Erwin]

27 minutes ago, z1812 said:

34 inch curved widescreen. 

Are you able to show CM2 and other games in the correct dimensions - ie not stretched in some way?

[Erwin]

24 minutes ago, SlowLarry said:

some stuff is too much, some is a bit lacking imho

That's interesting.  Given what I use the system for, it would be great is you could suggest specific alternatives (eg what GPU, mainboard and SSD) to ensure all components "match" for optimal efficiency.  

Also, why do you recommend 2 x 16GB Ram vs 32 GB?

Thanks... 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Erwin

[com-intern]

5 hours ago, Erwin said:

Your response is appreciated com-intern.  But, please clarify what your suggestions are. 

Note that I don't play RT FPS "wrist twitch" games, maybe occasional stuff like Call of Duty and GTA stuff is all.  Am mostly concerned with CM2 (obviously) and maybe flight sims like A10 Warthog by DCS etc.  So...

What is wrong with the i9?  

I thought the higher speed SSD would enable faster loading of apps like CM2 now that that larger maps and scenarios are available.

What video card are you recommending?

PS:  What monitor are you using?

 

 

 

My monitor: https://www.microcenter.com/product/620997/msi-optix-mag322cqrv-315-wqhd-144hz-hdmi-dp-freesync-hdr-curved-led-gaming-monitor

I got it on sale at a Microcenter.
 

Quote

Am mostly concerned with CM2 (obviously) and maybe flight sims like A10 Warthog by DCS etc.  So...

I dabble in DCS and IL-2 so I've got some experience with how they run on my system, but not a ton. I also found this thread on the DCS forums https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=225513
 

Quote

What is wrong with the i9?  

I would venture that you are flat out spending too much money without enough return. The i9 is in the land of diminishing returns as far as I'm concerned and you can do just as well with less.

 

Quote

I thought the higher speed SSD would enable faster loading of apps like CM2 now that that larger maps and scenarios are available.

There are some built in software issues with CM that increase the load times more than needed. And for consumer level circumstances a normal speed SSD will be more transfer speed than you'll need for the foreseeable life of the drive. So again its a case of diminishing returns.


-----

With both of these you can get most of what you want with far less expenditure if you don't go for these super high end options.


 

Quote

What video card are you recommending?

I would get either one of the Nvidia series cards 2070 or 2060 Super or the AMD RX 5700 XT. If you want to play flight sims in 4k I think you will need that sort of power if not a bit more.



My TL:DR: Either spend as much money as you are spending now and get a better video card and downgrade the processor and SSD or just downgrade the processor and SSD and save money.



EDIT:

My Suggestion with a disclaimer. I don't know where you live or where you are buying so I don't have a good handle on the actual price you will be paying. Your local market will determine some of this.

Processor: Ryzen 5 3600 (IF you reallly want to spend money the Ryzen 5 3600x)
SSD: Something 1 TB and cheaper. You don't need NVME
Video Card: Nvidia 2070 SUPER or 2080 SUPER


Why did I pick these? Combat Mission is essentially gimped regardless of what you buy. You will get good performance with these and spending an extra $500 isn't going to get you much better performance. Flight Sims however, will want a balance of processor power and video card power. The Ryzen 5 3600 is a solid processor that will do the job while allowing you to afford the video card to increase the LOD and run it at 1440p or 4k.

Edited March 19, 2020 by com-intern
LAYING IT OUT

[SlowLarry]

Basically it comes down to what you want from your pc. This really makes a difference. For example, you want serious( meaning no compromise...) 4k gaming? There is just no way around a 2080Ti atm. Those beasts cost 1000+though, basically the price of a nice budget 1440 gaming pc with almost all components.

CPU: Top-Level  i9-9700k / Ryzen 7 3700x / Mid-Level i5 9600k / Ryzen 5 3600

GPU: Top-Level Nvidia 2080Ti/2080Super/2080( awesome to ok) Mid-Level 2070Super/ Radeon 5700xt

SSD: if you go for the high end gear, its totally ok to get a nvme, its gonna be standard in a couple of months anyway, otherwise stay with sata ssd

RAM: depends on the cpu, new Ryzen is said to make good use of high speed ram, so you could go with 3200MHz, maybe even 3600MHz( and why two banks? because dual channel)

PSU: depends on cpu, the Ryzens are using noticable less power than the top end intels,especially when overclocked

Board: again comes down to what you want. there are boards with built-in wifi for example, which is nice, but costs extra of course

 

Im not trying to dodge your question, but its really up to you. Your budget, your gaming needs. If all your gaming is CM + two hours of flight sim in a month it makes little sense to get a high end gaming machine. If on the other hand you want to experience GTA and other stuff in 4k and money is no issue make no compromises.

If i were to get a pc in the 1000+€ range right now id go with this, and its pretty close to what @com-intern wrote:

• Ryzen 5 3600 ~170€
• RTX 2070 Super ~520€
• Samsung 970 Evo plus 500GB M.2 ~120€
• ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming4 ~150€
• G-Skill Aegis 16GB kit( that means two banks) 3000 ~70€
• be quit! Straight Power 11 550W ~100€
• + not overly expensive case maybe this: be quit! Pure Base 500 white+window

This will give you a pretty solid gaming pc for ~1200€. It will run pretty much everything at WQHD at high to ultra settings and low to mid at 4k. Going for a Radeon 5700XT will save you ~200, but you loose ray tracing( not a big deal if you ask me) and a bit of performance for 4k.  The rest of the setup is just personal taste, for example ive had good luck with ASRock boards so id go with one of theirs again. I dont need wifi onboard, because the pc sits next to the cable.

CM will work decently even on a budget 500$ build and no 1000$ graphics card will make it look any better. You will still get light flickering, shadow issues etc. Its really old now as a software. I love it anyway...

One word to your software. Dont you have a Windows 10 version already? What are you using for Office right now? And Chrome, Firefox and Adobe Reader can be downloaded for free from the internet, no need to pay anyone to do it for you imho. It s just two clicks away anyway.

[z1812]

10 hours ago, Erwin said:

Are you able to show CM2 and other games in the correct dimensions - ie not stretched in some way?

Yes there is no stretch or distortion. The resolution is 3440 x1440.  

My current computer has an i5 intel chip, 8G Ram, and a Nvidia Gforce 750 graphics Card. It runs CM smoothly, at the highest settings, and without stutter. It looks great. 

I also occasionally play Arma 3 and Battlefield 5. I have to tone down the Graphics settings a touch with these games but they look fine and play well.

With the system you have detailed above you should have no problem running anything at the highest settings.

I have been using Samsung SSD's for a couple of years now and they really work well. They have a software (Samsung Magician) for transferring the contents of old hard drives to the new one(s). It is quite easy to use.

If you are getting the Gforce 1660, I would suggest at least moving up a little to the 1660ti. If you can, the 20 series would be better.

I do a lot of my own upgrades. If you do the same, you may want a full rather than mid tower, just for ease of access.

[Armorgunner]

I don´t know if I can help you?

But last October. I uppgraded from a:

10 year old, first gen Core I7 950 "Nehalem" 4c8t 3,06Ghz base, 3,2Ghz boost, 18Gb 1333mhz RAM, Geforce GTX 970. All CM games installed on a 7200rpm HDD.

To a Core I9 9900K, 32Gb 3200mhz RAM, Geforce 2060 Super, And an Samsung 860 1Tb SSD. All CM games installed on the SSD.

 

I only moved the first computer to my doughters room. So all CM games, are still installed. For testing purpuses. And the only notable differance, is the loading times. Especially in very large scenarios. 

 

If you want me to test the differance in a scenario, just tell me. I have all CM games except CMBN installed on both computers. So it will not take long time to do.

edit: I have Nvidia overlay, with FPS counter. So I can see the FPS at all time.

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Armorgunner

[com-intern]

2 hours ago, SlowLarry said:

SSD: if you go for the high end gear, its totally ok to get a nvme, its gonna be standard in a couple of months anyway, otherwise stay with sata ssd

Do you have any evidence that the enhance speeds from an NVME drive are even noticeable/useful at a consumer level?

I went through the whole rigmarole of picking SSD drives a few months ago and I couldn't find anything that supported NVME drives being worth the cost outside of specialist use. SSDs are 10+ times faster than the average HDD (if not more) and I've been unable to find an NVME advantage over standard SSDs that makes it worth the cost.

[Armorgunner]

22 minutes ago, com-intern said:

Do you have any evidence that the enhance speeds from an NVME drive are even noticeable/useful at a consumer level?

I went through the whole rigmarole of picking SSD drives a few months ago and I couldn't find anything that supported NVME drives being worth the cost outside of specialist use. SSDs are 10+ times faster than the average HDD (if not more) and I've been unable to find an NVME advantage over standard SSDs that makes it worth the cost.

Did the same as you, and bought a regular Samsung 860. The NVME drives shines, if you have two of them. And copy files between them. But Windows doesent load faster, and niether will games.

[Erwin]

All these comments are helpful and much appreciated.

While I play a lot of CM, I do want the system to handle high end flight sims on a 4K monitor or TV (probably multiple monitors). 

Re the cost: 20+ years ago I was changing systems every year or two as the rate of tech advancement was so fast.  After 2010 I found that a good system (eg my current system) has coped well for 5-10 years without getting too obsolete.  So, I don't mind spending extra $ since am confident of getting approx 10 years of service (esp with an upgrade at some point).

Re the above comments:

I am puzzled that the i9 is considered overkill as that was one of the more basic options I was given(!)  Are you saying that I would do fine (for my purposes and 10 year time scale) with an i7 or...?

RAM is not as expensive as it used to be, and I have never regretted getting more than I thought was needed.  (I will check that it's 2 x 16GB re the dual channel issue.)  However, as RAM is easy to upgrade at a later date are you saying that I should get 16GB for now and pick up more RAM when the price has dropped even more (or buy new RAM when it is even faster)? 

From all the comments it seems like the video card seems to be where my proposed system is most deficient.  My next step up options are these two: 

NVIDIA® GeForce RTX™ 2060 6GB GDDR6-HDMI 2.0/DisplayPort 1.4-Multi-monitor supp. No DP/DVI  Adapter included or   NVIDIA® GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER™ 8GB GDDR6-2560 CUDA Cores-HDMI 2.0b/DisplayPort 1.4-VirtualLink-Multi-monitor supp. Specific upgrades required. No DP/DVI Adapter included

I note that the 2060 is not a "super".  Does that matter?

Re SSD's, are you absolutely sure that there is no "noticeable" speed advantage of an NVMe SSD?  If so, I can save maybe $100 each and get two of these:

1TB Solid State Drive Samsung® 860 EVO™ 2.5 SATA 6Gb/s 550/520MB/s Seq.R/W Shock Resistant 1500G. I plan to install two 1GB SSD's.  One for processing and one to store data so it can be easily removed and put in another system.  I hope that makes sense to you guys. Re MS software, I generally pass older machines onto staff, spousal unit etc. as they are still way more than enuff power for their purposes  So, I generally get new MS Office software installed on new machines. As I said, am thinking of a ten year lifespan for this machine.  Your thoughts?

[Armorgunner]

39 minutes ago, Erwin said:

 

I note that the 2060 is not a "super".  Does that matter?

Re SSD's, are you absolutely sure that there is no "noticeable" speed advantage of an NVMe SSD?  If so, I can save maybe $100 each and get two of these:

2060 is a 6Gb card with less Cu´s. 2060 Super is an 8 Gb card, that is more or less the old 2070. 2070 Super is 10-15% faster than 2060S. https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/xfx_radeon_rx_5600_xt_thicc_2_review,16.html

 

NVMe SSD´s are faster in benchmarks. But not in the typical use. Like I wrote, it shines in copy files between two of them. But Windows will not start faster. Game levels will not load faster. Only Intel Optane drives, will load your games very much faster. But they will cost you dineros,  and a lot of them.

 

Edit: Just an example 

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Armorgunner

[com-intern]

38 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Re SSD's, are you absolutely sure that there is no "noticeable" speed advantage of an NVMe SSD?  If so, I can save maybe $100 each and get two of these:

I guess the disclaimer here is that we're folks on a niche wargame forum. BUT! I would never build someone a computer with an NVME SSD. I've not see anything in any of my research that shows its worth the increase cost while I have plenty of evidence showing that having more space to store data is quite useful. My PC can support NVME drives but I did not get one and instead got two standard SSDs. The cost was about the same but I have 3 terabytes of storage instead of 1 terabyte and have two drives instead of one.

 

42 minutes ago, Erwin said:

I am puzzled that the i9 is considered overkill as that was one of the more basic options I was given(!) 

This is also one of those things where comes down to personal differences.I absolutely would not spend that much on a processor. My stomach clenches at the thought of spending that much - so I'm just generally not going to be on-board with that purchase. I'm largely saying this because I want you to know my bias. But if you are actually committed to a 10 year life-span it might not be the worst purchase to make.

HOWEVER if you do get it you want to have a strong video card to pair with it and the 1660 is way too weak to take advantage of the i9. It would be like if your left arm could lift 200 kilograms while your right arm could only lift 20 kilograms.

 

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

NVIDIA® GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER™ 8GB GDDR6-2560 CUDA Cores-HDMI 2.0b/DisplayPort 1.4-VirtualLink-Multi-monitor supp. Specific upgrades required. No DP/DVI Adapter included

This is solid - if you are committed to the i9 you might want to go one level higher even. SUPER does matter quite a bit and I would not get the 2060.


-----

I've been doing some reading on DCS forums and I think you are going to be hard pressed to actual get great 4k performance even with a super high end computer. But if you are really aiming for that go with the i9 and get a 2070 Super or 2080TI if you can afford it. If you can't afford a 2070 SUPER or 2080TI do not buy the i9.

[Armorgunner]

19 minutes ago, com-intern said:

 

I've been doing some reading on DCS forums and I think you are going to be hard pressed to actual get great 4k performance even with a super high end computer. But if you are really aiming for that go with the i9 and get a 2070 Super or 2080TI if you can afford it. If you can't afford a 2070 SUPER or 2080TI do not buy the i9.

I Think Erwin, like me. Is going to keep the base, for quite some time. So I Think the I9 would be the best way to go. I just bought the 2060S, as a placeholder. For next gen cards. As I Think the 2080Ti, is way too expensive. When next gen cards arive, later this year? You can, as Always. Buy last gen top performance, for half the price  

It was only because of Red Dead Reademtion 2´s imminent release on PC. That I bought an 2060S, as a placeholder for next gen cards. Otherwise, it would have been a cheaper GPU.

Edited March 19, 2020 by Armorgunner

[Erwin]

double post...

 

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Erwin