Processor Question

[Rake]

I'm looking at purchasing a new box, and trying to decide on a CPU.  This machine will not just be used for CM, but for Photoshop, Illustrator, and possibly video.  With that in mind, I'm looking at the i9-14900K

My issue is that the base speed is 3.2 GHz.  I've considered overclocking as the max is 6.  My question is, to anyone running an i9, are you seeing any increase in speed from the "Turbo Boost" technology that Intel touts on their product brochures? 

I understand that these newer processors don't leave a lot of "head room" for OC, so I'm concerned about stability.  It appears this CPU would be perfect for my intended graphics usage, but I'm a little concerned on how CM might run on it since the engine seems to be almost entirely bound to the CPU.

TIA

[Redwolf]

The i9s have stability problems. Not recommended right now.

You can basically forget about overclocking these days.

[A Canadian Cat]

I'm still running an i7 but 3.2GHz is not terrible for CM. I'm not really well versed in over clocking - can it be done on a per executable basis?

Ninja'd by @Redwolf

Edited July 25 by A Canadian Cat

[Rake]

18 minutes ago, Redwolf said:

You can basically forget about overclocking these days.

Pretty much confirms what I've been able to figure out.  

 

19 minutes ago, A Canadian Cat said:

I'm still running an i7 but 3.2GHz is not terrible for CM. 

Ninja'd by @Redwolf

"Supposedly", Intel has an grasp on what's causing its stability issues, and much, it seems has to do with Mobo configuration.  

I was primarily aking if anyone has experience with Intel's Turbo Boost feature which is supposed to crank up the processor speed in whichever core the CPU determines is carrying most of the load.  Since CM only uses one core, theoretically, this would boost the speed at which the game runs.

I've been fortunate to rarely have major issues with CM.  I can (almost) always get 14 -16 fps, at Best settings, on even the largest maps.  @George MC 's "Heart of the Dying Sun" crashed the first time I opened it, then struggled a bit once it did run.

I'm relatively happy with how the game runs; but was hoping to find just a bit more on these monster maps.  Turning settings down very far just isn't in my DNA.

[Thewood1]

I would suggest an i9-13XXX.  I have 12, 13, and 14 gen PCs.  The 13 series actually outperforms that 14 in almost all games and benchmarks.  The 14 runs basically the same as the 12...about 1-2% behind the 13 at load.

The only advantage of the 14 is some core memory speeds and a slightly higher boost speed.  But the sustained speed under load and similar cooling is slightly less than the 13.  I suspect that there are some high-end apps that can take better advantage of the 14's core memory and management, but no game I have or Photoshop does it.

Edited July 25 by Thewood1

[Thewood1]

btw, I do no overclocking and these are all large MSI GT77 laptops.

[Artkin]

Go with the new amds being launched in 5 days. 

13 and 14th intels are failing at huge rates. 

And considering the intel can pull 400w, it's probably not worth keeping in your system. 

Edited July 25 by Artkin

[Vacillator]

6 hours ago, A Canadian Cat said:

I'm still running an i7 but 3.2GHz

Me too and at a lower frequency:

Processor    13th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-13700H, 2400 Mhz, 14 Core(s), 20 Logical Processor(s)

I've never had an issue with CM or anything else, but that doesn't really answer the OP's question on overclocking.

[Thewood1]

Just a quick follow up.  My son has a desktop with an i9-14900K.  He has it overclocked to get 2-4 p-cores to 6GHz.  Has been running for 5-6 months with no issues.  Gigabyte motherboard.  That one board was one that was built correctly for the 14900K.  But he just got the new bios that addresses any issues.  He uses it for video editing and MSFS20.  He loves it.

 

He also has liquid cooling, but has never had temps above 70C. 

[Rake]

Thanks all...  I'm going to continue to shop.  Overclocking is likely out the window for me.  I'll wait a bit, maybe look at the AMDs, though I've always had Intel.

I AM looking at water cooling...

 

[Redwolf]

The 9xxx AMD chips have been delayed by 1-2 weeks.

[LuckyDog]

For reference, my 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-11700F @ 2.50GHz with a 3060 runs all maps smoothly with maximum settings and v-sync. There are some large in CM Cold War and I'm using terrain mods.

[chuckdyke]

10 hours ago, Rake said:

but for Photoshop, Illustrator, and possibly video. 

Photoshop (Adobe) takes a lot of scratch disk space. One of the reasons I changed to the Affinity Suite. It was not only their outrageous subscription model. I run all of CM with no problems whatsoever. 

[Artkin]

10 hours ago, Redwolf said:

The 9xxx AMD chips have been delayed by 1-2 weeks.

Two more weeks to save up for a 9950x. 

[Rake]

11 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Photoshop (Adobe) takes a lot of scratch disk space. One of the reasons I changed to the Affinity Suite. It was not only their outrageous subscription model. I run all of CM with no problems whatsoever. 

I am well aware of Adobe's space eating requirements.  I have the old (CS5 & earlier) disks which I load, negating the need to run the PS subscription... Light room,too.  I dont need the features that have been added since then.

But, I do run Acrobat Pro & Illustrator off the service.  My company reimburses for Acrobat, and may for Illustrator once I learn it reasonably well.  Still, that's a lot of HD space, and the reason I will like go with a 4 TB SSD for my main.  1 TB just isn't what it used to be.  And, I'm moving over a 1 TB M.2 drive that holds backups for all of my mods, scenarios, etc.  I also have a brand new 2TB Samsung NVMe that a friend handed me a couple of years ago...  I just don't have the slot for it in my current machine.

Here's the rest of the specs that I'm looking at:

1000 Watt PS

Asus ROG Strix Z790-E (I'm going with Intel, I'm comfortable with them)

2x32 DDR5-5200

Haven't yet decided on the Nvidia,  GPU, but it won't be the 4090. Possibly 4080, but likely 4070

Edit: 2 TB SSD main, 4TB M.2 storage, plus my old 1 TB M.2

Edited July 26 by Rake
Correction

[Artkin]

Personally I don't get it. 

AMDs chips have better performance at half the watt usage. And when you overclock it absolutely blows everything out of the water while still using less power (Wasnt on this bench but on another I saw).

 

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-zen-5-flagship-cpu-benchmark-6-ghz-overclock/

 

It's not even close. 

[Andrew Kulin]

I have no issues running CM, Photoshop or Lightroom using an i7-13900K (not overclocked), MSI Z790 Carbon mobo, 2x32 GB Ram (6000 Mhz), NVidia 4070 GPU and 2 x 2TB M.2 drives plus a variety of other drives for back-up, photo catalogues etc.).  I don't use Illustrator so cannoit comment on what its requirements are, but I like to stitch photos followed by edits with multiple layers so file sizes in Photoshop can become quite huge and it runs no problem (and with other stuff running in background).

The only advantage I am seeing is with the M.2 drives CM games load up extremely quickly.  Processor and RAM really do not help much the way the game is presently coded so I don't think you will see much speed differences in CM between any of the processors being recommended.  AMD Video cards seem to be problematic for CM, something to do with driver updates and Open GL. 

[George MC]

On 7/25/2024 at 3:39 PM, Rake said:

I've been fortunate to rarely have major issues with CM.  I can (almost) always get 14 -16 fps, at Best settings, on even the largest maps.  @George MC 's "Heart of the Dying Sun" crashed the first time I opened it, then struggled a bit once it did run.

I'm relatively happy with how the game runs; but was hoping to find just a bit more on these monster maps.  Turning settings down very far just isn't in my DNA.

I created and can run Dying Sun on my PC which has a Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-10850K CPU @ 3.60GHz   I've also got a Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti and a Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB.

Dying Sun FPS drops a wee bit during the opening turns when the bombardment and Soviet attacks rolls out but otherwise its fine with FPS in the mid to high twenties generally during turns.

[Rake]

On 7/29/2024 at 5:14 PM, George MC said:

I created and can run Dying Sun on my PC which has a Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-10850K CPU @ 3.60GHz   I've also got a Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti and a Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB.

Dying Sun FPS drops a wee bit during the opening turns when the bombardment and Soviet attacks rolls out but otherwise its fine with FPS in the mid to high twenties generally during turns.

I've decided to go with the i9 and a 3080, dual ssd's. Dying Sun will be the first test once I get it set up.  

Love your stuff, George...  maps are always spectacular.  Problem with that is it makes them hard to play on any settings less than Best

[Thewood1]

What gen i9 did you go with?

[Sunbather]

On 7/29/2024 at 7:37 PM, Andrew Kulin said:

I have no issues running CM, Photoshop or Lightroom using an i7-13900K (not overclocked), MSI Z790 Carbon mobo, 2x32 GB Ram (6000 Mhz), NVidia 4070 GPU and 2 x 2TB M.2 drives plus a variety of other drives for back-up, photo catalogues etc.).  I don't use Illustrator so cannoit comment on what its requirements are, but I like to stitch photos followed by edits with multiple layers so file sizes in Photoshop can become quite huge and it runs no problem (and with other stuff running in background).

The only advantage I am seeing is with the M.2 drives CM games load up extremely quickly.  Processor and RAM really do not help much the way the game is presently coded so I don't think you will see much speed differences in CM between any of the processors being recommended.  AMD Video cards seem to be problematic for CM, something to do with driver updates and Open GL. 

Nice to see another one using an RTX 4070. Was a very pricey card but there weren't much better options back then (and still aren't) and I am incredibly happy to have bought this GPU: silent, very energy efficient and powerful. And for the fancy new games you have Frame Generation which doubles your frames per second.

Some comments regarding the topic in general (for anyone else who has questions regarding CPU):

1. I think every current CPU of a 5 model (i.e. Ryzen 5 or Intel i5) are good enough for the CM games. (And also for most other games currently out, btw)

2. Recently, I accidentally had MSI Afterburner still on and some of you might know how glitchy it can be in the CM games. But still I saw that my RTX 4070 was used at a whopping 50% by Combat Mission! Quite funny actually, regarding that I was also able to play these games on an Intel HD 4000 chip...

3. There is a trick to actually smoothen out the gameplay a bit, see here: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2601713366

I am talking especially about the resolution trick. Turning up your resolution to 8k won't change the screen at all but trick the game into loading more into the cache which results in a smoother experience. It will increase the loading times though!

4. I made it a habit to put all my CM games on my NVMe SSD. Usually you don't see much difference in games but in CM my loading times are cut in half compared to a normal SATA SSD! So I definitively agree with Andrew Kulin, put the CM games on an NVMe SSD if you have one.

5. And yes, avoid AMD GPUs at all costs when you are a wargamer or fancy older PC games. AMD GPU drivers are notoriously unstable even for modern games and when it comes to older games and/or wargames you might be prevented from playing them at all for months!

 

Edited August 3 by Sunbather

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Sunbather said:

put the CM games on an NVMe SSD if you have one.

You hit the nail on the head. I have all of CM Games on my SSD Drive. 

[Sunbather]

3 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

You hit the nail on the head. I have all of CM Games on my SSD Drive. 

But you you have them on a SATA SSD drive or an NVMe SSD drive? (Both can be m.2 actually; m.2 is just the plug if you will)

 

[chuckdyke]

14 minutes ago, Sunbather said:

NVMe SSD drive?

It is on a Nvidia and on my SSD drive. I just looked deeper on this link and it looks very interesting it is actually one step up. Understanding SSD Technology: NVMe, SATA, M.2- Kingston Technology Looks like I will apply this next time I update, at present everything runs very smooth. 

[Sunbather]

1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:

It is on a Nvidia and on my SSD drive. I just looked deeper on this link and it looks very interesting it is actually one step up. Understanding SSD Technology: NVMe, SATA, M.2- Kingston Technology Looks like I will apply this next time I update, at present everything runs very smooth. 

You definitively should, at least for the drive on which you want to install your system and some games. Be aware though that most games don't profit from it. On the NVMe I only install the CM games and the RPGs I am currently playing and where a LOT of loading is involved (*Elden Ring anyone?*). For most games, the difference between SATA and NVMe is negligible or not even measurable.

Make sure that your mainboard actually supports NVMe and make sure to use the right slot. My mainboard, e.g., the MSI B450 Pro Carbon, has two M.2 slots but only 1 of them is capable of using the bandwith of an NVMe.

Another tip for you and anyone interested in this: I installed 'custom' heatsinks on both my SSDs, the SATA and the NVMe one, since having such a high bandwith and having your drives directly on the motherboard tends to make them hot. Price point is like 5€ to 10€. Most mainboards have heatsinks already included but I have found them lacking.