Groove_C

Well, you should consider that Valken has a K model of i7-4790, which is OC'ed to 4.6 GHz and not like 3.8 GHz of a non-K i7-4790 that you mention. + he has best of the best DDR3 RAM 2400 MHz and not 1866 MHz. And the performance is higher than that of a R5 2600, in Arma. I've tested my i7-4790K @ 4.8 GHz with same 2400 MHz CL10 DDR3 RAM as Valken against a friend's R5 2600X 4.2 GHz 3600 MHz 14-15-15-28 RAM and it performed worse than my 2014 confing. So... You mean Zen 2 maybe and not Ryzen 2 (2xxx)? Yes, there is a FPS and smoothness difference (in Arma) between Intel 4th gen and Ryzen 3rd gen, where Ryzen 3xxx with some good DDR4 3600-3800 MHz RAM (without CMA AVX2 malloc) is slightly better than Intel 4xxx (with CMA AVX2 malloc), but it's still not worth the price to pay for mainboard + CPU + RAM combo, considering the difference is minimal. Ryzen 4xxx should finally make it worth enough to finally upgrade, even from your i7-7700K.

@oldbear @Valken's current build is more than enough to run A3 at decent enough settings, so he has no problems to wait until next gen of CPUs (and GPUs). If next gen CPUs/GPUs won't be worth to buy because of price/performance vs. current gen, he still can buy current gen CPU/GPU for less $$$.

Buying a CPU with a lot of cores, for gaming, is an option, only to a certain extent. I would say not going past 16 threads, on current architectures, since past 8 cores, inter-core data latency increases with Intel's Ring Bus. Even with 6 cores, ring bus already shows negative effects (vs. 4/8 cores/threads) on inter-core data latency. Intel's Mesh scales a lot better than ring bus, providing more uniform inter-core data latency, but it's much slower than Ring Bus. As you can see here, until 4/8 cores/threads, Intel's Ring Bus is just perfect (inter-core data latency in nanoseconds). Past 4/8 cores/threads, Intel's Ring Bus is not that good anymore, although thanks to monolythic DIE it's still much much better than AMD with its CCXs, CCDs and Infinity Fabric. AMD is a clear looser here. i7-7700K (4/8 cores/threads) Ryzen 3 3300X (4/8 cores/threads) Ryzen 3 3100 (4/8 cores/threads) i7-9750H (6/12 cores/threads) i5-10600K (6/12 cores/threads) Ryzen 5 3600 (6/12 cores/threads) i7-10700K (8/16 cores/threads) Ryzen 9 4900HS (8/16 cores/threads) i9-10900K (10/20 cores/threads) Ryzen 9 3950X (16/32 cores/threads)

Also don't forgt that even if a game can't use all the threads your CPU has, it doesn't mean, they don't indirectly benefit to the game. Since the more threads (to a certain extent) you have, the less there is chance that Windows tasks and other programs will be doing their stuff on same threads that you're running your game on. Windows and other programs don't need to put a lot of load to degrade FPS and especially smoothness. There are really a lot of small processes running, even if not putting significant load on the CPU in general or on particular/several threads. So threads stressed less by other stuff, thus slightly higher FPS , but most importantly better smoothness.

@Valken Here you can see min. FPS still noticeably increases in Death Stranding even past 12 threads, all the way up to 24 threads. And this is because the CPU has only 24 threads. So it maybe can scale even further, provided the CPU has more than 24 threads. And this is only the first of next gen games. So imagine games that are still in developement or not even started. So buying a 12 threads CPU now, thinking that it will last you as long as a 8 threads i7 did is not the right decision*. *(unless buying a CPU with at least 16 threads is financially not an option) Here you can see how smoothly/consistently Death Stranding runs with 12/16 threads, compared to 8 threads. In orange, on the bottom, you can see i9-9900K providing smoothest/most consistent FPS delivery. i9-9900K corresponds to an i7-10700K or Ryzen 7 3700X/3800X/XT in number of threads and in-game smoothness. So 16 threads would be the minimum for me.

@Valken Well, I would advise you to buy 8/16 cores/threads, so you can keep it as long as you have your i7-4790K, thanks to Hyper-Threading. Most of people that have thought they're very clever and bought an i5 with only 4 cores, have already upgraded few years ago to something else and those who haven't, are experiencing a really uncomfortable in-game and applications situations. There are already games that can use more than 16 threads and games that will come with next gen consoles will do same. Death Stranding, released recently, is also very CPU threads hungry. And newer games we haven't seen just yet, will go even further, in near future. So 8/16 cores/threads is a better long term choice.

I wouldn't consider Ryzen 3, like 3300X, at all, since it's still only 4/8 cores/threads, like what you already have with your i7-4790K, just slightly newer. It's not an upgrade, but rather a sidegrade. In Arma there is 0 benefit. You should go to at least 6/12 cores/threads or better 8/16 threads. With your i7-4790K you should wait until the end of the year for Ryzen 4xxx. Ryzen 3xxx are not worth to buy, for Arma. Have reinstalled my i7-4790K 5.0 GHz (1.36V) and it's still a great CPU for Arma. max 77°C 100% load in latest version of Prime95 custom (non-AVX + 4K min&max FFTs in-place) at 25°C room temp. CPU is delidded with liquid metal on DIE, both sides of IHS and on Noctua cooler as well.

@Valken I'm actually using an i7-5775C (128 MB L4 cache) 4.1/3.8 GHz core/cache now on my Z97 board with my 2400 CL10 RAM. I still have my i7-4790K 5.0/4.4 GHz core/cache, but not using it anymore. FPS is slightly higher on i7-5775C and it heats less and consumes less as well (delidded).

@Smart Games specifically for Arma 3, giving it more than 4 cores/threads, won't help you with FPS at all. Don't know if Arma is the main game for you or you play also other games. At 1080p, in Arma 3, a GTX 1660 Super/Ti will deliver max possible FPS, at ultra video settings, provided you have RAM and CPU that aren't limiting. Can't tell you anything about GTX 1660 Super/Ti in other games than Arma. As @oldbear already said, AMD GPUs shouldn't be considered because of numerous problems with drivers that still aren't solved. It's a never ending story. I've also had several generations of ATI/AMD GPUs, always hoping/waiting for real fixes/improvements that never came or something was fixed and other problems appeared. So I switched to nVidia, for a price premium, unfortunately. But at least nVidia always works and even if there is something wrong, it gets quickly fixed. It's actually really unfortunate, since AMD GPUs hardware is very powerful and advanced, especially for the price. But who cares, if it doesn't always work correctly, not always stable/reliable. Also don't forget nVidia's super efficient and good visual quality video codec to record gameplay using the GPU. 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 RAM is actually better than 4400 MHz 19-19-19-39 RAM out of the box, when speaking about combo of frequency and timings. 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 RAM can also be OC 'ed to 4400 MHz with very very tight timings. Anyways, both kits are very good, out of the box. Just keep in mind, that 4400 MHz kit might not boot/work at specified specs, like at all, since for this combo of frequency and timings to work, you would need a better motherboard and a more expensive CPU, like an i7, that has a stronger memory controller than your i3. So I would go with 3600 14-15-15-35 as it will work simply by selecting XMP profil in the BIOS and out of the box, it will give you more FPS than 4400 CL19, that you would need to have better mobo and CPU + also tinker a lot. As conclusion, buy better RAM (if 3200 MHz, nothing with timings higher than 14-14-14-34 and if 3600 MHz, nothing with timings higher than 16-16-16-36), better GPU and keep your current CPU and change the cooler to a Noctua NH-D15S to further OC it or to lower temp and voltage for current frequency. Because no more expensive with more cores/threads CPU will raise the FPS, in A3. So no point in changing it, now. Good RAM, GPU and cooler can always be later transfered to a new CPU and motherboard. We don't know when exactly next Arma will be released, but it certainly and finally will use CPUs more than A3 and thus 4 cores will start to limit, to a certain extent. You also have current gen Intel CPU that's more than enough to deliver highest possible FPS, in A3, provided you have RAM and GPU that aren't limiting anything. So it makes no sense to upgrade from 9th gen Intel with Z390 to 10th gen Intel with Z490. Provided you buy mentioned RAM and GPU, you actually can keep your build until next Arma gets released and see if you need to upgrade anything.

@oldbear actually I'm pretty realistic there. Don't forget his resolution and that he also might be playing other games than Arma at that resolution. You proposed him a GPU (GTX 1660) that would have been better than what he has, but would still have limited him, because of 3200x1800 resolution, even in Arma. Also he wrote about RAM he's planning to buy and the choice was very very good and you told him to buy RAM that would have been once again, slightly better than what he has now, but still would have limited him. Your advises are corrrect, yes, but for 1080p, not 1800p.

In his post with YAAB results you can actually see that his monitor resolution is not 1920x1080, but 3200x1800. It's even higher than 2560x1440 (WQHD), where one needs at least a RTX 2060 Super with 8 GB vRAM for good FPS at visually pleasant video settings, not even talking about his 3200x1800 resolution. And a GTX 1660 is something like a GTX 1070 (in this chart), but with less vRAM and just slightly less powerful. And this chart is only for 1440p. At 1800p performance difference is even bigger. In his last post (before your last post), you can see that he selected 3600 14-15-15 RAM and you recommend him 3200 CL16... @Smart Games between your 2666 MHz RAM and some decent 3600 16-16-16-36 or RAM with even lower timings, real in-game performance difference is big enough for you to feel it, even without FPS counter. RAM with higher frequency and lower timings unleashes the CPU and the CPU unleashes the GPU in his turn, especially in CPU limit, per core or all cores, in games like Arma, Squad or Tarkov. With something like 3600 16-16-16-36, min. FPS is higher and FPS dips are less frequent, thus FPS in general is more stable and the game feels much smoother to the eyes. 3600 MHz 14-15-15 RAM is a very good choice, as it has the best out of the box performance one can currently buy, but I think it's not worth the price premium over some good 3600 MHz 15-15-15-35 (G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C15D-16GTZ) or 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 (G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-16GTZR / F4-3600C16D-16GTZKW / F4-3600C16D-16GTZ), considering a too small real in-game performance difference. Your RX570 is limiting you even more than your 2666 MHz RAM, at your 3200x1800 resolution. Since even at 2560x1440 its performance (in Arma) is not the best, at decent video settings. With your 3200x1800 resolution, for Arma, I wouldn't buy anything less powerful than a RTX 2060 Super (8 GB vRAM). For much more graphics intensive games than Arma, a RTX 2060 Super, considering your monitor resolution, might not even be enough to play at decent FPS at decent graphic settings.

@oldbear I don't know where you have found 400W consumption, since It's lower than 200W (in games) when manually OC'ed to 5.1 GHz all cores. Stock 4.7 GHz boost all cores is slightly over 100W (in games). But yes, a good 240/280 AiO is needed. Hope people will keep their eyes wide open and will know that there is i5-10600K (6/12 C/T) and i7-10700K (8/16 C/T) for same price (in Germany) as i5-9600K (6/6 C/T) or i7-9700K (8/8 C/T) and won't buy 9th gen CPUs. Because there are really a lot of people not following closely what's happening in tech world and don't even know that 10th gen is already released and available.

@Zagger49 I just checked, out of curiosity, and I see that i7-10700K (equals to an i9-9900K) is sold for same price as i7-9700K (in Germany), but has 16 threads and not just 8 + better memory controller and is somewhat cooler than an i9-9900K. You just need to buy a Z490 board instead of Z390. I see no reason to buy a CPU (i7-9700K) with less threads and that heats more, for the same price (in Germany). @oldbear a Ryzen 7 3800X costs just 25€ more than a 3700X (in Germany).

I'm sure that with Ryzen 4xxx, by the end of this year, 3600 MHz CL16 RAM will be the new standard, like 3200 MHz RAM is now. Don't forget that once new consoles will be released, we will see next gen games with much better quality textures, much more 3D objects and of much better quality, larger worlds and a lot of different new graphic technics. All of this will be really heavy on RAM bandwidth and on SSD.

@Zagger49 almost everything is more than fine, but if I were you, I wouldn't buy this Corsair 3200 MHz 16-18-18-36 RAM and go instead for 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 RAM, namely G.Skill Trident Z or Trident Z Neo. This way you can better unleash your CPU and GPU power as it won't be held back that much by slow RAM. It's a good mix of bandwidth and timings, for still acceptable price. And you're sure to have good memory chips to further reduce stock timings or leave them as is, but increase frequency to like 3800 MHz, bumping up slightly the voltage, if you will ever wish to squeeze out more performance out of it, easily. Make sure to not buy 3600 MHz 16-19-19-39 instead of 16-16-16-36. So don't look at it just having CL16, but check all the latencies. Avoid buying anything higher than 16-16-16-36 for 3600 MHz RAM freqency. 3600 MHz RAM with timings like 16-19-19-39, 17-19-19-39 or 18-22-22-42 shouldn't even be considered. G.Skill Trident Z RGB (F4-3600C16D-16GTZR) G.Skill Trident Z Neo (F4-3600C16D-16GTZN) G.Skill Trident Z black/white (F4-3600C16D-16GTZKW) G.Skill Trident Z silver/red (F4-3600C16D-16GTZ) It's same RAM (3600 MHz 16-16-16-36), just different colors and RGB or no RGB.

How have you tried to run this specific malloc and at the same time ask for direct link to download? Are you sure it's the same, the one you tried? Also I wouldn't say that large pages activated in A3 launcher work, since enabling them or not, performance is same. But don't worry, you "don't need this", since you only have Window 10 Home and you would need Pro for this to work, in order to activate large pages in Windows itself.

Still relevant: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T152276 - Fix/prevent helicopters from force-exploding when they fall/lay on the side good example of it being possible and this is the way it should be, if the helicopter overall/ hull is not dammeged or not dammaged enough to explode https://feedback.bistudio.com/T150535 - setViewDistance doesn't override overall visibility in video settings for guided rockets/missiles https://feedback.bistudio.com/T148411 - List of vehicles with commander turret not returned back by AI to vehicle's direction, when player switches to another seat https://feedback.bistudio.com/T148556 - List of vehicles with wheels sinking into the ground (locally) https://feedback.bistudio.com/T152270 - Offroad (Repair) shines in bluish tint, no matter what cammo selected (wheels included) vs. regular offroads https://feedback.bistudio.com/T152272 - A-149 Gryphon jet when different parts of it are dammaged, change color and have holes unlike the rest of the jet or other jets

9900K stock boost all cores 4.7/4.3 GHz + stock RAM 3600 16-16-16-36 i9-9900K (8C/16T) @ 4.7/4.3 GHz core/cache | 16 GB DDR4 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36-631-2T (single rank) | RTX 2080 Ti 66.9 FPS 1080p standard YAAB i7-9700K (8C/8T) @ 5.1/4.8 GHz core/cache | 16 GB DDR4 4000 MHz 15-14-15-28-360-2T (single rank) | GTX 1060 3 GB 73 FPS 1080p standard YAAB i7-9700K (8C/8T) @ 5.1/4.8 GHz core/cache | 16 GB DDR4 4000 MHz 15-14-15-28-360-2T (single rank) | GTX 1060 3 GB + CMA AVX2 84.5 FPS 1080p standard YAAB Stock i7-9700K is only 100 MHz slower than i9-9900K.

Well, I've mentioned core and cache frequency. One can always check CPU specs on Intel site. There is no reason to not OC a CPU for additional performance for free. At stock, turbo all cores is only 4.6 GHz. YAAB was also run at standard, as I've stated as well. There is also no point in not squeezing out performance for free, like when using CMA AVX2 malloc. With only 6 cores (aka i5-9600K), results are same. Without CMA AVX2 and without Windows large pages, avg. FPS is 10 FPS lower, around 72-73. There were already results here from stock CPUs and RAM. But it's not interesting at all. It's interesting to see what one can achieve in Arma by OCing CPU and RAM. So one can buy an i5-9600K or better an i5-10600K + 16 GB DDR4 3200 14-14-14 for acceptable price and make Arma fly. There will be refreshes of Ryzen 3xxx with higher clocks, but RAM and intercore latencies won't be lower than 63-65 in best case scenario with max RAM OC to like 3800 MHz 15-14-15. So until Ryzen 4xxx, Intel will remain the king, in Arma. And an i5-10600K is really not a bad buy, with 12 threads + good OC potential + very strong memory controller.

9x YAAB 1.0 standard 1080p i7-9700K (R0 Stepping) 5.1/4.8 GHz core/cache 1.35V (under load) @ Arctic Lquid Freezer II 280 mm (not delidded) 2x8 GB Trident Z 3200 CL14 @ 4000 15-14-15-28-360-2T 1.5 V max 35°C (under Load) @ 80 mm 5V fan GTX 1060 3 GB Fast sync in nVidia control pannel CMA malloc AVX2 Real time arma3_x64.exe priority sceneComplexity=600.000; (standard) PC is not mine, but I've helped to build it and could test it in A3 YAAB myself

And if the 3600X is not much more expensive where you live, I would rather get it instead of 3600, since 4.4 GHz is better for Arma and especially for Tarkov and Squad. 3600 can boost only up to 4.2 GHz and manually overclocking Ryzens often results in worse performance than when running on Auto (stock), despite higher than stock frequency.

@123golden I would go for R5 3600 and 16 GB G.Skill Flare X 3200 CL14. Especially Tarkov is very very heavy on RAM banwidth and timings. In $200 class, MSI MAG X570 Tomahawk WiFi has dethroned Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite and Asus TUF Gaming X570-Plus 🙂 It beats even most high end boards in CPU power delivery components thermals and has both M.2 SSD slots passively cooled by an aluminum plate. It even has Wi-Fi 6 (802,11ax) and Bluetooth 5.1 from Intel, 2.5G LAN port from Realtek (instead of just 1G) and also USB BIOS flash button to update the BIOS even without CPU, RAM and GPU installed. To have both M.2 SSD slots passively cooled as well, but from Gigabyte, you would have to go for X570 Aorus Pro (Aorus Elite has only 1 M.2 slot passively cooled), but it's no longer the champion 🙂 Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD65w5RVmtY&feature=youtu.be&t=337 Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro is the best B450 board with 2 M.2 SSD slot passively cooled and good onboard sound with amplifier for higher ohms good quality headphones. For the GPU it depends whether 1920x1080 or 2560x1440 monitor resolution, since Squad and Tarkov are very GPU heavy. 5700 (XT) have really excellent power for $$$, but AMD drivers still aren't as optimized as nVidia and streaming/recording gameplay via GPU is a pain in the ass on AMD with Relive. You shouldn't go lower than 5700 or RTX 2060 Super and lower than 8 GB vRAM. Considering you also need a monitor, I hope you keep your current PSU, HDD/SSD and case. Otherwise, building a new PC with good performance that you won't need to upgrade again any time soon won't be possible. Because going for only 3200 MHz 16-18-18 RAM instead of 3200 MHz 14-14-14 and RX 590/GTX 1660 Ti, you would have to lower graphic settings in Squad and especially in Tarkov right from the start. Not even speaking from what your experience would be in few years with such PC. If you choose to buy only a B450 chipset mainboard (instead of X570 chipset), you won't be able to upgrade later to a better (second hand used) CPU, like upcoming Ryzen 4xxx. Only X570 and B550 chipset boards will support Ryzen 4xxx. B550 chipset boards will be released in June. This is what I would get, if you can wait 1 month? Otherwise X570 chipset board - namely MSI MAG X570 Tomahawk WiFi.

@123goldenI would wait until Ryzen 4xxx release, if you can support/accept your current PC performance until then. I think Ryzen 4xxx will be announced/showed/released in September. The performance gains vs. Ryzen 3xxx, in Arma, would be worth the wait 100%.

Yes! The i5-10600K not only will have 12 threads and be soldered, but it also will have the same DIE size as the i9-10900K, which is slightly bigger than the DIE of i7-8700K (also 12 threads from 2017) + the DIE will also be lower/thinner. All of this will result in lower temps (also vs. i7-8700K) and also 4.8 GHz stock is what Arma will like for sure.

I think the i5-10600K (6/12 cores/threads) will be very interesting*, despite its somewhat higher price than R5 3600 (X), since 12 threads are not that difficult to cool + it's soldered (no rockhard thermalpaste) + you can OC it to >4.8 GHz for extra % in single core and also >3600 MHz RAM with very tight timings is a thing, despite all the security vulnerabilities. *If you need to upgrade before Ryzen 4xxx.