NZFF

100% ad-free
https://www.nzff.org/

For those who want EXCELLENT FPS in FSX

https://www.nzff.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14976

Page 1 of 2

PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:26 pm
by Kelvinr
Hi all,

Ok, I have never really invested much effort writing something proactively in the forum, but, there's always a first ey?

The reason I am posting is due to my need to let everyone know that there actually is a pc that can run FSX at respectable frame rates CONSISTENTLY. I was reluctant to go ahead with the acquisition but as I scoured the internet for reviews on the new chip I was investigating, I saw over and over that this new generation chip had something to offer. The decision was clear. The major components contributing to my smooth experience is:

Core i7 1155 2600k 3.4Ghz
8GB Kingston 1600MHZ (2x 4GB) Dual channel.
OCZ Vertex 2 180GB SSD
EVGA GTX 570 1.2GB

The major change I believe has been the i7 2600k. Below is the Windows Experience Index to prove that this is a high performing spec PC.



If you truelly want a pc to do the job this will definately do it. I will give you my little finger if it doesn't do what i'm saying it will do. you WILL notice a difference. (thinking to self) Now, where do I go to change my system specs signature?

PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:43 pm
by deeknow
Good to see you've got a solid rig there Kelvin. If anyone is researching their own setup do check out the avsim forum post following where they summarise results of a benchmarking tool against various CPU/GPU/memory arrangements in FSX:
http://forum.avsim.net/topic/329116-fsxmark11/

The interesting thing to me is that the i5/2500 performance is super-close to the i7, so if you wanna save a couple of hundred $$$ that could be the CPU to go for. Looks like most of those are overclocked but even so theres some good data there. Kelvin, you should run the test on your rig and let us know how it compares

PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2011 6:03 pm
by Adamski
Thanks for that, you two ... I was wondering what I could waste my money on next (just to annoy HER laugh.gif) ... this will help winkyy.gif

PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2011 6:45 pm
by Kelvinr
deeknow wrote:
QUOTE (deeknow @ Jun 11 2011,5:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Good to see you've got a solid rig there Kelvin. If anyone is researching their own setup do check out the avsim forum post following where they summarise results of a benchmarking tool against various CPU/GPU/memory arrangements in FSX:
http://forum.avsim.net/topic/329116-fsxmark11/

The interesting thing to me is that the i5/2500 performance is super-close to the i7, so if you wanna save a couple of hundred $$$ that could be the CPU to go for. Looks like most of those are overclocked but even so theres some good data there. Kelvin, you should run the test on your rig and let us know how it compares


I'll take a look and report back...

PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:32 pm
by Dontcopy
I am an Intel fanboy and I will forever own Intel.
But I strongly recommend if your going to build a new PC, wait.... AMD's FX Zambezi chips are to be released within the next few weeks.
They are 8 cores and rumoured to be a stock frequency of 3.8Ghz, and should easily chew through FSX.

Sorry Kelvin, i'm not trying to steal your thread

PostPosted: Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:55 pm
by Kelvinr
Dontcopy wrote:
QUOTE (Dontcopy @ Jun 11 2011,8:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I am an Intel fanboy and I will forever own Intel.
But I strongly recommend if your going to build a new PC, wait.... AMD's FX Zambezi chips are to be released within the next few weeks.
They are 8 cores and rumoured to be a stock frequency of 3.8Ghz, and should easily chew through FSX.

Sorry Kelvin, i'm not trying to steal your thread


That's the purpose isn't it? I'm glad it's got people commenting!

PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2011 9:39 am
by Dontcopy
What HD do you have FSX on?

PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2011 10:57 am
by Kelvinr
Dontcopy wrote:
QUOTE (Dontcopy @ Jun 12 2011,9:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What HD do you have FSX on?


I run OS and FSX on my OCZ Vertex 2 180GB.

PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:04 am
by Kelvinr
... I also must add that one would think that the socket 1366 i7 with triple channel memory would outperform the socket 1155 with dual channel memory but with not only the benchmarks i have seen from reviews and running my own from that i am confident to say that the first generation i7 can go back to its resting place or a good home for someone wanting a higher spec PC. It's a pity though that the technology embedded in the 1155 2600k is not seen in the i7 9XX range. Perhaps this is to come.

PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2011 4:03 pm
by AndrewJamez
Kelvinr wrote:
QUOTE (Kelvinr @ Jun 12 2011,11:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
... I also must add that one would think that the socket 1366 i7 with triple channel memory would outperform the socket 1155 with dual channel memory but with not only the benchmarks i have seen from reviews and running my own from that i am confident to say that the first generation i7 can go back to its resting place. It's a pity though that the technology embedded in the 1155 2600k is not seen in the i7 9XX range. Perhaps this is to come.


Yep the new Gen i7's kill the older 1366 9XX series cpu's. Orbx posted that there i7 2XXX series laptop ran fsx smoother the John venemars legendary 1366 desktop. Dont worry, Intel's next series of cpu's wil be a direct replacement for the 1366 hardware. The new chipset will be named 1355 which will sport a quad channel ram setup. Along with 3 new cpu's, 2 new unlocked 6 core cpu's which will require a mortgage and one locked quad core cpu. I will personaly not even look at this new chipste as an upgrade option as the price will be prohibetivly high but I am sure they will take the crown for the king of cpu's.
Does anyone know what amd's new cpu's will be priced like?

PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2011 4:09 pm
by Dontcopy
QUOTE
Does anyone know what amd's new cpu's will be priced like?[/quote]
At the moment its looking like similar to the Phenom X6 when it was first released, so about $400-500 would be a good guess.
Ivy bridge will be what my next CPU/MB will be, i'm hoping that AMD will drive the price of them down cause' they won't be cheap!

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 9:59 am
by morrisman1
My system is just over a year old now and its starting to feel old sad.gif

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 11:07 am
by creator2003
I looked at my score after this and the only thing slowing it down is a good fast hard drive from the looks of it ,this is somewhat a old X6 core amd and the cheapest lower core set at 2.8ghz ,if i had a fast HD id be getting a pretty high score 7.3 -7.4 outta only 7.9 which is not bad for a $1200 pc ,though even with a 5.9 score i still dont have any problems running fsx on this rig ,i was hardcore intel once probably go back to it too if i had the extra $$ to pay for the same thing almost same performance ..



graphic card is hd5750 i think and is very low end cheap which still runs all the highend flp games ,the ram was even cheaper brand and hasent caused any issues ,i mean how much better does it need to be i can run everything i chuck at it now .

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:47 pm
by Kelvinr
creator2003 wrote:
QUOTE (creator2003 @ Jun 14 2011,11:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I looked at my score after this and the only thing slowing it down is a good fast hard drive from the looks of it ,this is somewhat a old X6 core amd and the cheapest lower core set at 2.8ghz ,if i had a fast HD id be getting a pretty high score 7.3 -7.4 outta only 7.9 which is not bad for a $1200 pc ,though even with a 5.9 score i still dont have any problems running fsx on this rig ,i was hardcore intel once probably go back to it too if i had the extra $$ to pay for the same thing almost same performance ..



graphic card is hd5750 i think and is very low end cheap which still runs all the highend flp games ,the ram was even cheaper brand and hasent caused any issues ,i mean how much better does it need to be i can run everything i chuck at it now .


Not sure how the Phenom behaves with FSX but definitely the Intel 2600k Sandy Bridge improves performance big time. pmdg and even pic 737 which both have a tendency to hog resources seem to run extremely smoothly for me. I see the bottle neck for you is HDD performance but even though I have an SSD I have seen little performance increases except with loading times not in-game.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 5:39 pm
by Dontcopy


^My PC... But FSX isnt installed on that HD, its on a much faster Velociraptor.
Video card is to be replaced with a GTX 560 ti in August and an SSD end of year...

Full System spec available here : http://3dmark.com/3dm11/1376407;jsessionid...WmfETu8qh4vPNup

PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:10 am
by AndrewJamez
This test is pointless to accertain whether yuor PC will run FSX well or not. It seems all of us with mid ot high level modern machines are getting mid 7's (except for the obvious HD "5.9" speed) out of a possible 7.9. ANY pc no matter how awsome can be ground to a hault by FSX if you are prepared to tweak the cfg file for xtra awsomeness - Tweaking it for FSX's max autogen settings and LOD levels will soon take care off that.

And running an SSD drive probably wont change FPS but you should should see a reduction in ground texture loading time.

My i7 870 feels old as well, am half way preparing to upgrade to a 2600K and probably a GTX 560Ti.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 3:43 pm
by cowpatz
What selection of MOBO's are you running the I&-2600K's on?
I hear that the ASUS P8P67 has an issue with waking from sleep mode. has this been rectified?

PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 4:23 pm
by Dontcopy
QUOTE
My i7 870 feels old as well, am half way preparing to upgrade to a 2600K and probably a GTX 560Ti[/quote]
Well it's not really the weak link in my computer and its not really that old. I dont think it would be a great idea going from an i7 870 to a 2600k I doubt you will see much (if any) boost in performance.. I think it would be best to wait until Ivy.. But yes a 560ti is a good choice and is approx 55% faster than my 5770.

I will be Overclocking my i7 later to prob around 3.7Ghz

Also it might not be a bad idea to wait for Ivy, as PCIE 3 and DDR4 are expected soon.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 7:36 pm
by Kelvinr
AndrewJamez wrote:
QUOTE (AndrewJamez @ Jun 15 2011,9:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This test is pointless to accertain whether yuor PC will run FSX well or not. It seems all of us with mid ot high level modern machines are getting mid 7's (except for the obvious HD "5.9" speed) out of a possible 7.9. ANY pc no matter how awsome can be ground to a hault by FSX if you are prepared to tweak the cfg file for xtra awsomeness - Tweaking it for FSX's max autogen settings and LOD levels will soon take care off that.

And running an SSD drive probably wont change FPS but you should should see a reduction in ground texture loading time.

My i7 870 feels old as well, am half way preparing to upgrade to a 2600K and probably a GTX 560Ti.


I run the gtx 570 so with your (new) 2600k and gtx 560 you should see a marked improvement. I do agree with your statement about the SSD, the loading times of the textures have improved upon re-taking some flights.

Dontcopy wrote:
QUOTE (Dontcopy @ Jun 15 2011,4:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well it's not really the weak link in my computer and its not really that old. I dont think it would be a great idea going from an i7 870 to a 2600k I doubt you will see much (if any) boost in performance.. I think it would be best to wait until Ivy.. But yes a 560ti is a good choice and is approx 55% faster than my 5770.

I will be Overclocking my i7 later to prob around 3.7Ghz

Also it might not be a bad idea to wait for Ivy, as PCIE 3 and DDR4 are expected soon.


there will be a guaranteed improvement with 2600k. i'm a hard person to convince without seeing for myself, I have, and I believe.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:16 pm
by Kelvinr
cowpatz wrote:
QUOTE (cowpatz @ Jun 15 2011,3:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What selection of MOBO's are you running the I&-2600K's on?
I hear that the ASUS P8P67 has an issue with waking from sleep mode. has this been rectified?


MSI P67 C43 here and no bugs detected.
All times are UTC + 12 hours
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/