New FSX CPU Performance Charts

[codeseven]

Dont know if this has already been posted, check it out.

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTY0NCw3LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==



Codeseven

[Panther_99FS]

'Fascinating'......:)

[txnetcop]

Honestly that looks like a pretty poor attempt at setting up FSX properly to me and I would love to know what exact configuration they used in their systems because it looks like a bad case of bottlenecking. IMHO
Ted

[dharris]

I agree, settings are not ideal, need to be change these in order to better test came play.

[harleyman]

Thats really wild..How many game at that resolution anyways?

Truth be known my little $410.00 box beats all their chart scores with no tweaking at all..

I hold 35 frames full FEX weather and traffic settings MUCH higher than theirs..

All on a E5200 OCed to 3.4 and a 3850 ATI card...:running:

[Dangerous Beans]

harlyman, sorry to go OT but do you have a link to the thread with the specs of your budget box ? I cant find it now.
A friend has been asking about building a cheap box for FSX.

[Brett_Henderson]

It confirms what I've known for a while. The i7 is not a cost effective CPU.

I've got a Q9550 running at 3.8ghz, effortlessly and cool (never gets above 65C).

Sure, an i7 940 can be clocked to run FSX just a tad better, but not nearly in proportion to the cost difference.

[Panther_99FS]

It confirms what I've known for a while. The i7 is not a cost effective CPU.



How does the i7 perform with other games?

Remember, FSX didn't initially utilize multi-core CPU's either....Until a Service Pack was released...

[Brett_Henderson]

How does the i7 perform with other games?

Remember, FSX didn't initially utilize multi-core CPU's either....Until a Service Pack was released...

Good question, and point. But I can't imagine the performance difference doesn't span most games.

FSX is unique though, in its CPU hunger.. CPU speed and cache-size are what matter first.. then comes the v-card's capability.. and finally the chipset and memory configuration. Any one of those can be a bottle-neck.

The 45nm quads (like a Q9550) have gobs of cahce and can be clocked up near 4ghz.

i7-940 = $560
Q9550 = $270

When you add in motherboards and DDR3 RAM (for the i7), you're spending about twice as much for an i7, and the performance is only slightly better.

[N2056]

Guys, I can attest to the performance of Harlyman's little rig. Mine came in at $502 after I added in a 530W power supply, and I got XP instead of Vista. I have yet to mess with overclocking, and frankly it is running so well right now that I have no need to do so at this time! I tried using my old FS9 SoCal Megascenery (which I hardly ever used before as it never worked well), and it ran so good that today I went out and got the FSX hi-res version. It ran great! It looked great! You have no idea what this little rig has done to change my FS world. I can now fly over the area where I live with a visual quality that is truly amazing. I have not even looked at framerates yet...it is working so well I have not felt the need to!

392393394395

[txnetcop]

Robert did you use the same ATI video card to keep the price low? And yes that little rascal is sweet the fsb on that thing is dang near perfect.
Ted

[N2056]

Ted, I followed the "recipe" dead on except for the power supply & OS. Can't say enough how happy I am with it so far! :jump:

[Major_Spittle]

Something to make you go hmmmmm

The Q9650 has 12mb of level 2 cache vs i7 940's 8mb of level 3 cache.

Sure the Q9650 has an external memory controller, but when overclocking to FSB speeds of 1600-1800 it has more bandwidth than it knows what to do with and the memory controller is feeding two separate dual core CPUs that each share a 6mb cache. Doing something repeatitive like textures may just be faster on the older cpu due to the way the cache memory is set up on the Core 2 Quad.

[harleyman]

Hey Robert...I'm so glad to hear that all your experiences with this little monster are all positive..:applause:

I am just loving mine, and hardly ever fly my big box any more.....I have all but :running: away from it for gaming.....LOL

[txnetcop]

For all you guys that may be feeling panicky over the fact that this little beast seems to work better than your Q9550/Q9650/E8600. It doesn't in the strictest since of the word as you can raise your level of detail and texture higher, but this little system runs FSX very smooth and at fairly high frame rates but at a little lower detail. For a less than $700 machine it is hard to beat. Besides, with so much processor transition going on the i7 core going to the D0 stepping (which is great by the way) this system is a great alternative and fully upgradeable.
Ted

[harleyman]

Hey Ted... I just ran a test to compare my system over a full blown build...

Here are the results...

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=16953