Clarksdale i5-670 processor and FSX????

[Major_Spittle]

I will be building a new system soon. I currently run a Q9450 (3.7ghz), 4 gigs of DDR2 1066, ATI 4890, on a Win 7 64bit system.

Due to where I work my upgrade options are:

A: i5 750 for $100
B: i5 650, 660, or 670 for free
C: Wait 3-6 months and get an Gulftown 6 core processor free
D: i7 920 for $145

I do Over Clock my processors heavy on Air and figure I could get 4.6-5.0 Ghz out of an i5 670 but can't find any info on what kind of performance that would give me in FSX. I have a feeling that might give me the best performance though.

Has anyone ran FSX on an Overclocked i5 dual core processor or a Gulftown?

Has anyone ever used the Affinity command in the .cfg to see the difference that 2 vs 4 cores has on FSX? Perhaps I should set Affinity to use only 2 cores of my current Quad and see what it benches at at different speeds vs using all 4 cores? Heck, if I only use cores 3 and 4 to run FSX I could probably Overclock my current processor to 4 Ghz due to the lack of heat and it might be faster.

Any way, does anyone have any input on the Clarksdale/Gulftown processors or what would be my best option?

[Wally-Bob]

Major_Spittle,

Seeing no reply to your questions after a week I’ll throw in my 2¢ worth, albeit I wish I could speak from experience regarding your questions.

Performance wise, FSX is largely processor bounded. By reducing the affinity mask from 4 to 2 on your Q9450 you have reduced the processing power by 50%. Going from 3.7 -> 4.0 GHz and only adds back 8% to your performance. These calculator generated numbers do not account for system inefficiencies such as buss latencies, RAM & VRAM bandwidth bottlenecks, etc. I predict significantly less performance with this change. Please report back on your findings with this experiment.

My gut feel is a Gulftown 6 core processor will be the best choice. This is where I am leaning for my next build in 9 months. We hope to hear from you regarding your experience with the 6 core in 3-6 months.

Wally-Bob :USA-flag:

[harleyman]

I missed this alltogether...sorry.


If it were me..i would forget the i5 for now...

Use the i7 or and wait for then next core Gulftown...



But..that also means other expencises like new memory and maybe heatsinks too for the 1336...



What I dont know is what board the Gulftown will run on..I am not 100% sure but I don't think its that X58..So that means new mem again if you use the i7 now.....

Might get costly....

[Major_Spittle]

Yeah, that is the problem. If I get the i5 670 now and it doesn't work well I could alway throw an i5 750 Quad in the Motherboard (1156) and it will be about as good as anything out at the moment.

If I get an i7 920 now I could upgrade to the i7 985(I believe this is what gulftown will release as) and not have to change MB or anything (x58). The Gulftown is 32nm and supposed to Overclock like the i5 670 processors 4.4-5.0ish on air.

The problem is, does more that 2 cores really effect frame rate in FSX much if any??? I know it loads all my cores up, but seems like processor frequency does much more for frame rate in reality.

I haven't had time to test any of my theorys due to my video card burning up last week and being on RMA. Will mess with it when my card gets back and set up a default flight.

[harleyman]

The problem is, does more that 2 cores really effect frame rate in FSX much if any??? I know it loads all my cores up, but seems like processor frequency does much more for frame rate in reality.

.



Not really..

With a regular quad , the second two cores help with load and texture rendering...IT DOES not really help frames..that is why the older socket 775 still runs FSX great..just cant quite keep up with EXTREME texture addons.......

[txnetcop]

Well I will add my two cents since I have tested all the i5 and i7 Core processors and all but four of the motherboards for both processors. For a budget core the i5 750 is a real bargain powerhouse that is easy to overclock, cost is about the same as a 775 unit and allows for more expansion than a current 775 setup. The core i5 750 overclocked to 3.8 GHz with the MSI Platinum P55 board tested faster in almost all games than the fastest 775 socket core 2 quad extreme processors and costs less.

The six cores that are coming will make little difference except in games that are programmed to take advantage of every core possible, FSX is not currently one of those, nor will it probably ever be. The better 1156 socket core i7 860 Oc'd to 4.13 was a screamer with FSX and every game tested on it and it was tested on a Gigabyte p55 UD7. The 870 will be tested this week and next week on games I will try to include FSX. The overclocked i7 860 socket 1156 is a great upgrade for the i5 750 on the same motherboard. So if money is the issue, the i5 750 is a decent upgrade from the 775. I would not waste money on a 775 build for any reason at this time with cost of entry level Core i5 and Core i7 prices being so cheap and yet powerful.

I personally still like the i7( D0 stepping) 920 or a 930 because my upgrade options are better. Microcenter.com is selling the i7 920 D0 for $199.00 which is hard to beat. Maybe there is a cheaper option i7920 for you Major I would look around some more and see what bargains are available for the i7 1366 socket CPUs. However, considering budgets, again there is nothing wrong with the 1156 socket i5Core 750 for gaming and with the i7860 1156 option to upgrade to quite a bargain for future upgrade.

http://www.techspot.com/review/193-intel-core-i5-750/

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_i7_core_i5_lynnfield_performance/

Ted

[Major_Spittle]

Ted- did you guys test the i5 650,660,661 or 670? Been hearing that they can hit 4.6-5.0ghz on air.

[txnetcop]

Yep and the results were not that great compared to the i5-750 and i7-860. David Ramsey has a good article on the new Clarksdale Core i5. We are not allowed to publish our findings in detail but his article in Benchmark Reviews follows very closely to our own findings:

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=464&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=9

I am aware that the Clarksdale CPUs are touted as an" also gaming chip", but honestly for a little more money you can do much better with i5-750 and above. Overclocked to the 1.4 volt recommeded to hit over 4.1ghz will likely damage the CPU although admittedly, very slowly. But you are dealing with fewer transistors, less bandwidth, and the risk of losing your processor to internal damage not to mention the possibility of damaging your motherboard and memory as well.

Look, Major I am in to OCing, always have been, but some OC's aren't worth the effort if it costs you in the end. I wish I could publish our results but that would break our contract with the mfgs., and end my employment at TechCorp.

True I did not test FSX on either of the Clarksdale cores. I have seen the stats posted by some review boards touting the Clarksdale CPU as a great budget gamer, and I really don't believe what I see, because we test very thoroughly and publish to the mfg our results-Clarksdale did not come out that great. Why start out so low on the power side when for a little more money you can have better results with the Core 15 750 and above or i7 920 and above 1156 and 1366 socket CPUs? I am not saying these Clarksdale processors will not run FSX, heck I can run FSX on an old Athlon x2 64 with a decent motherboard and memory, but again ask yourself if the money spent offers you enough upgrade capability. Also what about future gaming? Each new game that comes out really tests the CPU and GPU capability.

Ted

[Major_Spittle]

Thanks Ted, but I think we are talking about two different things here.

I don't plan on using the iGPU on the 670, it would be disabled. Price is not an issue because I would be getting it for free.

It is really frustrating not being able to find any performance benchmarks on the processor, but from everything I have read the processors seem ok @ a 175 clock with a rather small voltage bump. 175 X 27 would give about 4.7ghz. The i5 750s seem to clock to about 4.1ghz from what I have seen. I could always change out to a i5 750 if the 670 doesn't give me good FSX performance, but not sure what I would gain ( 1-3 FPS maybe ) when the system is really loaded??? I am sure either processor is better for FSX than my current Q9450 @ 3.6.

Too bad nobody has tried one yet for FSX. I know people are having great results running the i5 530/540 processors in gaming rigs. Most games don't use more than 2 cores, so running these DDR3 cores @ 4.3 beats out the socket 775 cpus in about everything and they only cost $100 or so.

I will wait and see the Gulftown benchmarks in FSX before deciding now. 6 cores is such overkill, imo, so I won't be willing to spend much more to make a Gulftown system.

[txnetcop]

Hey Major I see what you are getting at...the problem is that TechCorp and other reviewers don't use FSX as a benchmark for various reasons. Sorry I could not be of more help.
Ted

[harleyman]

My hero......................... Thanks for all that knowledge Ted....:applause:

[txnetcop]

de nada Amigo
Ted

[Wally-Bob]

I agree with Harleyman who said it very well regarding texture loading and rendering. I might also add in mesh terrain.

The way I see it is (again – right or wrong, don’t know) the clock frequency on Core 1 determines the frame rate ceiling - the simulation rate. I’ll call this quantity. The additional cores give you the ability to load all the eye candy enhancements – rendering capacity - without drastically over crowding the simulating demands residing only on the first core. I’ll call this quality.

So with your proposed experiment, I believe you will achieve higher FPS using only 2 cores with an increased over clock ONLY IF you significantly back off on your rendering demands. Yes I believe you will attain a slightly higher quantity but will see a dramatic loss of quality. You won’t have it both ways.

Again, my conjecture here. Your experimental results will be factual. As Ted said, nobody is benchmarking with FSX anymore. So that leaves it up to us in this forum to help fill in that void.

Ted – Please Help!

I hope you have not broken my heart about the Gulftown but I seem to remember a much larger number than 4 cores can be used. I dove into my archives and found this part of Phil Taylor’s blog from 15 MAY 2007:

“As far as practical limits on number of usable cores; currently SetThreadAffinityMask only allows explicit scheduling of threads on 32 cores ( the mask is a dword ) on Win32. So thats our effective limit on number of cores. But as soon as there is a way to explicitly schedule them, we can handle 256 cores.”

It looks like setting the AffinityMask=63 (Binary=111111) would use all six cores. Please double check on this and get back with us to verify I am understanding all of this correctly. Maybe I’m misunderstanding your statement. I do agree additional cores will at best increase FPS only slightly, but will significantly both reduce stutters and postpone the blurries.

Wally-Bob :USA-flag:

[NoNewMessages]

First, Greets out to Wally-Bob, my bestest customer! :wavey:

Hope my work didn't "mesh" up your computer... I might send a couple of screenies your way next week and see if you like or not?:salute:

Second, my head hurts from browsing Newegg. i3, i5, i6, i7, i9, WTH? Ram speeds that mean nothing to me. Geez, things sure have gotten so complex from a few years ago. I *might* be looking for hardware in a month or so?? I'll come groveling for some good information, but to me it's not about FPS. I'm more looking to take a file from a HD, process it and get it back to the HD as a BGL file in the least amount of time. Does Intel make a P4 at 8ghz yet?

[Major_Spittle]

Well, I ended up ordering parts for my new system today.

ASRock X58 Extreme
6 Gigs of 1600 DDR3
i7 920 (hopefully will be getting an i7 980X soon)

In the end it came down to upgrade path and the fact that Ted wasn't very impressed with the Clarksdale. If I do get the Gulftown through work it should clock similar to the Clarksdale ( same thing just 3 of them in a row on a die ).

To finish off my system I got 3 SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD502HJ 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache HDDs that are short stroked in Raid 0 (320GB) for OS/FSX and Raid 5 data (1TB).
Will still be using my ATI 4890 video card in my new system.

Anyone have a similar system? What should I expect?

[txnetcop]

Well, I ended up ordering parts for my new system today.

ASRock X58 Extreme
6 Gigs of 1600 DDR3
i7 920 (hopefully will be getting an i7 980X soon)

In the end it came down to upgrade path and the fact that Ted wasn't very impressed with the Clarksdale. If I do get the Gulftown through work it should clock similar to the Clarksdale ( same thing just 3 of them in a row on a die ).

To finish off my system I got 3 SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD502HJ 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache HDDs that are short stroked in Raid 0 (320GB) for OS/FSX and Raid 5 data (1TB).
Will still be using my ATI 4890 video card in my new system.

Anyone have a similar system? What should I expect?

Go to Nick N's site and follow his setup for the i7Core system for FSX
Besides, Major now you have a very nice upgrade path for a few years to come! Enjoy Amigo
Ted