Duo core vs Quad core

[fcfcfc]

Somewhere (probably some hardware benchmarking write-up), I read that FSX works best with a high clock speed single core, and for the same speed, a duo core would be better than a quad. As a result, I have been looking stubbornly at the E8600.

I notice that most users here have core2 quads.

Did I get the wrong message?

[Tako_Kichi]

I can't speak for the others but I switched earlier this year from a 3.4 Ghz single core to a Core2Duo E8400 3.0 Ghz chip and noticed a big improvement in my FSX performance. How much of that was the chip and how much was the new mobo with a 1333 Mhz FSB I am not sure (the old mobo had a 1066 Mhz FSB). Of course you have to also factor in a change from a 256 Mb 6800 GTS GFX card to a 512 MB 8800 GT card.

Bottom line is that I saw a big improvement but with so many things being changed it is hard to pinpoint the real source.

[dswo]

1. You want two cores for FSX.

2. Beyond that, what do you want? For better framerates, increase clockspeed. For crisper textures at higher groundspeed, get more cores. A few months ago I upgraded from a Core2Duo E6600 @ 2.4 GHz this summer to a Core2Quad Q6600at the same clockspeed. No improvement in FPS, but noticeably faster texture loading; makes flying with photoscenery a lot more fun. For the same money, I could have bought one of the faster Duos and got better FPS, but I would have needed a new motherboard.

[txnetcop]

1. You want two cores for FSX.

2. Beyond that, what do you want? For better framerates, increase clockspeed. For crisper textures at higher groundspeed, get more cores. A few months ago I upgraded from a Core2Duo E6600 @ 2.4 GHz this summer to a Core2Quad Q6600at the same clockspeed. No improvement in FPS, but noticeably faster texture loading; makes flying with photoscenery a lot more fun. For the same money, I could have bought one of the faster Duos and got better FPS, but I would have needed a new motherboard.

Well said and absolutely correct. I found the Q9550 to be an excellent little quad and E8400 on up to be very adequate. I also overclock to 3.5 and higher to get the most out of both cores. That requires very good quality memory DDR2 1066 or better
Ted

[fcfcfc]

Thank you everyone. It looks like I should walk away from the E8600 and start looking at the Qs. This will be my first self-built PC and I have zero experience with overclocking although I intend to learn about it. Without going for a QX and assuming I am unable to OC for a while, would a straight out-of-the-box Q have enough speed to deliver 30+ FPS?

[txnetcop]

Don't mean to mislead you. There is nothing wrong with the E8600. It is a very fast processor and if you don't intend to overclock it is the one to have for flying FSX. If you are overclocking, and really know what you are doing, the Q9300 and above are just fine. As You will find most of the Penryn series Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo are excellent processors for our hobby. I found 3.45 to 3.8GHZ ideal for flying FSX.
Ted

[fcfcfc]

Thanks Ted. I am fairly new to FSX also to make things worse. :redf: I am trying to have it as realistic visually as possible because I struggle a bit in simulators especially on finals or in VFR in the absence of physical cues and head-turns for spatial references. So, I am hoping to use WideView and three PCs to drive six displays, enough FPS at all times to feel "normal" even in detailed live weather. I also plan on having hardware instruments and avionics which I think connect through USBs (leaving displays as mostly windscreens), but I have not found any references to how they would affect performance. As I am so ignorant when it comes to OC that I worry about each CPU/PC behaving differently when overclocked making synchronisation messy. But, it seems that OC is unavoidable if the sweet spot for GHz is up to 3.8.

I know this is slightly off-topic, but could you perhaps suggest a few places when I can learn to do OC properly?

[txnetcop]

Thanks Ted. I am fairly new to FSX also to make things worse. :redf: I am trying to have it as realistic visually as possible because I struggle a bit in simulators especially on finals or in VFR in the absence of physical cues and head-turns for spatial references. So, I am hoping to use WideView and three PCs to drive six displays, enough FPS at all times to feel "normal" even in detailed live weather. I also plan on having hardware instruments and avionics which I think connect through USBs (leaving displays as mostly windscreens), but I have not found any references to how they would affect performance. As I am so ignorant when it comes to OC that I worry about each CPU/PC behaving differently when overclocked making synchronisation messy. But, it seems that OC is unavoidable if the sweet spot for GHz is up to 3.8.

I know this is slightly off-topic, but could you perhaps suggest a few places when I can learn to do OC properly?

There are several overclocking guides available and I also have done a custom guide. Let me know which motherboard you finally settle on and I will send you overclocking information.

It only takes a few minutes to set up your first overclock and as long has you keep your components cool, and test as you go, you should have no trouble at all. As a matter of fact now most motherboard mfgs allow overclocking by use of their OCing software (which I usually hate-as setting it up in BIOS is actually better.

The easiest and most stable boards I have found are the Gigabyte motherboards, followed by ASUS. I have also noted that the X58 for i7Core CPUs for ASUS and Gigabyte are easy to overclock. Nvidia is introducing a version of their X58 that allows the use of SLI or CROSSFIRE but I have not overclocked one yet. I will be down at TechCorp in two weeks to work on the Nvidia X58 boards and the latest DFI.

Almost all of the newer motherboards easily overclock to 4.0 and better, but I don't recommend 4.0 on air, and it really isn't needed for FSX anyway.

[fcfcfc]

Ted, sorry to keep pestering you with more and more questions. So, am I right to think that the best way forward on a clean sheet is to just go for x58 and i7? Would I need Crossfire or SLI to use two ATI4870 cards (not ATI4870x2) on the same MoBo?

[harleyman]

There is nothing wrong with going X58 now at all..Just get good ram for it...


To use two 4870's you would need a crossfireX ready mobo....

[Butcherbird17]

Most of the x58 boards are either sli or crossfire. If your going with the ATI cards you'll need to get a crossfire board. Depending on which board you go with they will either have 2, 3 or 4 pci-e 2.0 x16 dimm slots.

Joe

[txnetcop]

Check your motherboard info some of the X58s allow you to go use SLI and CROSSFIRE.
Ted

[hews500d]

Would it be possible to offset some of the "blurry textures" problems with the duo's, by going duo core with a higher end graphics card, Ati HD 4850 for example, or something along those lines? I'm finally getting to the point where I have an extra $1500 to $2000 to spend on a new system.

How difficult is it to overclock a quad core?

I've been researching various systems and will probably be posting some specs shortly to get some opinions. :ernae:

Darrell

[txnetcop]

Overclocking a quad is as easy as a dual. Darrell. As for blurries there are several reasons for them that have nothing to do with the video card, however I have found the HIS HD4850 ICE-Q4 and almost all the HD4870s are excellent with FSX.

On the Nvidia side,I have also found the eVGA GeForce GTX 280 HC16 Hydro Copper to be very fine card as tested at TechCorp, unfortunately it is still better to use nHancer to get the best results with the Nvidia drivers. Several of the newer HD4870s come very close in performance though and for the price difference it is cheaper to go with the HD4870

a review:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-geforce-gtx-280-hc16-hydro-copper-review/

Shortly I will repost some overclocking guides again. I am reviewing and adding more pertinent information to the guides.
Ted

[Bruce Thompson]

Hi Ted,

Uguru3d is reporting that i7 cpu's have a TLB Bug, much like AMD did.

I think it mentions a workround for it.

Bruce.

[Butcherbird17]

That's one of the reasons why i'll be waiting for the 2nd stepping of the core i7's to be released before I build new rig, to let them get all the bugs out first. Plus I just bought a new laptop to play with until then.:kilroy:

Joe

[txnetcop]

http://www.hardware-infos.com/news.php?news=2553

http://download.intel.com/design/pro...pdt/320836.pdf (http://download.intel.com/design/processor/specupdt/320836.pdf)

Core 2 had the same bug and in most cases the work-around is unnecessary. I have been testing with i7Core and the Gigabyte and ASUS P6T and found no issues with FSX or any of the popular games

[fcfcfc]

:wavey:Thanks everyone.

Still a lot to think about but I guess I am now considering future-proofing more than what is optimal today...

Ted, how far do you think the i7 920 would overclock with good air cooling or simple water cooling?

[txnetcop]

:wavey:Thanks everyone.

Still a lot to think about but I guess I am now considering future-proofing more than what is optimal today...

Ted, how far do you think the i7 920 would overclock with good air cooling or simple water cooling?

With water 4.2
On air safe 3.4 to 3.6 3rd party CPU cooler and a great case with lots of cooling.

I am using Thermaltake Armor MX VH8000BWS Black Aluminum on this build I am doing now:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811133062

Best CPU cooler $79.00 US:
http://legitreviews.com/news/4766/

[fcfcfc]

Wow, that is a large jum from the stated speed. So, the 130w limit and other constraints raised in various reviews are roadblocks that could be overcome? (apologies for my lack of knowledge:redf:)

Is the Gigabyte Galaxy II water cooling system any good for the i7?

And would I need chipset coolers or any other coolers?

[fcfcfc]

When it comes to RAM for i7, is 3x1GB better than 2x2GB?

[harleyman]

But the best(and seems standard) is 3X2 for 6 gigs.....

[Butcherbird17]

If you go with the new tri channel memory you can get 3x2 for 6gb. :applause:

Joe