New AMD Phenom II

[fcfcfc]

Has anyone looked into this new CPU and how it would perform running FSX?

[harleyman]

From all my reading it is still lacking for FSX...

Intel is still King ....

[kilo delta]

While AMD have come a long way with the new Phenom II they are still way behind Intel.

[stansdds]

I agree, AMD is still lagging behind Intel.

[harleyman]

I just spoke with Ted,txnetcop, and he is building one as we speak..i will get the full low down on it in a day or so.....


Stay tuned till then for a good answer on your question....

[Bruce Thompson]

Just built one.

AMD Phenom 11 940
Asus M3A -79T Mobo
Noctua CPU Cooler
4gig Patriot 800mhz Ram (will upgrade later to 1066mhz)
Nvidia 800GTX (will upgrade later to Nvidia 295 GPU)
1000w PSU.


Have only just finished putting it together, so have not yet tried to OC it.

Tried FSX, smooth as silk at 35fps locked, all seems to be running well so far. The OC tools with this mobo should improve it even more.

Idle Temp 35C.

Changed Affinity Mask to 15 in FSX Cfg.

I know someone else who is running it at 3.8mhz on air, but I don't know what his temps are like.

[harleyman]

Cool...Thanks Bruce..Keep us imformed please...:wavey:

[fcfcfc]

Bruce, how have things been with your Phenom II?

[harleyman]

fcfcfc....

The latest news from builders is that its a great performer for FSX....

If you wanted one I think it just might be a great choice..Expecially if your mobo is ready for the CPU already...........

[fcfcfc]

thanks harleyman

[CG_1976]

Smooth as silk for me the Phenom is. Works perfect and crisp and cool. And thats not even overclock. Frames are very strong and fluid at 35 no shutters or blurr of scenery. haven't tried the phenom out on dx10 mode although.

[rwmarth]

Looking at the Phenom II 940 as well in an upgraded system. You guys who are using it, what sort of settings do you tune FSX to run smooth, or can you crank it up to the max even with some of the more demanding add ons?

[Bjoern]

The Phenom II is a good CPU, right on par with Intel's Core2Quads but still miles away from the i7s.

[rwmarth]

Does even the i7 let sliders really go all to the right including traffic?

[RyanJames170]

Does even the i7 let sliders really go all to the right including traffic?

NOPE NOT IN FSX LOL not unless u do some major FSX Configuration tweaks

[rwmarth]

Im Curious; what sort of settings does one run with an i7 or a q9650 or a Phenom 2 940 for that matter? I read about how one's computer can get so and so fps locked and steady, but I can do that with my 2.2ghz quad now too depending on my settings...

[orionll]

From almost all reports of the Phenom II I've been hearing 35-40 FPS, but with no information about the settings. Anyone with a Phenom II mind sharing the rest of their specs, FSX settings and FPS?

[txnetcop]

I built this one for a friend a little while back:
http://sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=8446

While the 940 is nice, my Gigabyte x48 with an E8600 runs circles around it when it comes to fps with FSX and my other games. Still it was good to see AMD start competing with at least some of Intel's Penryn quad cores and Core 2s.
Ted

[rwmarth]

Thanks for the info!

[Hanimichal]

I regretted to have spent the money with this cpu

(I use XP SP3)

http://f.imagehost.org/0974/imagem_2.jpg

http://f.imagehost.org/0293/1_23.jpg

http://f.imagehost.org/0555/2_3.jpg

http://f.imagehost.org/0112/3_4.jpg

http://g.imagehost.org/0390/4_19.jpg

[Bjoern]

Does even the i7 let sliders really go all to the right including traffic?

All except traffic.


Phenom IIs just scream for overclocking...

[txnetcop]

I had to kick the Phenom II 940 up to 3.8 to get the performance I was getting. With the HD4870 it was just fine. I ran very high textures most settings full right.

I still believe the i7 Core is a better buy for the future of FSX flying. If the budget won't bear it the higher Penryns do just fine and the cost is almost comparable to the AMD Phenom now.
Ted

[harleyman]

I had to kick the Phenom II 940 up to 3.8 to get the performance I was getting. With the HD4870 it was just fine. I ran very high textures most settings full right.

I still believe the i7 Core is a better buy for the future of FSX flying. If the budget won't bear it the higher Penryns do just fine and the cost is almost comparable to the AMD Phenom now.
Ted






That txnetcop has all the toys.........:argue: LOL :wave:

[fcfcfc]

Thanks everyone. Really useful info.

I have not been able to make up my mind between FSX and XP9. Is there an inevitable compromise to run both? Sorry to bring up XP in a FS area. Am I right to think that FSX is CPU bottlenecked and XP9 is GPU limited?

Would the PII or i7 do well for both?

[fcfcfc]

I just noticed a new 3.2GHz black edition.

For MB, Asus has this OC tool that would allow tweaking without reboot. Is this helpful or should I stick to Gigabyte which everyone seems to favour?

What I have in mind is:
AMD 955, HIS 4870 1GB ICE, CoolerMaster RR UV8 fan, Zalman ZM750HP, Kingston HyperX 1066 8GB. The Gigabyte MA790GPDS4H is no long available here for some reason. So thinking about an Asus 790FX type instead. HD will probably be the Caviar Green.

[txnetcop]

I just noticed a new 3.2GHz black edition.

For MB, Asus has this OC tool that would allow tweaking without reboot. Is this helpful or should I stick to Gigabyte which everyone seems to favour?

What I have in mind is:
AMD 955, HIS 4870 1GB ICE, CoolerMaster RR UV8 fan, Zalman ZM750HP, Kingston HyperX 1066 8GB. The Gigabyte MA790GPDS4H is no long available here for some reason. So thinking about an Asus 790FX type instead. HD will probably be the Caviar Green.


Asus 790FX is just fine...so is this MSI 790FX-very easy to OC to 4Ghz, but these dang Phenoms get hot quick so ya really need to kick that CoolMaster on full when gaming

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130223
Ted

[fcfcfc]

Thanks Ted. I just realised that MSI is an AM3 board. Would the ability to use DDR3 make a noticeable difference on the AM3 board? The vendor here would only sell DDR3 in triplets - can you put 3 on the board or do they have to be in pairs? (sorry, showing my tech ignorance again)

[harleyman]

Thanks Ted. I just realised that MSI is an AM3 board. Would the ability to use DDR3 make a noticeable difference on the AM3 board? The vendor here would only sell DDR3 in triplets - can you put 3 on the board or do they have to be in pairs? (sorry, showing my tech ignorance again)



What do you mean by *Put 3 on the board or they have to be in pairs?*

[fcfcfc]

Sorry for the confusion; let me rephrase... The RAM comes in 3x2Gb triple channel kits, but there are four slots on the MSI board. Do I have to find dual channel kits or can I just install all three and leave one slot empty? Or am I only allowed have either two or four slots occupied?

[txnetcop]

The motherboard chipset is intelligent to a degree just place them in the slot and it will configure for triple channel.
Ted

[fcfcfc]

Ted, just reading your comments in another thread about the MSI x48 board, are there similarly complex issues to stumble a novice like me with the MSI 790FX AMD3 board and its DDR3 slots?

The MSI website also made it sound really easy with the automatic maximum overclocking tool - is it really that easy?

[ryanbatc]

The Phenom II is no match for a clocked 940/950 Core i7

People who say they are getting 35 fps smooth probably aren't flying NYC with max scenery and high AI traffic. A few guys with clocked i7's in the 4.0 - 4.5 GHz range are getting about 25-30 fps with very high settings but still non payware aircraft.

But if you're on a budget (which means dont expect fantastic fsx performance) you could go with the Phenom II

[txnetcop]

OK I build computers for living as well as manage a physicians network. I will finalize with this. If all you want is FSX. I have run AMD Phenom 955 with an AM3 790X motherboard as fast as the fastest i7Core940 in FSX only. Both were clocked at 4.2Ghz. FSX is not too picky about whether you run AMD or Intel as far as speed is concerned. I have built over 50 systems for FSX and not one Intel has run away completely from AMD...that only applies to FSX. In other games I would rather have Intel chipset X48 or i7Core x58 motherboards and CPU!
Ted

[idancesafetydance]

From all my reading it is still lacking for FSX...

Intel is still King ....
Hmm... really? My phenom 940 Runs FSX on the highest settings, at 1920x1080, no CFG mods (exept the one that makes it use 4 cores) and I am at 35-40 FPS SMOOTH, and yes... around the Seattle area. around NYC it hovers at 20. I also have a fairly weak 9600GT OC. SO AMD isn't THAT far behind. A new Octa-core CPU is in developement by AMD. Montreal they call it. Also AMD is to release new 6, 8,12, and 16 core CPU in the near future. This info has come off of server PC news sites.

[harleyman]

fcfcfc....

The latest news from builders is that its a great performer for FSX....

If you wanted one I think it just might be a great choice..Expecially if your mobo is ready for the CPU already...........




In responce to the above post...

This is an old thread when the new phenoens just came out and were untested...(for FSX)

[txnetcop]

Hmm... really? My phenom 940 Runs FSX on the highest settings, at 1920x1080, no CFG mods (exept the one that makes it use 4 cores) and I am at 35-40 FPS SMOOTH, and yes... around the Seattle area. around NYC it hovers at 20. I also have a fairly weak 9600GT OC. SO AMD isn't THAT far behind. A new Octa-core CPU is in developement by AMD. Montreal they call it. Also AMD is to release new 6, 8,12, and 16 core CPU in the near future. This info has come off of server PC news sites.

Much as I love AMD they will never catch up to Intel...they are nearing bankruptcy now as I write this. They do not have the deep pockets that Intel has. I work with the guys from Advanced Micro Devices in Austin as they are regular visitors to TechCorp...they are closing down the Austin location soon to reign in expenses. No AMD is currently as fast as the Intel Core i7 to date.
Ted

BTW the new 945, 955, and 965 run FSX extremely well but in 90% of all other games they lose to Core i7 and now even some core i5

[Bjoern]

Much as I love AMD they will never catch up to Intel...they are nearing bankruptcy now as I write this. They do not have the deep pockets that Intel has.

Maybe AMD shouldn't have gone shopping for a certain canadian video card manufacturer a few years ago...:monkies:

[kilo delta]

Maybe AMD shouldn't have gone shopping for a certain canadian video card manufacturer a few years ago...:monkies:

I reckon that was a very good move on their behalf. ;)

[txnetcop]

I reckon that was a very good move on their behalf. ;)


I agree or they never would have gone on to create the Spider Board and Dragon Board. ATI would never have been able to create the HD4890 or HD5000 series GPUs. AMD will survive in bankruptcy but it will take a while to get back up to speed. They survived the big downsize in 2001-Austin lost two labs there. I don't remember how many employees were laid off but many came back to work just a few months later. The same will happen here.
Ted

[idancesafetydance]

Much as I love AMD they will never catch up to Intel...they are nearing bankruptcy now as I write this. They do not have the deep pockets that Intel has. I work with the guys from Advanced Micro Devices in Austin as they are regular visitors to TechCorp...they are closing down the Austin location soon to reign in expenses. No AMD is currently as fast as the Intel Core i7 to date.
Ted

BTW the new 945, 955, and 965 run FSX extremely well but in 90% of all other games they lose to Core i7 and now even some core i5 oh really? I have been looking at the 965 myself. I have heard good and bad. I guess I'll have to look into it.:jump: Really the only reason I don't use intel anymore was the old "pay vendors to not sell AMD" thing Intel pulled. But I'm building an Intel rig for my buddy and I must say I'm kindof impressed. But AMD is good for those like me who don't have a ton to spend on just on part. My whole entire PC costs less than an I7 LoL.

[txnetcop]

I have a great fondness for the Phenom II system cores. I have tested them at various speeds(actually not a engineer term) and have found them to be very good gaming platforms. The 965 is particularly interesting and a great overclocker. AMD is not stingy with their gamer crowd as they do allow unlocking the multiplier-I like that feature. As you said earlier, some AMDs outperform Core i7 in FSX and that is true up to a point, however I doubt if AMD will overtake the raw power that i5 and i7 Core can generate with time and better board BIOSes. The high-end series Intel cores are really kicking arse and taking names. But that will certainly not stop AMD from selling their CPUs in great numbers. They are a bargain when it comes to price/performance
Ted

[Bjoern]

I reckon that was a very good move on their behalf. ;)

Never has been, never will be.

ATI will always have a place in my heart for their awesome 7500 and 9700 cards, but after their sellout to AMD and the subsequent 2xxx and 3xxx failures, they're nothing but dead meat to me.



ATI would never have been able to create the HD4890 or HD5000 series GPUs.

Not really outstanding chips to me.
The 4890 is just a souped up 4870, the 5000 series is just the spearhead of a new generation and thus has a huge performance advantage.

Pretty much standard GPU-development-cycle stuff.