PDA

View Full Version : So does FSX run eight threads on i7?



SolarEagle
February 4th, 2009, 22:13
Been playing with my new i7 system, which I've got running at 4Ghz using a Noctua air cooler and the memory is doing 1600MHz at 7-7-6-18 1T. I also switched to Windows 7 for this build. Not a bad system for $820.

I must say FSX runs quite impressively on this setup. The overall framerate is not what impresses me, but the increase on minimum's as well as the fact it seems like I've now got eight cores.

When I went from a 3.5Ghz Core 2 Duo to 3GHz Core 2 Quad it was clear the doubling of threads gave me nearly a two fold increase in terrain texture loading power, as my propensity for blurries was cut in half, and as was the amount of stutters I was seeing. So I have always advocated 4 cores, even if at the expense of clock speed, if you want the best experience in FSX.

Moving to the i7 is again giving me the results I would expect from doubling my cores, from 4 to 8. i7 does have hyper threading, so it has 4 physical cores, but also 4 more logical threads, for a total of 8 processing threads. I had hoped it would run eight with FSX and double up on terrain loaders, though I had heard the logical threads are inactive with FSX. I thought that was true when I viewed task manager, as only four threads are active, however my results in game spoke contrary to that.

With i7 I now fly over the highest LOD terrain at all times. No longer am I one, two, or three steps behind on terrain LOD. So not only is blurred terrain a thing of the past, but stutters as well. With my Core 2 Quad, in order to fly with a glass smooth stutter free experience I had to lock the framerate at a value I consistently achieved. Now with i7 I can run with the framerate unlocked and it's like glass, no stutters, no hitching, just silk. The fact I can now run with an unlocked framerate and get results superior to locked framerate is just amazing. Never with my Core 2 Quad, no matter how low I would lock in relation to the framerate I was achieving, have I seen textures load as well as they do with i7.

Now back to threads. With i7 task manager only shows 4 active threads, though those 4 threads are often at 100% utilization, and do not drop below 50%. With Core 2 Quad the three non-primary threads would be at 50% utilization or less. What this tells me is i7 is actually running 8 threads with FSX, and task manager is mis-reporting. As evidence to this is the fact I can fire up only four threads of Prime95, and task manager dispalys that load as 50% on all 8 threads, for a total of 50% CPU utilization. Given this I would not be surprised if the reason the other threads run around 100% instead of 50% as with Core 2 is that the load is in fact being spread, just not reported correctly.

In regards to framerate performance, I am seeing a 50% gain on minimums compared to my 3Ghz Core 2 Quad. Doing my Coffs Harbour benchmark pass, the lowest part was previously 16fps, and now I'm seeing 24fps. The mid and upper frames don't see that kind of gain, but that's ok as bringing up the low end is what matters most.

So that's what I've got. Hit me back if you have anything to add or with questions. Given blurries are cured one thing I'd like to play with is some new cfg tweaks. A low fiber fraction time gives a massive framerate gain at the cost of terrain texture loading power, so I might be able to balance that a bit to get more raw performance while maintaining sharp terrain. Below are the tweaks I use currently with autogen set to very dense in the sim, but I have not yet tried adjusting these values for my new system. I've found using a bufferpool pool over 50MB makes a nice difference when down low above heavy autogen, while values up to 10MB don't do much at all. Cheers.

[DISPLAY]
TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=80

[TERRAIN]
TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=1700
TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=2000

[MAIN]
DisablePreload=1

[SCENERY]
SmallPartRejectRadius=3

[BUFFERPOOLS]
PoolSize=80000000

Jen
February 5th, 2009, 03:24
Hi SolarEagle

Welcome to the Nehalem world. It`s a nice world :ernae:

Read this from NickN, avsim. :

http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=241915

There semes to grow a concensus, that disenabling hyperthreading in the bios, and adding an affinitymask=15 will give you a smother ride.

Worked for me.


Jen

Boomer
February 5th, 2009, 07:40
It sounds like my experiences with it thus far are much like yours. I am running my autogen at 6000 though.

I have taken to not looking at my fps counter because it isnt as high as I thought it would be (I went from a 2.66 quad core). However it takes nearly anything I throw at it & remains stable & silky smooth.

Frankly I love it! :wiggle:

SolarEagle
February 5th, 2009, 17:50
Hi SolarEagle
Welcome to the Nehalem world. It`s a nice world :ernae:
Read this from NickN, avsim. :

http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=241915

There semes to grow a concensus, that disenabling hyperthreading in the bios, and adding an affinitymask=15 will give you a smother ride.

Worked for me.


That's some excellent info, and just what I've been looking for! Thanks for pointing that out. I'm going to do some testing after work tonight!

SolarEagle
February 11th, 2009, 02:20
I've been testing and posted my findings over in the avim thread, but I'll post it here too since I've found what is for me the perfect way to setup my cfg.

http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=241915&st=40&start=40

***************
Well I tested again, and I get 50% utilization with HT enabled and 100% without, so that appears to prove HT is not used, but when enabled I do get slightly better performance. I'm just amazed i7 can load textures as well as it does on only 4 threads.

I also tested the fiber fraction time again using a 30fps lock. With .33 and HT disabled I was seeing a 18fps minimum on my Coffs Harbour pass. With .10 and HT disabled I was seeing a 26 minimum. That's a 45% gain and I was always flying over the highest LOD, so I didn't see any reason not to take the 45%.

Other than when passing the scenery elements seen below I was pegged at my 30fps lock with an occasional dip to 28, but when I enabled HT many of those dips did not occur. My minimum would still dip to 26, but was more likely to hover around 28 than without HT. I have not had a chance to test my OC with HT disabled, but maybe I can get a gain that tops the small one I appear to see with HT enabled.

Stutters in any form are non existent with a framelock, so to me that's the best the way to go, and with the .10 value there's only a small performance hit when using it. What matters to me is seeing 25-30fps, seeing the highest LOD terrain at all times, and seeing a totally fliud and stutter free presentation. Seeing that makes for the best visuals, and FS is after all a visual simulation to be used as a point of leverage for the imagination. I'll take my visuals as high caliber as they come, and what I've got going achieves my goals with room to improve in any direction, so I'm golden. :)



[DISPLAY]
TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=110

[MAIN]
FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.10

[TERRAIN]
TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=1700
TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=2000

[BUFFERPOOLS]
PoolSize=50000000
<!--c2-->

I have autogen set to Very Dense in game.

http://sio.midco.net/ftp6/coffspass.jpg

harleyman
February 11th, 2009, 02:30
Very clear and crisp...

I am suprised though that with the i7 at 4 Gh you hav to play at all in the config...I guess as it reads it was more for just tuning up textures than for performance..

Thanks for your findings,I'm sure that will be helpful for many...:applause::ernae:

txnetcop
February 11th, 2009, 02:59
I have built a total of 5 i7 940 cores now. While what you are showing is correct in most cases in the BIOS HT, what I found was with the 6GB kit Corsair Dominator PC314400 1800mhz running at 7-7-7-20 by raising the voltage, I did not have to worry about the BIOS settings everything was very smooth and the frames rates locked stayed at 30 running with everything on max even ground shading-which I had never turned on. The unit was OC'd to 4.2GHz but remained fairly cool. I was also using the XFX 260 Black Edition in SLI which while being of no benefit in FSX had Crysis running very smooth and frame rates were fantastic. I believe the memory made the difference because I had been using OCZ Reaper HPC on the first one and the results were a bit disappointing. I found that the Gigabyte Extreme and ASUS P6T Deluxe ran equally well with the Dominator PC3 14400 ram. I had set up a dual boot, and was also using Windows 7 Beta for the best results.

Affinity not set

[DISPLAY]
TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=120

[TERRAIN]
TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_TREES_PER_CELL=4400
TERRAIN_MAX_AUTOGEN_BUILDINGS_PER_CELL=4000

[MAIN]
DisablePreload=1

Note:
With the setttings I had with my Gigatbyte X48 set exactly the same with the Dominator series memory I could run in the 40s locked but again they were not fully maxed settings but darn close to full max-no ground shading.

Video card used at TechCorp
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150330

codeseven
February 12th, 2009, 15:12
So fellas, you guys with the 'cutting edge' newest, most powerful systems. Out of curiosity, in terms of FSX, have you now been able to 'power' FSX sufficiantly to finally max everything out with smooth, good frame rates?

I'm just wondering. Most games, if 'futureproofed', are developed with what 'will' be available in the future as far as computer components, ie CPU/GPU/Memory. Are the computer components available nowadays capable of finaly maxing out this game (sim) or is it 'still' futureproof?