FSX Upgrade Dual to Quad Core Worthwhile ?

[marklaur]

Currently I have an Intel E8500 dual core processor 4 gig ram and a Nvidia GTX280 video card.
Running XP SP3 32 bit. (and will be for the forseable future)

I still find FSX to run too poorly for my liking with this setup and are considering upgrading to a quad core. For my budget I think the best I could afford would be a i7 960 (3.2 gig) processor and one of the latest ATI HD 5870 single core cards.

If I load any fancy scenery I often get out of memory messages then FSX crashes. Also AI traffic at the levels I like in FS2004 slow down FSX to the point I do not use it any more.

Would I get any realistic performance increases with the above upgrade. I would be running at stock speeds, no over clocking.

I recently looked at some bench marking statistics in an Atomic PC magazine I get and it indicated only a few FPS increase would be obtained. The article was about 6 months old.
Is this correct? Or would there be any other benefits like scenery load any better?

I am not really a settings tinkerer, so I only rely on my hardware.

Just not sure if would get any value for money with the upgrade. But I would like to use FSX a little more as well.

Regards MarkL

[Navy Chief]

Currently I have an Intel E8500 dual core processor 4 gig ram and a Nvidia GTX280 video card.
Running XP SP3 32 bit. (and will be for the forseable future)

I still find FSX to run too poorly for my liking with this setup and are considering upgrading to a quad core. For my budget I think the best I could afford would be a i7 960 (3.2 gig) processor and one of the latest ATI HD 5870 single core cards.

If I load any fancy scenery I often get out of memory messages then FSX crashes. Also AI traffic at the levels I like in FS2004 slow down FSX to the point I do not use it any more.

Would I get any realistic performance increases with the above upgrade. I would be running at stock speeds, no over clocking.

I recently looked at some bench marking statistics in an Atomic PC magazine I get and it indicated only a few FPS increase would be obtained. The article was about 6 months old.
Is this correct? Or would there be any other benefits like scenery load any better?

I am not really a settings tinkerer, so I only rely on my hardware.

Just not sure if would get any value for money with the upgrade. But I would like to use FSX a little more as well.

Regards MarkL

Mark,

I rebuilt my system a few weeks ago. Aside from a different processor, I installed many of the components you listed:

OS Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
CPU i7 Extreme 980X @ 3.33GHz
RAM 16.0GB Triple-Channel DDR3 @ 667MHz (9-9-9-24)
Motherboard ASUSTeK Computer INC. Rampage III Extreme (LGA1366)
Graphics VT2430-M ATI Radeon HD 5800 Series
Hard Drives
244GB Hitachi HDT722525DLA380 ATA Device (IDE) 29 °C
488GB Seagate ST3500320AS ATA Device (Unknown Interface) 27 °C
488GB Western Digital WDC WD5000AAKS-00A7B2 ATA Device (IDE) 29 °C
488GB Western Digital WDC WD5000AAKS-00V1A0 ATA Device (IDE) 29 °C
Optical Drives
HL-DT-ST BD-RE WH08LS20 ATA Device
Audio
Realtek High Definition Audio

This thing screams now. I set my framerates to about 40, and it rarely wavers from that....

NC

[txnetcop]

The i7 960 and up are absolutely awesome! You would also benefit with one of the new Nvidia GTX470 FERMI or ATI 5850 or above series video cards as icing on the cake!
Ted

[mike678]

Hi Mark,

The i7 will definitely help keep FPS high with lots of AI and autogen. It will not however stop the out of memory problems you are having. For that you need a 64 bit OS. If you are going to the trouble of building a new system I would recommend Win7 64 rather than sticking with XP 32.

[ZEUS67]

I build my own rigs when I have the money. For a gamer specifications, which also works with FSX, I usually go to the Alienware webpage and see the details of their machines and then I go and buy the components, that way I know that I have a machine that will perform as I want.

[strykerpsg]

The i7 960 and up are absolutely awesome! You would also benefit with one of the new Nvidia GTX470 FERMI or ATI 5850 or above series video cards as icing on the cake!
Ted

Ted, anyway to find out the limits of current mobo to accept upgraded i7 processors? I have a Dell 730X with a i7 940 processor. While certainly no slouch, have been watching the Extreme processors dropping in price. Thanks

Matt

[Stratobat]

Hi Guys,

Speaking of quad cores, what kind of performance would one get out of an AMD Phenom II X4 965 3.4 GHz Black Edition processor with four gigs of DDR3-1600 RAM and an EVGA GeForce GTX 460 1Gb superclocked graphics card?

Regards,
Stratobat

[txnetcop]

Ted, anyway to find out the limits of current mobo to accept upgraded i7 processors? I have a Dell 730X with a i7 940 processor. While certainly no slouch, have been watching the Extreme processors dropping in price. Thanks

Matt

That motherboard has the standard Intel chipset and should handle any i7 processor upgrade. There are amplified chipsets with the ASUS and Gigabyte motherboards but I would stay with what you have and just upgrade the processor when you consider price/performance. You will not see as much of a performance upgrade however just going to the i7 960. Your best bet would be upgrade to a Nvidia FERMI video card

[txnetcop]

Hi Guys,

Speaking of quad cores, what kind of performance would one get out of an AMD Phenom II X4 965 3.4 GHz Black Edition processor with four gigs of DDR3-1600 RAM and an EVGA GeForce GTX 460 1Gb superclocked graphics card?

Regards,
Stratobat

The 965 unlocked Black Edition is a good processor but I would go with the new six core especially since you are not talking about that much more money.

[Stratobat]

Hi Ted,

Thank you for the reply.

The 965 unlocked Black Edition is a good processor but I would go with the new six core especially since you are not talking about that much more money.

Which Hexacore are you talking about and why would you go with it?

Regards,
Stratobat

[Bjoern]

I wonder if an upgrade from four to six cores would be worth it. It's to more cores for scenery loading after all...

[ryanbatc]

Your main problem is the 32bit OS

That's why you're getting OOMs....

HAve you tried adding the 3GB switch?
http://forums.flightsim.com/fswiki/index.php/OOM_Error

[Stratobat]

I wonder if an upgrade from four to six cores would be worth it. It's to more cores for scenery loading after all...

Doesn't really help you if the program doesn't recognise those six cores.

Regards,
Stratobat

[Bjoern]

Doesn't really help you if the program doesn't recognise those six cores.

FSX does (via "AffinityMask").

[Stratobat]

FSX does (via "AffinityMask").

I didn't know that. Thanks, Bjoern :salute:

Regards,
Stratobat

[stansdds]

Your main problem is the 32bit OS

That's why you're getting OOMs....

HAve you tried adding the 3GB switch?
http://forums.flightsim.com/fswiki/index.php/OOM_Error

I started getting the OOM error after installing Active Sky X. The 3GB switch, with userva=2560, seems to have helped. Obviously a single, uninterrupted 2 hour flight is not a conclusive test, but seeing as how the previous three 2 hour flights ended with a OOM error, it's an encouraging sign.

I've considered a "cheap" upgrade to a Q9650, but I'm not sure if that would be all that great of an improvement since I'm running a 800 MHz FSB and RAM.

[txnetcop]

Hi Ted,

Thank you for the reply.



Which Hexacore are you talking about and why would you go with it?

Regards,
Stratobat

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103849 For use with AM3 boards.

Using Affinity mask as Bjoern said you can set up your processor for use of all cores in FSX

[mikew]

Just curious...
Is there a huge difference between the i7 930 and the i7 960 other than the operating frequency? Is it worth almost double the price for the 960 over th 930?

Thanks,
Mike

[DennyA]

1) Get rid of XP. There is no good reason to run XP in 2010, and your PC will become more and more of a security risk as time goes by. (If you're playing some ancient game that can't be made to run in DosBox or a virtualization app, then set up a dual boot.) Win 7 64-bit will use your entire 4GB of RAM, and you should find things run smoother.

2) The Q9650 isn't going to give you anything like the speed increase you'll get from an i7. The new architecture speeds things up significantly.

3) MikeW, if you're willing to futz around with overclocking, and you have decent RAM (since overclocking sometimes pushes memory speed up a bit), that i7 930 can run at i7 960 speeds.

[stansdds]

1) Get rid of XP. There is no good reason to run XP in 2010, and your PC will become more and more of a security risk as time goes by. (If you're playing some ancient game that can't be made to run in DosBox or a virtualization app, then set up a dual boot.) Win 7 64-bit will use your entire 4GB of RAM, and you should find things run smoother.

2) The Q9650 isn't going to give you anything like the speed increase you'll get from an i7. The new architecture speeds things up significantly.

3) MikeW, if you're willing to futz around with overclocking, and you have decent RAM (since overclocking sometimes pushes memory speed up a bit), that i7 930 can run at i7 960 speeds.

That's what I was thinking, better to put the cost of a Q9650 towards a new system. I agree, today Win XP is no longer the best, Windows 7 rules and the 64 bit version is the best route.

[Bjoern]

Say Ted, do you think it's worth getting an upgrade from DDR2 to DDR3?

This is what I'm currently running:
http://www.sysprofile.de/id109664

I want to push the Q9450 a bit more (to 3.6 Ghz), but my FSB refuses to play along (topped off at 405 Mhz).

I didn't know that. Thanks, Bjoern :salute:

No problem.

[Stratobat]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103849 For use with AM3 boards.

Using Affinity mask as Bjoern said you can set up your processor for use of all cores in FSX

Hey Ted,

These are the prices I can get the following processors for in my part of the world. Please note that I have converted the currency in to US Dollars using http://www.xe.com/ucc/


AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Processor - $221.62

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Processor - $276.03

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Processor - $399.56


Would I see enough of a performance increase between the AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition processor and the AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition processor to justify the extra expenditure?

Regards,
Stratobat

[txnetcop]

Hey Ted,

These are the prices I can get the following processors for in my part of the world. Please note that I have converted the currency in US Dollars using http://www.xe.com/ucc/


AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Processor - $221.62

AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Processor - $276.03

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Processor - $399.56


Would I see enough of a performance increase between the AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition processor and the AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition processor to justify the extra expenditure?

Regards,
Stratobat

That has a a lot to do with your willingness to overclock. The 1090T hasn't even unlocked all of it's potential yet. There are some new boards and new BIOSes that are really giving the 1090T some horsepower that heretofore were not being seen. I have a friend on staff at Maximum PC that rates that 1090T as the most improved processor ever to come from AMD. Our tests at TECHCORP have shown that processor to be a dynamo still to be unleashed. Admittedly I am still more impressed with the i7980X but look at the price difference.

The 1090T stock is impressive but not so much more than the OC'd 965 Black Edition unless you are willing to unlock it and take it to it's potential. If you can get the six cores working to their full potential by trial and error in FSX you will have a really fine system on your hands. It does take a little more work than say using the i7980X which is a killer right outta the box, again you save a ton of money. I was running my unofficial tests at TechCorp on the 1090T OC'd to 4.2Ghz and was running FSX full blast at 40fps and rarely did I see it drop no matter what I threw at it.

You cannot OC the 965Black to match the speed of the unlocked OC'd 1090T. It is an entirely different processor with much more potential. Can you justify spending that much more...I can't tell you that. It really depends on how much you have in the budget. If you are doing it just for FSX I would say no. Invest in a really good video card and push the 965 Black to 3.8Ghz or higher.

New games are coming that really take advantage of these six core processors. I know for a fact that new X-Plane 10 does. I'm hoping Microsoft's new flightsim offering will too. Rise of Flight does also.

Here is good article on the 965BE versus the new six core processors from AMD http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-...attr=reviewall

[txnetcop]

Say Ted, do you think it's worth getting an upgrade from DDR2 to DDR3?

This is what I'm currently running:
http://www.sysprofile.de/id109664

I want to push the Q9450 a bit more (to 3.6 Ghz), but my FSB refuses to play along (topped off at 405 Mhz).





No problem.

Bjoern DDR3 when combined with Win7 64bit has definite advantages over DDR2. My test unit is a i7960 6GB unit and really ROCKS eveything I throw at it. However I didn't see the huge difference in DDR3 over DDR2 on the 775 socket systems...yes there is some, but not so much as to warrant buying a new 775 board that uses DDR3.

Using DDR2 you should still be able to push the Q9450 to 3.6. For my home unit I had a Q9550 running Patriot PC2-9600 1200mhz ram at 4.0Ghz on air. It ran FSX very very well with Win7.

[txnetcop]

Just curious...
Is there a huge difference between the i7 930 and the i7 960 other than the operating frequency? Is it worth almost double the price for the 960 over th 930?

Thanks,
Mike

Mike if you are not afraid to OC the 930 the performance is adequate and you can save a little money. However if you OC the 960 a little it really shows it's taillights to the 930! If you really want a barn-burner go for the 980X WOW what a ride!