OT: Some INTEL questions..

[Guest Joshieca]

So I am too getting ready to throw my computer out the window....ok well maybe not the whole thing but my CPU and mobo. I bought an AMD to save money and to have great performance. But to tell you the truth I have had nothing but troubles with it. It takes weeks to get the thing to run stable and then if I add or change things its back to the drawing board once again. I see other users on here getting better results with their P3 and GF2's then what I am getting with my XP1900+ and GF4. :(So I have a couple of questions about INTEL's...First, what is everyone's take on RAMBUS memory? I know that it is supposed to be faster then DDR, but I hear that DDR now has caught up. Is rambus the "betamax" of memory? What do you all think?Second, I have been a member of AMDMB.COM forums for while now. They have been an invaluable source of information for troubleshooting and trying out things to see if they work. I also use Mad Onion. Does anyone know of a source/forum group like AMDMB for INTEL CPU'? I posted this question over there and got nothing but smartass answers.Thanks....Josh[br][br][div align=center]http://members.cox.net/joshieca/fstimeslink.gif][br

[Guest PaulL01]

>So I am too getting ready to throw my computer out the >window....ok well maybe not the whole thing but my CPU and >mobo. I bought an AMD to save money and to have great >performance. But to tell you the truth I have had nothing >but troubles with it. It takes weeks to get the thing to run >stable and then if I add or change things its back to the >drawing board once again. I see other users on here getting >better results with their P3 and GF2's then what I am >getting with my XP1900+ and GF4. :( Don

[Guest]

Your problem is understandable.A solution is at hand.http://www.apple.com/switch

[Guest Joshieca]

Thanks....I already own a Mac TiBook G4....no problems with it EVER!!!! :(>Your problem is understandable. >A solution is at hand. >>http://www.apple.com/switch

[Guest Joshieca]

Well of course I can wait. My system is working, I get good scores on 3dMarkSE (11K), so/so scores on PCMark....but where it counts, FS2k2, it just lags. Perhaps WINXP and FS2k2 doesn't like the GF4? If I add any additional aircraft outside of the defaults, I get like 10fps, and thats not good, esp for a GF4. They should be up around 25 or 30.I do think that FS2k2 runs better with INTEL's chips....MS's poor programming job taxes the CPU much more then the GPU.If I do move, it would be to a 2.26 chip, unless the 2.4 comes down below $250.>>Don

[Guest]

>First, what is everyone's take on RAMBUS memory? I know >that it is supposed to be faster then DDR, but I hear that >DDR now has caught up. Is rambus the "betamax" of memory? >What do you all think? Well for one, RAMBUS only has a 16-bit wide bus, whereas DDR RAM has a 64-bit wide bus. In other words, the RAMBUS transfers 4 times less data than the RAMBUS. But it runs faster (not strangely about 4 times faster than DDR - I don't want to give bandwidth numbers as they are only theoretical), so it compensates. On top of that, data going to the "last" RAMBUS chip has to go through all the others first (serial configuration), which is not the case with DDR RAM where it goes to the proper place immediately (parallel architecture). Basically, I'm saying there's not that much difference. I'm sure Elrond could tell you way more about all that. I'll stick to DDR myself if only for the price.__________________________________________________________EricList of all airlines, aircraft manufacturers and aircraft types recognised by ATC:http://www.geocities.com/eric_2203/orhttp://ftp.avsim.com/library/esearch.php?D...atID=fs2002misc

[Guest]

Funny how people feel about computers (and probably about all complex systems). You are providing output data that is dissatifying, and you are about to make a $300+ decision based on what? I use an amd xp1700+ processor on a shuttle via kt266a mobo, 256 mb ddr ram, and an older Radeon 64 ddr vivo video card.VERY rare to dip below 25 fps, normally it pegs at 32fps, which is where I have it locked at.Changing CPU to get my kind of fps, when you already have more cpu than I do? Hmmmmmmm Wouldn't be my choice, when it'll drive you to a different mobo as well.For under $100 you could get an old Radeon 64mb video card, if you find that your mobo is an old fashioned chipset, you could get the one I use for $80. You'll have the same system as I do, that's half the $ and you'll either get the performance I have, or you have a different problem unrelated to cpu, mobo, or video card (in which case, your idea for what to buy won't help you either).B

[Guest Joshieca]

These users that claim to get these great frame rates are you using the stock FS2k2 planes? Do you use addon's? Add more parking to your airports? Add more flights to your airports?Fly jetliners and not prop planes on cloudly days not clear?I just did a "clean" instal of Fs2k2 and I get good frame rates with the stock install, but I know the min. I add addon's to it, down they will drop.You people with GF2's etc can't tell me that your getting frame rates of 30fps at LAX during peak airport traffic with addon's and non default planes!

[Guest]

Josh, from this post now it seems you are claiming that buying a P4 will make it IMPOSSIBLE to load down your frame rates! LOLheehawsounds like you just want to spend some moneyenjoyB

[Guest Joshieca]

No Bob....I am just trying to get a system that is stable, usable with addon aircraft, and that I don't have to baby along.....hmmm sounds like a Mac..... :( After I sell what I already have, the price diff. will only about $300 for a newer system....if that system is stable compared to what I have now, then thats $300 well spent.Anyways....back to what I asked....Who like RAMBUS and who likes DDR?Also any help sites for INTELs out there?

[Guest PaulL01]

>These users that claim to get these great frame rates are >you using the stock FS2k2 planes? >Do you use addon's? >Add more parking to your airports? >Add more flights to your airports? >Fly jetliners and not prop planes on cloudly days not clear? >>I just did a "clean" instal of Fs2k2 and I get good frame >rates with the stock install, but I know the min. I add >addon's to it, down they will drop. >>You people with GF2's etc can't tell me that your getting >frame rates of 30fps at LAX during peak airport traffic with >addon's and non default planes! Video cards have only the very very slightest impact on FPS until you start filtering with Antialiasing and Anisotropy even then there is not much to gain, When the "review" with benchmarks is up you will see for yourself. You are much better off being careful not to load much 3rd party ATC AC unless it has been well coded (G-max) as it wont matter what system you have now or in the near future as any current and near future (Am I repeating myself? Am I rep...)CPU can/will be brought to its knees by the all the code, it has nothing to do with "bad code" but has to do with the raw power that is required to render as much as there is with 3D Mesh, objects AC, AC position, atmosphere + clouds, shadows + movement, gauges etc. etc.And as for "FS2k2 programmed to run better on Intel" that is nonsense, what are you basing that on? Clock for clock AMD wins, pure Clock speed P4's are winning and Yeah, a P4-2.4 with the right/best parts can edge-out an XP2200 with the right/best parts not to mention a P4-2.5 as well as the next 2.8, but that has nothing to do with "programmed to run better" the "real" showdown will be when the XP gets the 512kb on board cache (Barton), don

[Vulcan 14]

Josh,How you spend your money is up to you but..As others have pointed out, the only way to compare system frame rates is to use a standard set up. That is all FS settings the same, all weather settings the same, sat in the same plane with the same view at the same time of day.If any one of those basic settings are different then the frame rates quoted are just BS.And I suspect that is the root cause of P3 & GF2's beating your XP1900 & GF4, your FS settings are maxxed, the P3's are not.As to changing from AMD to Intel, sure go ahead, but don't come back here crying when you see little or no improvement :-)There are enough simmers in these forums using AMD CPUs with more than acceptable results to disprove your idea that a move to Intel will solve all your problems.Bottom line, AMD beats Intel for 'bang for buck' and with a quality mo/bo and up to date drivers the vast majority of simmers have no problems with AMD.From a simmer who uses nothing but AMD & Abit.Rgds

[Guest Joshieca]

....ok thanks for everyones, time. :(

[tgibson 11]

Just to let you know, I had a P3-500, and it usually ran FS2002 between 10-30 fps. I now have a P4-2.26, and it runs FS between... 18-30 fps. The difference? I have the sliders moved to the right now, when I couldn't before.I can easily drag that down to 10 fps by adding AI aircraft that are too complex, adding too many of them, or taking the video tweaks too far (terrain distance, anisotropy, LOD, etc.).One more thing - I have found that my new system is MORE sensitive to things running in the background. I did a few tweaks and was shocked to see my frame rate was now 9 fps in my "normal" situation. I then (sheepishly) noticed that I also had Norton Anti-virus, Netscape, and Dreamweaver running too. I shut those down, and... 25 fps!Hope this helps,-- Tom GibsonCalifornia Classic Propliners: http://www.calclassic.com/Cal Classic Alco Page: http://www.calclassic.com/alco/Freeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.com/ San Diego Model RR Museum: http://www.sdmodelrailroadm.com/Drop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

[LAdamson 240]

I'm not complaining about my Athlon 1900XP & Geforce3Ti500/512 DDRram at all. Had it about 7 months now & runs FS2002 very well. Much better than my previous PIII600/Viper 770 Ultra. I lock fps at 32, run a 22" monitor at 1600*1200*32. This is my first AMD after eight other CPU's with Intel.L.Adamson