November 2, 200718 yr BeHardware did a nice CPU comparison. The results are with the RTM version, but even so he noted a 7% increase in performance with two or more cores. It scales very well with clock speed making it clear an overclocked Core 2 Duo is the way to go. A 3.5GHz C2D would probably run at 26fps on this chart. http://www.behardware.com/articles/657-6/a...on-64-6000.htmlhttp://www.behardware.com/articles/642-8/i...-quad-core.htmlhttp://sio.midco.net/FTP4/chart.gif
November 2, 200718 yr "A 3.5GHz C2D would probably run at 26fps on this chart."I imagine SP1, with its dual core support, would make it even faster.
November 2, 200718 yr A very interesting line up. This comparison was done earlier this year in March. Therefore it could not include the latest Athlon X2 6400+ (3.2GHz stock) processor.I wonder how the Athlon X2 6400+ would fare in this test. Maybe on par with the Core 2 X6800?
November 2, 200718 yr not even close....around the E6600-6700 range...My 6000 is supposed to be on par with the E6600, but from that post, apparently not | My Liveries | FAA ZMP | PPL ASEL | | Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 64GB 6000 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |
November 2, 200718 yr The chart agrees with my AMD 64-2 3800's fps. And to think, one year ago, It was a hot performer. Kinda like my body 20 years ago. LOL JohnMy first SIM was a Link Trainer. My last was a T-6 IIAMD Ryzen 7 7800 X3D@ 5.1 GHz, 32 GB DDR5 RAM - 3 M2 Drives. 1 TB Boot, 2 TB Sim drive, 2 TB Add-on Drive, 6TB Backup data hard driveRTX 3080 10GB VRAM, Meta Quest 3 VR Headset
November 2, 200718 yr FSX seems to have an extremely low ratio of "increase of fps/price to be paid". My conclusion: I will not pay thousands to get a miserable frame rate increase of 10fps...tagada
November 2, 200718 yr That is why overclocking is your cheap ticket to more FSX FPS!Gary 9800X3D | 4090 | 64GB | 2+1TB NVME | 2TB SSD | 2TB HDD | 85/50/43” TVs | Quest 3 | DOF H3 Motion Rig | Buttkicker | T.16000M Flight Kit MSFS @ 4K Ultra DLSS Performance FG 80 FPS | VR VDXR Godlike 80Hz SSW | MSFS VR DLSS Quality, Ultra Preset - Windows 11 Acer Nitro 5 | i5-11400H | RTX 3060 6 GB | 32GB DDR4 | 15.6" FHD IPS 144Hz | 2 x 512 GB SSD | Windows 11
November 2, 200718 yr >>I wonder how the Athlon X2 6400+ would fare in this test. >Maybe on par with the Core 2 X6800?Not even close. It might be as fast as the E6600, at best.
November 2, 200718 yr >FSX seems to have an extremely low ratio of "increase of>fps/price to be paid". My conclusion: I will not pay thousands>to get a miserable frame rate increase of 10fps...>>tagada>>Do you realize a CPU that will beat everything on that chart can be had for less than $200?Also keep in mind those numbers are pre-SP1, so you can add 30-40% to those numbers if using SP1.My guess is you need to spend some time configuring FSX to run properly, as even with my 2 1/2 year old system I'm running in the 20-27fps range, and thats WITHOUT SP1. As you can see from the chart I'm likely to see a 50% increase in performance when moving to a 3Ghz C2D, and another 30% when installing SP1. I'll easily be running in the 30-40fps range, and there is nothing miserable about that at all.
Create an account or sign in to comment