Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Useful Upgrade Info for ya!!!

Recommended Posts

Guest

Greg,The 2800+ (Thoroughbred) is the best that you and I can do for awhile. The 2800+ (Thoroughbred) is a limited edition chip. The Barton 2800+ will be out soon if it is not out already. For FS2002, the Barton is inferior due to it's lower mhz rating. It utilizes extra L2 cache to boost it up to 2800+. Even the 3000+ runs slower in terms of mhz than the 2800+ Thoroughbred, the Barton 3000+ running at 2170Mhz vs the 2250 for the 2800+ Thoroughbred. The Thoroughbred won't officially be released as a 3000+ chip. The great thing about the Thoroughbred is that it is a very overclockable chip!! ANd, out board is a very overclockable board!!!Best of luck!!RobbExcuse my rambling if you already know this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Robb,I guess the 2800 is next in line for me, though I doubt I will do much overclocking with this board; my particular mobo just does not have what it takes to run with any stability beyond default speeds. Even at 136MHz FSB it crashes flight sim after a while. Memory tweaks? Forget it. I purchased 2 Mushkin 3200 (400MHz) modules and have to run them at the slowest timings. Memory bandwidth stinks. Guess I got a 'lemon' of a motherboard, but hey, it's almost 6 months old now, time to retire it! :-)Just another FS freak,Greg G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going the cheap route here...I'm soon getting a XP2400+ and Epox 8RDA+. I'm hoping to hit at least 2.4 GHz with the XP chip, though nothing can be taken for granted when overclocking. That would give it a performance rating of well over 3000+, not bad for a $140 chip. I'm not expecting miracles over my XP1900+/8KHA+ combo but things should be a bit better around detailed airports.


Asus Prime X370 Pro / Ryzen 7 3800X / 32 GB DDR4 3600 MHz / Gainward Ghost RTX 3060 Ti
MSFS / XP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Not a bad idea Jimmi, keep us posted. I just might take that route if overclocking is succesful. I have never had such a struggle bumping up a cpu as with this system. Default speeds are rock solid though.G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I would retire that MBoard. Get ya a new NForce2 board or the one I am using for a little less money for about the same performance using FS2002. Both boards are very similar as far as performance goes. FS2002 is a CPU hog, and that is an understatement!Best of luck bud!Robb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

That is probably something I should have done actually. The TBred CPUs are pretty overclockable. I am going to take my 2225 CPU up to at least 2.4Ghz by increasing my bus frequency. AMD has locked the multiplier. I am not familiar with your MB, but at $140.00 a pop, you should have no problem. One thing I was thinking about is that with World Airports and scenery such as LAX, you would need about 6Ghz to get smooth framerates. That is why I probably won't try and increase my current CPU much beyond 2.4Ghz. I will throw in an R350 when it comes out to enjoy all the options with no loss in framerates.Moving up from a 2100+ (266DDRbus) to a 2800+ (333DDRbus) got me an average of about 4 frames per second, so that was a 100 bucks per frame. I think boosting it up to 2.4Ghz will give me another frame. I am not sure how high I can boost up the 2800+ using a good air cooled fan- which you will need a copper-based one for any AMD processor 2200+ and above.Best of luck!Robb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Robb,I'm joining the discussion late, so I hope this doesn't get buried. I just set up my FS2002 to match yours (same display and hardware settings, weather, everything. The only scenario I can replicate is Meigs, because I don't have the scenery or a/c used in your other scenarios. At Meigs, I'm seeing52 - 58 FPS (~55 mostly)This is better than double what you posted for the 2100+. Guess what my CPU is? A 2100+! Now, I'm overclocking it to 2600+ specs, and pushing the FSB along at 192 Mhz with memory sync'd at this speed (e.g. 384 Mhz), so that accounts for things somewhat. But after doing some tests, it doesn't seem to account for as much as I would have thought. To see the effect of overclocking, I reset to the default FSB and multiplier for the 2100+, and in the same scenario I'm seeing:45 - 50 FPSIt doesn't look to me like the FSB and memory speed is in play here, only the CPU speed. Going from 1733 Mhz to 2112 Mhz is an increase of 22 percent. Going from 47 FPS to 55 FPS is an increase of 17 percent. We're probably seeing some nonlinearity in the increase in FPS per increase in Mhz as Mhz increases (e.g. it is going to be less than 1 to 1). If your CPU's are running at stock speed, you gained 22 percent in FPS (24 to 29, at Meigs) for a 30 percent increase in Mhz (from 1.73 Ghz to 2.25 Ghz), again less than 1 to 1. And while your simflyers scenario has very poor frame rates, percentage-wise the increase from ~7 to ~9 -- 28 percent -- is pretty good, and all you could expect from the increase in Mhz.Now, all that said, just a couple of more things. I still seem to be getting nearly twice the frame rates "out of the box" compared to your experience, and the only major differences between my 2100+ setup and yours (at default speeds) would be the chipset and video card. My mobo (Abit N7) uses the nForce2 chipset, and my video card is a Radeon 9500 successfully hacked with Soft9700. If YOU were to tell ME that just changing the mobo and video card could nearly double my frame rates, I'd be skeptical. But I cannot deny the numbers I'm seeing.Despite having what seems on all accounts to be a system others would die for (over 16000 on 3dmark2001se, and over 5000 on 3dmark2003), I don't keep all sliders maxed. I did max them for comparison to your results. But then I gradually restored them to the settings I use. Here are the results -- at stock 2100+ speed:45 - 50 : Maxed52 - 58 : Terrain mesh detail backed off to 80 percent52 - 58 : Max visibility 9058 - 71 : Ground scenery cast shadows off66 - 77 : Scenery Complexity backed off to Dense77 - 100 : Water effects backed off to Detail77 - 100 : A/C Reflections Off77 - 100 : A/C Cast Shadows OffThen I restored my overclock to 192 x 11 (2112 Mhz) and get100 - 125This increase in FPS -- ~25 percent -- is pretty good considering that I'm only increasing the Mhz 22 percent. But the FPS fluctuates pretty wildly at this level, so without an average counter it is hard to say for sure exactly what the increase is.FWIW.-Basil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

WOW! Basil!!!Let me contemplate what you have typed here. You must have the thoroughbred 2100+ which is supposed the be the best overclockable chip there is in terms of potential increase in mhz speed. I am not sure if my old one is the Tbred or the Tbird. I thinks is a Tbird which would not have been that overclockable...Either way, you specs are impressive!!!I see that your overclocking did about what mine did in terms of percentages. The other stuff you have here is blowing me away!!!!!I read the following article which is a direct comparison of my K-T400 (A7V8X) board and the ASUS NForce2 (A7N8X) board, and there does not seem to be that much difference between the two. http://www.legionhardware.com/html/doc.php?id=220I wonder what could account for that much of a difference between what I am seein and what you are seeing? If what you have posted is true, I'll run out tomorrow and purchase me a NForce2 board.I'd like to hear more about what you feel the reason for the difference is. Also, take a read at the article and let me know what you think. You may just be on a gold mine here!!!Also, why do you use the setting less than max if your machine obviously can do more than the max without difficulties?I feel like I am in one of those dreams where you have been given super great news, but then are awaken to find the same old stuff!!!Could it be your card? I'm guessing, if anything, it's your NForce2 MBoard.Here's looking forward to your reply!Robb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

>WOW! Basil!!! >>Let me contemplate what you have typed here. >>You must have the thoroughbred 2100+ which is supposed the >be the best overclockable chip there is in terms of >potential increase in mhz speed. Right, Robbie. It is a T-bred B. Actually, my o'clock of it at 2112 Mhz is pretty modest. A lot of people claim to get 2.2-2.4 Ghz with this chip, but when I go much higher, I have stability problems with Prime95. But hey, for $95, and with the performance I'm seeing in FS2002, I'm happy as lark.>The other stuff you have here is blowing me away!!!!! >Me, too.>I read the following article which is a direct comparison of >my K-T400 (A7V8X) board and the ASUS NForce2 (A7N8X) board, >and there does not seem to be that much difference between >the two. >>http://www.legionhardware.com/html/doc.php?id=220 >I read it, and focusing on the gaming benchmarks, the differences seem about like what are indicated in this review:http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=1719&p=9>I wonder what could account for that much of a difference >between what I am seein and what you are seeing? If what >you have posted is true, I'll run out tomorrow and purchase >me a NForce2 board. While I think there is no question that the nForce2 chipset is the better chipset for XP processors, those reviews would not indicate that the difference is sufficient to account for what we are seeing.>You may just be on a gold mine here!!! >This is the first time I've done a major upgrade where the results have exceeded my expectations. To me, the "gold mine" sits on a three-legged stool: the performance of the 2100+ XP, the nForce2 mobo, and the 9700 Pro (well it is almost a 9700 Pro, technically speaking).>Also, why do you use the setting less than max if your >machine obviously can do more than the max without >difficulties? >Well, I don't sit on the runway at Meigs watching 100-125 FPS very often. I do all my virtual flying in Alaska, with Merrill Field in Anchorage as a home base. Just to see what difference it makes, I just jumped from Meigs, where I was still getting 100-125 FPS, to Merrill Field, and the FPS dropped to 45-50 FPS. Then I jumped from the 172 to the Dreamfleet Cardinal that I do most of my flying in, and the FPS dropped to 41-46 FPS. Then I turned on ActiveSky, and the FPS fell a bit more to ~33-35 FPS -- oh, wait, some AI traffic is now waiting for me to get moving. I have a very rich AI environment in the Anchorage area, and I'll see the FPS dip down to 20 FPS at some point, though usually it stays at 30 or above.>I feel like I am in one of those dreams where you have been >given super great news, but then are awaken to find the same >old stuff!!! >Hey, don't wake me up!>Could it be your card? I'm guessing, if anything, it's your >NForce2 MBoard. >Well, like I said, there's three legs to the stool I'm sitting on, and I think they all play a part. But I do love the nForce2!There is one last thing we haven't talked about, though: memory. I have PC3200 DDR memory, set to run in sync with the FSB. Both the syncing of the memory speed to the FSB, and the level to which I can push the FSB because of the 400 Mhz memory (I have it at 384 Mhz with the FSB at 192 Mhz), adds importantly to the overall performance of the system.-Basil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest PaulL01

Hi Robb,Nice box! :)The numbers seem just a tad low for your specs since you state "AA=off".I am gonna guess that perhaps in the display driver settings you have either force AA checked or "texture sharpening"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Thanks Paul. I will check out my situation and get back to ya. In the mean while, please comment on Basil's posts and results. His results are very interesting. I know you are a hareware wizzard, and I'd like to have your opinion on his mind-blowing results.Thanks,RobbI am going to check out my display driver settings now if I can find them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest PaulL01

>Thanks Paul. I will check out my situation and get back to >ya. In the mean while, please comment on Basil's posts and >results. His results are very interesting. I know you are >a hareware wizzard, and I'd like to have your opinion on his >mind-blowing results. >>Thanks, >>Robb Robb,Having run the FS numbers on many different machines including those very close to running 4Ghz-(p4) with O/C 9700pro etc...The numbers don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

>2.Basil results my not have been in cockpit view...??? Not so, Paul. Tell me, do you find my results hard to believe? I honestly do not know if they are out of line or not? That's why I asked, a while back, if there were any "rigorous" benchmark scenarios for FS2002. While the "sitting in the 172 at Meigs" is hardly taxing, it is a common denominator for the sake of comparison.>3.or.... well obviously there is a setting difference that accounts >for the difference that we might see in a system that has skewed the >results. I tried to match Robb's settings exactly as he posted them. I do acknowledge no AF or AA. But that is how I understood Robb to have his system set up for the numbers he posted. If his numbers are low for his system, as you suggest, and he's sure of his FS2002 setup, then I agree he needs to look into his system display settings to see if there is something holding him back.-Basil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Hey guys,I don't see an option for my system displays for any 3D functions. Is there something I need to download?Thanks,Robb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...