Sign in to follow this  
Guest over and out

does FS9 benifit from duo cores?

Recommended Posts

How does FS9 run on the new duo core machines? I read somewhere that FSX for example does not take advantage of the Do core system. Since FS9 was developed long before the duo cores, does it run well on them? In other words, with all things being equal if I got one of the new duo core systems would I see a high jump in my frame rates. Now I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I think you will see a definite benefit on FS9. In fact you'd probably be able to max it out completely. Others here who have dual cores will probably confirm.Dual/Quad core is the future, whether we like it or not. So you're going to have to confront this change sooner or later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>How does FS9 run on the new duo core machines? I read>somewhere that FSX for example does not take advantage of the>Do core system. Since FS9 was developed long before the duo>cores, does it run well on them? In other words, with all>things being equal if I got one of the new duo core systems>would I see a high jump in my frame rates. Now I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least for me, upgrading from a 3,4 Ghz System to the smallest C2duo and a new GFX card (see my specs in the sig)improved performance a lot. I can max out all settings with my addons now(PMDG and FS2crew and some Airports). So I would highly recommend investing in a core2duo. I was in the same boat as airtime, hoping to improve my performance for FSX but I am not satiesfied with it.I am no computer gig so I cannot explain why this happens, but if fs9 does not take advantage of the dual core cpu, the system obviously does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although FS9 isn't really being helped (directly) by the second CPU, there are many significant architecture improvements in the new intel dual core CPUs that make them run much, much faster than their P-4 predecessors at the same clock speeds.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is good to know. Because like I said, I would rather get a computer upgrade knowing that I could max out FS9 and run it top end instead of spending all that money just to settle for FSX at low settings.I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does setting fs9 to use only one of the 2 cores benefit fs9, or is it better to let it use both at once?(i.e setting cpu affinity)Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just checked this the very moment now and did not notice any difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm new (6 months) to computer gaming/simming and never had a computer that wasn't an old clunker. I couldn't spell nurd a year ago and now I are one according to friends. I did a lot of research, mostly here, and bought my first power computer and have never looked back. You can see my specs below. I have everything maxed out essentially, locked my FPS at 27, applied quite a few tweaks here and there and she is as smooth as a sows belly and as crisp as a pork rind.I had treated myself to a reward for stopping smoking and have bought the computer and about $700 worth of addons (much cheaper than smoking BTW) so I have most of the usual must haves running all the time. My brother in law also added a bunch of his stuff when he was staying with us for a while and didn't have a computer so I've almost got the full Monty. 70 Gb worth. The computer also runs cool with the Core 2 and 7900 GS so that's not been an issue. One day down the road I will probably even overclock it but I've a 4 year in home warranty and am in no rush.You will not regret buying a Core 2 and I suspect it will perform far beyond your expectations as it has for me, and that's a rare treat in life.Oh yeah, when I received a copy of FSX for my birthday last mongth I not so graciously didn't load it and exchanged it for some hardware bells and a whistle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be a silly question but is it possible to use two computers networked to get better performance from FS9?The reason being is that on EBay I can a used computer like mine for about a few hundred bucks. And for that price it would be worth it if I could network them somehow to get better overall performce.Would this be a pseudo-duo core somehow?I know that may be a stupid question.:-roll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JSC:The only stupid questions are those not asked :-)The only benefit to networking two computers is to run your addons (i.e. ATC, weather, map, etc) on the second computer while FS9 runs alone on the first computer.Now, prior to having a dual-core PC I saw great benefit to this and it really helped with stuttering in RC4 and Activesky updates. However, post dual-core, I no longer see any benefit at all since I am able to run it all on one PC and have FS9 maxed out in all its glory with neer a hickup. You would see far, far, far more benefit from a Duocore or high end AMD dual-core than you would a second computer networked to the first.So the bottom line is that the benefits in FS9 are negligible with the state-of-the-art. Now, if you are running FSX you will need all the help you can get and I would highly recommend offloading as much as possible to a second PC.Hope this helps a littleMike T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use two monitors for the sim and despite the fact I have my old computer networked in I still primarily use the old computer for charts, internet access while flying and manuals, manuals, and more manuals. I'm surprised we don't see more discussion about manuals but I sure know it's sure handy to have them right there and open anytime I need them without disturbing the flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how does this work on two computers?Do you install active sky on the 2nd computer with FS9 on the first, for example?How do the various addons get set to run through the second computer to fee up resources for the first?Is there a write up somewhere on how to do this?Again, it would be much cheeper to get a used computer for a while before getting a brand new duo core, plus my wife would be less to give me one those looks when I tell her I'm buying more stuff for my simulator! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use a similar setup: main FS9 computer with two monitors and an older one for the rest of FS related stuff. Both on a network. How does it work? Through WideFS by Peter Dawson. One of the best investments I made for FS. :)http://www.schiratti.com/dowson.htmlI have ActiveSky, Radar Contact 4, FS Flight Keeper, Flight Deck Companion, AI Smooth, nDac, all of them running on this secondary computer and I can't imagine going back to a one rig setup. It is fairly simple to set everything up, WideFS comes with extensive documentation and so do other programs like ActiveSky and RC, for example. I am in the process of building a new computer for FS although the one I am using now isn't all that bad. I was toying with the idea to have two FS boxes synchronizing FS through Wideview, but decided against it. I'll rather beef up the "WideFS machine" as I call it. :)Regards,Jure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you run FS9 in window mode or full screen when you run the addons on the other computer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full screen. I usually start in windowed mode simply to drag whatever sub-panels I choose to a secondary monitor on the main computer, then go to full screen, but that's got nothing to do with the secondary computer. It's a completely separate unit and FS add-ons on it communicate with the FS computer via WideFS. Regards,Jure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I couldn't spell nurd a year ago and now I are one according to friends."I'm sorry, Nes...I just couldn't let this go. I probably have Kool-Aid overdose.Isn't it spelled, "N-E-R-D"?? I don't really know if it makes a difference becuase I've noticed that fooling aroud with this game and reading the forums has the side effect of teaching me more about computers than I ever thought I would know.And just so I don't get accused of not contributing to this thread, I have to agree that when I got my duo core I notice what for me a big difference In my performance, but I also have more RAM. Is it possible that more RAM is just as responsible? I don't know.Best regardsJan1,KINDWhen I push the button and it works, I'm happy:-)HP Media CenterPentium D 2.80 GHz Duel core2.00 GB RAMNVIDIA GeForce 6200SEConexant Falcon II NTSCXP SP2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To say that it isn't being helped directly by the second CPU is a bit misleading. FS9 on my Core 2 Duo rig shows both cores running about 50-55%. So both cores are working together to run it.FSX shows one core at max and the second at less than 10% so really, FSX isn't really helped by the second CPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>To say that it isn't being helped directly by the second CPU>is a bit misleading. FS9 on my Core 2 Duo rig shows both>cores running about 50-55%. So both cores are working>together to run it.>>FSX shows one core at max and the second at less than 10% so>really, FSX isn't really helped by the second CPU.No, not misleading at all. What you are seeing is a single FS9 thread being swapped back and forth very rapidly between the two cores. But only one core is running the FS9 thread at a time, so no, the second core isn't helping run FS9 directly. In fact the overhead of doing that thread swapping is working against you.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not misleading at all. What you are seeing is a single FS9 thread being swapped back and forth very rapidly between the two cores. But only one core is running the FS9 thread at a time, so no, the second core isn't helping run FS9 directly. In fact the overhead of doing that thread swapping is working against you.

I find that hard to believe personally. Just went into FS9 and checked my performance tab. Both cores show around 55%. Over to processes and set the affinity so that the second core is not being used and the first core usage went to about 98%. If they were swapping threads back and forth, neither one would be using more than the original 55% so a single core shouldn't be maxed if it tries to handle the entire process load.It's a good theory Bob, but in practice, it doesn't hold water very well.:-beerchug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HiYes, FS9 and FSX can benefit from multi core due to the following...FS9 and FSX are not designed explicitly to use multi core using"fine grain" parallel code - as you note. They can however usethe resources of a multi-core system since they are complex programswhich require many resources. 1) The require compute such a scene 3D calculations, collision calculations etc 2) The programs require lots of data of disk, so need to carryout data fetch from disk and RAM. 3) need to send data to GPU 4) On board sound - oops...These resources can be seen as different from the OS, so the OScan implement course grain parallel methods.Data fetch in particular can result in a block to the CPU, socan data transfer to the GPU. So the different processors cando the data management, while calculating. So if you see both processors working over 100% then you are gettingmore than 100% of one processor. I get up to 180% in some cases.If the process was swapping between CPU then you would get less than100% as time slicing would result in wasted time.As for using multiple computers - there is no problem with thisas long as what you want on the "secondary" computer does not needto send to much data across the network - of you will end up witha wait for data. Ie the data transfer rate through a networkis really slow compared to anything within a single computer.I use a second computer (really old laptop) to view maps andlearn the instrumentation while flying. I have not tried anything else more integrated. RegardsTom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just write advanced panels without knowing anything about operating system behavior and performance. I'll go throw my university diploma in Computer Science away as soon as I finish posting this... Too funny.Two CPU cores running at ~50% is equivalent to a single core at 100%. One half plus one half equals a whole, if I remember that lesson from 2nd grade correctly. In one case the single FS9 thread runs for a few microseconds on one CPU, then the thread is swapped by the WinXP executive to the other CPU, then back etc etc. While the FS9 thread runs on one CPU, the other is near idle. The net effect is both CPUs showing an average load of ~50%, which is approximately equivalent to one CPU running the thread at 100%. In the second case, the FS9 thread is constrained to run on a single CPU, keeping its usage up close to 100%, with the other near 0%. Of course there is some overhead added in the process of swapping the thread between CPUs plus the load of services running distributed across both, so the two cores show slightly above 50% when the process is time-shared across CPUs.Sorry you can't believe it, but that's what's happening.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be careful when you present your qualifications, you never knowwho you are flaming :-)I tried to avoid being technical. Although FS9 and FSX are not parallel code which means that thecode is not specifically designed to run the same function (letssay collision detection), each of the "background" tasks...generate and place terrainload terrain, mesh, scenery addonetcare done as threads. Many computer languages support threads, andall interactive programs must use threading. How do we know - wellyou are flying in FS9, and you want to pick a control on that niceVC. You must do the picking in a thread as the flight sim is busyflying your plane. If not implement in a thread then you could notinteract with the program while it was running. Since FS9 and FSX are threaded, then it is up to the OS to decide where to run the threads, and it you have hyperthreading + multi-corethen the OS has a choice. Thread blocking is a common problem withhigh data throughput - so even hyperthreading can help on a singleCPU. This is known as coarse-grain parallelisation which isdifferent from fine-grain prallelisation that can be done if thecode is specifically written for multi-core.You will not get 200% on 2 cores and 400% on 4 cores (where I definea base line of 100% as a single core), since any one process runninga number of thread will have to wait for the slowest thread to complete before doing the next task as it may suffer a datacoherence/integrity problem (look it up). Ie we are into the world ofload balancing. This is why FS9 will swap between cores since theprogram is likely to have been written in modules with many threadsstarting and stopping. Where any one thread ends up is completelyundefined and depends the instantaneous load balance and how the OSpartitions these thread. How you set your sliders for quality, FSB speed,memory latency, F1/F2 bus speed/size and all sorts of thingseffect the speed up of multi core; then there is the OS and howwell it is written - has aggressive branch detection in the predictivecode bla- bla. So, I think that multi-core are useful for simulation (and all complex programs). How useful depends on many things you cannotcontrol, and some things you can control. In FS9 and FSX youcan play with the quality of view etc, sometimes you change somethingand you get a lot of bangs for you buck, sometimes it grinds to a halt and you get a slide show. It all comes down to tweaking yourFS9, setting the parameters in fs9.cfg, and seeing what works. Ihave tweaked my to about 180% over a single CPU. No more from me on the subject, take it or leave it, and yesI do know what I am talking about, honest :DRegardstom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>run FS9 at an outstanding level with full add-ons and high>frame rates, long before buying a new machine just to run FSX>on its low end settings?>In my case it does all settings to the right traffic 100%and all other programs such as ASV on the second cpu :-)FS9 looked never so great as now :-) Andr

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