Hi, have read loads of posts on i7 cpu's but not many on AMD cpu's. Having used AMD cpu's for many years and now thinking of upgrading to the Phenom II x4 955 black edition with thoughts of o/c, but looking on this and other forums the AMD cpu's don't get much mention is there a reason for this, are the intel chips better or what......any views on this, I could be persuaded to convert to intel!!!! peter

HardOCP did a great review of real world scaling in FSX of 4 different mainstream chips from Intel and AMD. HardOCP FSX RW GameplayI myself picked the AMD X3 720 BE due to the cost and overclocking capability. Good Luck

Anyone who knows FSX and knows how it responds to HIGHER scenery settings also knows those tests ARE FLAWED and to quite honest in my personal opinion are completely STACKED in AMDs favor to MATCH IntelHINT: Look at the SCENERY, TRAFFIC and GRAHICS TAB for the CLUESSCENERY is excessively LOW except water which leads to the next clueGRAPHICS are run in DX10 MODE - That was slick. FPS results will be flatlined with low scenery and traffic settingsNO Screenshots in real time to verify image clarity and distance resultHardly ANY AL/GA traffic which slams anyones CPU no matter what mode. 20% max AL/GA traffic? Anyone who buys into AMD-AMD is the same as Intel and Nvidia in FSX (defined by correct head to head in the right hardware selections and settings) falls under what PT Barnum once said-If it looks too good to be true, it probably is-There is a sucker born every minuteAnd finish this post with:You get what you pay for... -Phil Taylor, Lead Developer Aces...IF you know how to use it. - NickNand I wont make anymore comments about it. Choice is yours.. make it a good one so you dont sit there and tweak all day then spend more later anyway :(

Anyone who buys into AMD-AMD is the same as Intel and Nvidia in FSX (defined by correct head to head in the right hardware selections and settings) falls under what PT Barnum once said

While I can appreciate your view points, trying to say the folks at HardOCP "STACKED" the test on purpose is ridiculous. Never have I seen HardOCP favor one manufacturer over another unlike other major review sites. Even when manufacturers complain HardOCP will stand by their results and even retest. No where in the review did they say AMD = Intel. In fact numerous times the reviewer stated the AMD chips didn't offer the same performance as the Intel. HardOCP tried as best as they could to create a balanced test. They used the same exact settings for each chip at the same resolution of 2560x1600. You have always been very helpful to the FS community but unfortunately your post sounds more like an Intel a really excited user than a enthusiast with constructive criticism.Why don't you post/email HardOCP on how to do the test correctly or do your own benchmarks that show the i7 vs the Phenom II's under the perfect conditions you approve of.

I am a 'a really excited user', if that is the definition people wish to use, to what works and could care less what anyone else thinks about itThe day AMD/AMD runs FSX better or nearly equal to Intel/Nv (apples to apples on the right system components/FSX settings/tuning) will be the day I come in here and post that.. and support it EXACTLY as I support the opposite right now... If that was true I would want people to save money and would wish to let them know they can and get a better or nearly equal resultI dont support what I do right now out of some silly 'a really excited user' desire either.. I support it so people get pointed in the right direction with their flight sim hardware because my ONLY goal is to see people FLY without coming into forums and griping about it.. and at the same time fly in the best environment for scenery and visuals they can without learning thing$ the hard wayAnd I got news fer ya.. I have seen a few "stacked' reviews over there once and a while over the years, just as I have seen them at many different hardware sites.. although HARD is not anywhere near as bad as a few choice othersIs it possible they just happened to set that test up in ignorance where AMD and Intel would benchmark out in 'overtone' of the result numbers as almost the same? (lets be serious.. a 2-4FPS difference?) Youbetcha!anything is possibleI just found it very interesting the defined areas that would bring on very 'similar in nature' results were established for that test and NEVER exceeded or changed.. or SHOWN in graph data/numbers if they were run higherwhich I qualified my assessment with "in my personal opinion"People tend to not read what they say in reviews.. and instead look at the pictures/numbers. The reality when they buy that hardware and fly real world FSX settings people want to SEE is they dont get a 2-4FPS differences (less) as the pretty pictures suggest, .. its more like 8-10FPS less (sometimes more) and then there are the blurs...... "Minimal" was as high as we could set Traffic no matter what on the two AMD CPUs. - STATED FOR THE FIRST TESTSUnlike ALL other tests in that review with had AA enabled, the last test set (APPLES TO APPLES) they removed AA from the loop and THEN they then finally ran with higher traffic (20% is not high either).. if AA had been ON, and traffic set to a reasonable value (30% MIN) those AMD numbers would not have been as flatering compared to Intelno need to waste time telling HardOCP about it.. :( they already know it, the reviewer said so himself :(

I've always wondered why nobody but me could get SLI working. oh well more frames for me I guess....

I've always wondered why nobody but me could get SLI working. oh well more frames for me I guess....

AVN8tr:Are you planning to start the same thing you started in the following thread?HERE :(

I've always wondered why nobody but me could get SLI working. oh well more frames for me I guess....

Lol, and we've always wondered how some could be so ignorant to think that SLI could improve the performance of a CPU bound game.

Wouldn't the performance of any application depend on the CPU... heres a hint guys.. if you do proper load balancing of the GPUs it will work

Wouldn't the performance of any application depend on the CPU... heres a hint guys.. if you do proper load balancing of the GPUs it will work

avn8tr, You should really report your results back to Phil Taylor. Would you be so kind as to do a write-up of proper FSX hardware selection and tuning? We all would really appreciate it because there just doesn't seem to be anything out there now that's trustworthy. :( Please, show us all how we can use SLI!I'm sure you know of a way to make hyperthreading work too.-jk

Wouldn't the performance of any application depend on the CPU... heres a hint guys.. if you do proper load balancing of the GPUs it will work

Wow, you must have a special version of FSX that properly utilizes the GPU.

What if I bet (like he did in the other thread) that AVN8tr wont reply back? :(

To respond to the original question.I'm using an AMD system and it runs FSX pretty well and I didn't had to spend twice the money on a i7 965 systemUsing PMDG MD11/LDS767 - paywaye sceneries - very dense settings - FPS locked at 30 with an average of 26-28 FPS on the entire flight (recorded by ACARS utility) and they are smooth FPS... I'm pretty sure i7 a really excited user will bash this system and will say their i7 runs better .. and I'm sure they are, but I didn't had to spend the money they did, I'm very happy with the results and I will use the rest of the money on me and my family. period.The Phenom II 955 kick butts and more when you overclock it with a custom cooler.What I'm using is:AMD Phenom II 940 Black EditionGigabyte MA790X-UD4P4 Gb Gskill 1066Caviar Black HDD x2XFX Nvidia GTX275You want the best buy an i7 extreme, however to say AMD is not good for FSX is a lie, you can have a very good experience with them.Regards

I said it once and I will say it again.. people do not read benchmark reviews in their entirety and they skip to the charts, and, they don

Charly: I only need to look at the Xbox360 to understand why ATI/AMD aren't behind at all... they won't sell you those chips though.. made for and subsidized by Microsoft. :)