FSXMark11

[TechguyMaxC 516]

Very impressive results. - This is really great to see that the IB chips paired with PCIe3, 680, and fast RAM can produce a great result! Thanks for sharing!

 

Would you be willing to take the test @ 4.5GHZ?

 

I was actually thinking of going the opposite direction since I've gotten temps under control by popping the IHS off to replace the thermal paste. Shooting for 4.8GHz now.

 

Going to create an image backup now so I can update my Vertex 4's firmware, I'll continue FSXMark testing as the week goes by.

[Ben Cap 89]

I was actually thinking of going the opposite direction since I've gotten temps under control by popping the IHS off to replace the thermal paste. Shooting for 4.8GHz now.

 

Going to create an image backup now so I can update my Vertex 4's firmware, I'll continue FSXMark testing as the week goes by.

 

How difficult was the re-application of thermal compound within the chip?

[TechguyMaxC 516]

How difficult was the re-application of thermal compound within the chip?

 

Not at all, though I made the poor choice of using the IC 7 Diamond compound which would not be wise to remove at this point, given its abrasive quality. If I had to do it all over again, I'd use Cool Laboratory Liquid Pro or Ultra. Then I'd lap the IHS and the H100 base and apply a sheet of Indigo Extreme. That would remove the thermal transfer bottleneck entirely, IMHO.

[Ben Cap 89]

Not at all, though I made the poor choice of using the IC 7 Diamond compound which would not be wise to remove at this point, given its abrasive quality. If I had to do it all over again, I'd use Cool Laboratory Liquid Pro or Ultra. Then I'd lap the IHS and the H100 base and apply a sheet of Indigo Extreme. That would remove the thermal transfer bottleneck entirely, IMHO.

 

What I am having a hard time understanding is why Intel decided to use such cheap quality paste.

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Most impressive performance. I am thrilled that the march to faster and better equipment for Flight Simulation marches on!

 

Kind regards,

[Ben Cap 89]

Most impressive performance. I am thrilled that the march to faster and better equipment for Flight Simulation marches on!

 

This is exactly how I feel too!

 

I remember hearing an elderly man tell me that the one of the most important things that he learned was to embrace change.This is very apparent in a situation as with Ivy Bridge.

 

At first, many of us on the forum were quite upset about the temperatures and 'de-lidding' nonsense etc. But, after some diligent and persistent members purchased IB chips, we have come to realize that this new platform is simply another step in the right direction. - A step into the bright future ahead of us.

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Hey Word Not Allowed, whatayallthink so far? What will IB-E be like?

[dazz 69]

Finally got back to re-testing after setting everything up according to instructions again and I'm very happy to say that with the latest 301.42 driver performance is back up to results I had last reported, and even a bit higher! Confirmed wideviewaspect=true this time as well. Looks like I had something mis-configured in the Nvidia Control Panel previously that was causing results to drop when I enabled wideview. Set it back to stock and here we are:

 

 

So the only difference with HLJames is the GPU and the RAM clocks... can you do a quick run without the GPU overclock just to confirm that's what¡'s making the difference please?

[Kosta 122]

Hey Word Not Allowed, whatayallthink so far? What will IB-E be like?

 

Well, as you might have noticed, I've been quite inactive lately about IB discussions - exactly for the reason as I don't actually see it as such a big step forward (it is a small step though). Maaaaybe also in the right direction (Haswell?), but after SB performance, IB looks like Intel is going in other direction which isn't for us.

 

I've been on an Intel/Microsoft seminar lately, and a guy also told me that Intel is going towards performance laptops, desktops are becoming quite old story and are going to become things for hardcore gamers - which means prices are going to skyrocket. All the while Intel isn't gearing their current mainstream processors like 2500k/2600k toward us/desktop users but rather towards laptops.

What an IB-E is going to become is a big question. But - why would a E processor be so much better? As I understand it, E is going to be a six or eight core, but the same CPU as IB... as far as FSX is concerned.

 

I am actually wondering, and noone here can prove me otherwise, how good of a business SB chips were/are for Intel.

Because if you look in retail store, how many computers with SB are being sold in comparison to laptops and weaker desktops. Not to mention consoles.

We (including other gamers too) are a handful of users. Seriously - I lead a shop that sells notebooks, and we do have high performance around €1000 notebooks, with both Intels and AMDs - what do you think, how many people buy those, and how many people buy notebooks priced at €500 range?

I wouldn't wonder if Intel shifted most of their resources towards low(er) classes, leaving us exposed to chips like IB or uber-expensive chips like Extreme editions.

 

I might he completely off, I hope I am actually, but now you might understand why I have been so quiet about this :-) I simply don't want to mix up too much the current chip status!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ramrunner800 10]

I'm getting psyched by these IB/Fast RAM/PCIe 3.0 results. I will be receiving my GTX 680 and 2600MHz RAM this morning, and will commence with a clean install and testing immediately. Unfortunately the room I'm currently in has a very high ambient temp (85f or so), so my OC will be limited to 4.5GHz, but hopefully it will still be decent.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

So the only difference with HLJames is the GPU and the RAM clocks... can you do a quick run without the GPU overclock just to confirm that's what¡'s making the difference please?

 

I'll go ahead and load up the stock GPU profile and see what results I get, though I suspect the increased performance is actually due to the newer driver!

[TechguyMaxC 516]

Ok, re-tested with stock GPU clocks and get this: performance actually goes up slightly. Looks like that GPU OC is probably only going to come in handy when I add the other two monitors and get some heavy AA going. Here's the highest results thus far, with 301.42 driver and NO GPU OC:

 

[dazz 69]

Thanks Techguy, awesome results

[ramrunner800 10]

I tested two configurations, essentially the same, but with different sets of RAM timings. Here's the link to the first test, and here's the link to the second (I tried to embed them but the editor threw a fit). I was really impressed to see that by increasing from 1600MHz to 2600MHz I saw a 5 FPS performance boost. I'm liking the IB/Fast Ram/PCIe 3.0 combination.

[ant_1984 20]

Do you think going from 16GB of 1600MHZ to 8GB of 2133MHZ RAM would yield a performance improvement as far as FSX goes on a SB system?

 

From what I'm seeing here fast RAM seems to really be helping and I'm thinking this may be part of what's holding back my FSX mark results.

 

I can pick up this http://www.gskill.com/products.php?index=403 for $85 AUD so thinking it may be worth a shot. What do you think?