FSXMark11

[Kosta 122]

Yes, I did. I don't really understand what the question is?

[liketofly1 11]

Well, the question was if there would be any other solution to get ones FSX.cfg tweeked (still following the benchmark rules) then with bojotes website, since this was down.

 

However, I saw bojotes site it is back again today, so never mind.....

 

regards

[Kosta 122]

Yes, just look in the link in my sig. It's definitely a good guide due to hundreds of reports in the thread.

 

But if you want to go with Bojote, you're very welcome.

[liketofly1 11]

Hi Word Not Allowed,

 

Yes, just look in the link in my sig. It's definitely a good guide due to hundreds of reports in the thread.

 

But if you want to go with Bojote, you're very welcome.

 

I know your guide, and follow it to the dot! on my usual setup, however in the Installation & benchmark guide which comes with the benchmark, it specifically says to use *******'s tool and not to add any other tweeks....

 

That was why I was asking.....

 

regards

[TechguyMaxC 516]

Hi Word Not Allowed,

 

 

 

I know your guide, and follow it to the dot! on my usual setup, however in the Installation & benchmark guide which comes with the benchmark, it specifically says to use *******'s tool and not to add any other tweeks....

 

That was why I was asking.....

 

regards

 

That's just to maintain continuity by using the minimum number of tweaks specifically for the sole purpose of benchmarking FSX. It puts everyone on an even playing field so that benchmark results can be compared without worrying about who's using what tweaks. Word Not Allowed's tweak guide has more powerful tweaks in it that will unlock additional performance, but there's no guarantee they will all work with your system, you have to try them out and see for yourself.

[Kosta 122]

Hi Word Not Allowed,

 

 

 

I know your guide, and follow it to the dot! on my usual setup, however in the Installation & benchmark guide which comes with the benchmark, it specifically says to use *******'s tool and not to add any other tweeks....

 

That was why I was asking.....

 

regards

 

In that case no prob.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[tfm 169]

I thought I'd try FSX on my new office PC (not for play): no heavy o/c, re-using an old GPU, and no attempt on my part to find equivalents for the Nvidia settings in ATI's drivers:

 

 

 

 

"Max" might be capped by the vertical refresh rate which I don't know how to fiddle with in the ATI drivers.

 

Quite interesting to see the minimum fps holding up with this combination: this is the critical figure, IMHO.

 

Tim

[BimmerCop 332]

Here is my result with a GTX280 1GB card. My GTX680 4GB FTW+ just arrived this morning, so I will post the results with that card later today.

 

 

 

EDIT: The CPU is being listed as a 3700K. That was my mistake, sorry. It should say 3770K

[snowpig 0]

A result that should be achievable by many people without too much trouble.

 

Overclock settings:

• HT OFF
  
• multiplier 49,
  
• DRAM speed 2133
  
• DRAM voltage 1.575 (MOBO defaulted to 1.60 which concerned me as I read somewhere that 1.575 was highest Intel spec.)
  

That’s it. All else default (including CAS 11)

Cooling using Noctua D14. Very, very quiet! Ambient 24c for these tests.

 

vCore was adjusted by MOBO. It varies depending on the CPU load:

• During Prime 95 FFT Large 1.42v 70c steady for hours
  
• FSXMark11 (sorry no vCore), MAX 54c
  
• FSX on my 3840x1024 with FSXMark11 settings otherwise: 1.47v (really!), MAX 54c
  
• Idle 1.14v
  

I cannot explain why the vCore is so much higher with FSX than Prime95, but it is obviously a different workload. I am not too concerned since I do not run FSX all day, every day.

 

Temperatures and voltages are from ASUS Sensor Recorder which comes with the MOBO (ASUS P8Z77-V Pro).

 

Based on other results here, I suspect that it is my GTX 570 that is limiting the max frame rates.

[dazz 69]

I cannot explain why the vCore is so much higher with FSX than Prime95

 

Most likely Vdroop.

 

1.47 is a bit steep, you should really consider adjusting your Vcore manually. You may also want to cancel that Vdroop with some LLC.

Those temps are great for such high clocks

[westman 257]

Most likely Vdroop.

 

1.47 is a bit steep, you should really consider adjusting your Vcore manually. You may also want to cancel that Vdroop with some LLC.

Those temps are great for such high clocks

 

Agree probaly Vdroop, and some parts of FSMark11 need hi vcore to be stable at that clock.

To get higer score the GPU do probaly 2fps and faster mems with thigter timings and N1 do 2 fps

[bruguima 0]

Hello Guys,

 

This is my new rig. Above 4.6 ghz I´m having some crashes.

 

See the tests results...

 

Regards

 

Bruno

[Ben Cap 89]

Hello Guys,

 

This is my new rig. Above 4.6 ghz I´m having some crashes.

 

See the tests results...

 

Regards

 

Bruno

 

Very nice results!

[bangoman 2]

Some testing I did to answer my question of which setup should be in the FSX rig - i3-540 @ 4140mhz or a stock i5-3470. (X-posted from my thread) The i5-3470 + B75 mobo + 16gb RAM was about CA$350 with taxes and shipping (about $310 sans taxes/s&h).

 

The lowest for a K-series CPU in Canada? There was a deal for a 3570k + mobo for $299+tax so $50 for RAM = $350+HST = $395-ish. For an FSX specific build, K series all the way but I thought this would be useful to see some "regular" hardware in action.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[cpt-robie 0]

OK so I've put together my new fltsim PC and wanted to set a benchmark before I start OC'ng.

See My PC profile for the rig details.

 

So heres whats been done:

 

Bios: Turned off hyperthreading & manually entered in DRAM timings

OS: Turned off power saving & installed the latest drivers

FSX: Straight install w/ Accel to separate HDD drive and settings according to the FSMark11 guide