FSXMark11

[Charlatan 68]

No contest.  Intel all day

[boom_box 0]

No contest.  Intel all day

 

Well yeah I agree with that but at least the numbers from AMD A10 would decide if I should go with i5 4670K depending on my tight budget..

[dazz 69]

Well yeah I agree with that but at least the numbers from AMD A10 would decide if I should go with i5 4670K depending on my tight budget..

get the  I5. A10 are APUs even slower than FX in FSX. 

[gizmosellsbunnys 106]

Can anyone with AMD A10 7850K make a benchtest on FSXmark11.

Still can't decide if I should go with FX 8350 vs i5 4670/4670k.

 

Intel is best AMD A series is useless and FX is better. Still I5 is best option for fsx.

[rzepa10 0]

Hi All.

This is my results in Windows 8.1

 

Hardware Configuration:
CPU: Intel i7-4770k @ 3.5GHz stock Hyperthreading On
RAM: 1x8GB 2666 (11-13-13-35-2T) 2666mhz
GPU: Gigabyte GTX770 OC 2GB - 1137Mhz stock
HDD: Crucial MX100 512GB SSD
FSXMark11 Results:
Test Frames  Time (ms) Min   Max    Avg
2      13281    300000    27,0   61,0  44,270
3      13079    300000    26,0   61,0  43,597
4      13007    300000    25,0   60,0  43,357
AVG 13122    300000    26,0   60,7  43,7

Hardware Configuration:
CPU: Intel i7-4770k @ 3.5GHz stock Hyperthreading OFF
RAM: 1x8GB 2666 (11-13-13-35-2T) 2666mhz
GPU: Gigabyte GTX770 OC 2GB - 1137Mhz stock
HDD: Crucial MX100 512GB SSD
FSXMark11 Results:
Test Frames Time (ms) Min    Max   Avg
2      14744   300000    29,0   68,0   49,147
3      14919   300000    30,0   67,0   49,730
4      14698   300000    31,0   67,0   48,993
AVG 14787   300000    30,0   67,3   49,3
 
I'm happy with my actual results, will try to do some OC to my haswell, but because I never done it earlier it can take a while

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

I've been away from FSX for a while and am getting ready to upgrade to a new rig for FSX/FS9.  I thought I'd run FSXMark11 on a near fresh FSX install on the computer I am currently using for study, namely an 8 year old Q6600 rig, and see how far behind the curve it now is. The following results will make most of you feel much better with your current systems!:

 

Hardware Configuration:      

CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.4GHz

RAM: 2x2GB 800 (5-5-5-18-2T)

GPU: Gigabyte GTX 460 OC 1GB

HDD: SanDisk Ultra Plus SDSSDHP-256G            

 

FSXMark11 Results:      

Test Frames  Time (ms)  Min  Max  Avg

2 4262 300000 5.0 22.0 14.2

3 4264 300000 8.0 21.0 14.2

4 4280 300000 8.0 21.0 14.3

AVG 4269 300000 7.0 21.3 14.2

 

Note resolution used was 1600x1024 due to limitations of my current TH2G display setup.

 

FWIW, I am looking at getting an i5-4690K and overclocking to over 4GHz, a GTX 770 4G video card and 8G low latency 1600MHz or faster memory. I'll bring the Sandisk SSD over to the new system as load times are already fast enough with it on the old rig. I'll be running 3x1280x1024 via TH2GO and a secondary 1280x1024 display.

 

Based on results I have seen in this thread, I'm hoping to see min FPS on the new system at full TH2GO res exceed max FPS on my old system at test res in FSXMark11. ie. if I can get 25-30 FPS min, I will be a happy chappy!

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

Upgraded my computer yesterday to an i5 4690K with Intel TS13X water cooling and 8GB RAM. It overclocked quite easily to 4.5GHz @ 1.2V and sub 70C temps under Prime95 full load, which I am very happy with for now.

 

I kept the GTX460 for now out of morbid curiosity as to whether I can pull similar min frame rates in FSXMark11 as most folks with similar CPUs but with faster video cards. I don't really care about FPS over 30 and in my experience FSX is CPU bound in the lowest FPS situations anyway.

 

Anyhow, here's my FSXMark11 result for a clean install. Again, resolution is 1600x1024 due to TH2GO display setup limitations.

 

Hardware Configuration:      

CPU: Intel I5-4670K @ 4.5GHz

RAM: 2x4GB 2400 (10-12-12-31-2T)

GPU: Gigabyte GTX 460 OC 1GB

HDD: SanDisk Ultra Plus SDSSDHP-256G            

 

FSXMark11 Results:      

Test Frames  Time (ms)  Min  Max  Avg

2  13028,    300000,  29,  54, 43.4

3  13576,    300000,  31,  56, 45.3

4  13433,    300000,  32,  55, 44.8

AVG 13346 300000,  31,  55, 44.5

 

FWIW, a second test run @ 3840x1024 windowed (ie. how I will use FSX) yielded 26/43/34 ie around a 15% drop in lowest FPS. Given my original goal with upgrading was to see 25-30 FPS min, I'd say mission accomplished!

[Ted Striker 338]

Congratulations on your new system Reset. You are going to enjoy the flights on that. I went from a Q6600 @3.6ghz to a 3770K at 4.5 ghz last year and had similar benchmarks as you.

 

When I first built the 3770k I was using my old 285gtx and had an average Mark11 fps of 42 with 2400-10-11-11-30-1T ram. After installing a 780GTX it went up to 45.5 with much improved graphics quality. I think I was running 1680 x 1050 resolution, but didn't take good enough notes.

 

Out of curiosity I compared the Q6600 at 3.6 ghz with the 3770k at 3.6 ghz. The scores were 23.3 and 35.4 respectively. A nice improvement based on just the technology change.

 

Enjoy your new system and pushing the sliders to the right.

Ted   

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

Thanks for the feedback Ted.

 

My Q6600 system was on its last legs, with memory no longer working in two of the memory slots and one clip broken on the CPU HSF (leading to imbalanced core temps), so it was definitely time for an upgrade.

 

I am still considering a GPU upgrade, but so far my min FPS requirement at max resolution is being met, even with my FSX add-ons installed. While I can definitely notice the difference between AA/AF being on or not, I can't really tell the difference at between lower and higher levels so I am just running with the in-game options enabled at this time. The highest video memory usage and GPU load figures I have seen like this is 800MB and 40% respectively, so it seems there's is still enough life left in the GTX460 yet.

 

Since posting yesterday, I've overclocked a little higher to 4.6GHz and have brought my uncore up from 3.5GHz to 4.6GHz to match, which should yield a slightly higher FSXMark11 result. As I have installed all my FSX add-ons, I will not be able to run a baseline FSXMark11 again, but I might do one to compare before and after overclocking with my current FSX configuration just for my reference.

 

More importantly, my FSX experience is now much closer to what I've always wanted. I can now load up a complex aircraft at a major airport with some heavy weather going down and still achieve a relatively smooth flying experience. Although FSXMark11 doesn't specifically measure HDD impact, the switch to an SSD has significantly improved FSX playability at lower FPS. Pauses and stutters have virtually disappeared!

[Ted Striker 338]

I also still use FSXMark11 to check the performance of my system even though I have installed addons. Just recently I was having problems and noticed my FSXMark11 results had dropped to an average of 22 fps. I disabled my addons one by one and narrowed it down to UTX. Don't know what it the exact issue with it was but I have all my addons enabled again with NickN's basic Nvidia Inspector settings and I am back up to 41.4 FPS. This isn't comparable to the baseline results in this thread as I have GEX, UTX,  MyTrafficX, ASN, cloud textures, plus other addons installed. I'm just illustrating the usefulness of this tool after the initial benchmark testing.

 

Ted 

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

I caved in and bought a GTX 770 someone was selling on Gumtree (similar to craigslist) for half its new price. Was pleasantly surprised at the low end FPS boost it gave me in heavy weather/cloud situations of up to 50% in some cases.

 

Noting that my FSX is now polluted with addons and tweaks, I ran a before and after FSXMark11 to see what difference the upgrade made as I play it. Major differences to the FSXMark11 required setup were resoluton 3840x1024, windowed mode, 80% Ultimate Traffic X commercial AI setting, cloud draw distance 90 nm.

 

Hardware Configuration:      

CPU: Intel I5-4670K @ 4.5GHz

RAM: 2x4GB 2400 (10-12-12-31-2T)

HDD: SanDisk Ultra Plus SDSSDHP-256G

 

3 run average results were:

GTX 460 (1GB) - 20/49/35.5

GTX 770 (2GB) - 25/66/48.5

 

I'm pretty pleased with that result at that resolution.

[westman 257]

Test of Intel Pentium G3258 AE @4.8ghz

Great CHEAP CPU very good Overclocker if you now what you do!!!

This is not the Bottom it do 5ghz and can run the mems at CL9 2800mhz.

only to show a normal allday OC with the right stuff..

 

Memspeed 2666 not 266

[westman 257]

The G3258 result was cooled by a Corsair H110 ambient 22C .

With a custom loop you probaly run the CPU at 4.9-5ghz  and with some efficiency tuning of the system, avg of 52-53fps is possible.

[SAAB340 28]

Test of Intel Pentium G3258 AE @4.8ghz

Great CHEAP CPU very good Overclocker if you now what you do!!!

Very nice to see. I would guess you can get some serious delays loading panel and aircraft textures when switching views at times though? And also some notable FPS drops at times you wouldn't have got them with an i5. I'd guess even a dual core haswell at those speeds will be enough t maintain full autogen population? Not too sure about ground texture loading even with default landclass scenery though...

All of the above could be helped if we got a cheap unlocked Hyperthreaded i3 Haswell (wink wink Intel). Doubt that will happen though as it would eat in to the i5K sales too much.

[mpknemo 0]

Now with Intels Haswell-E and X99 chipset on the market, how would for example the 6 core i7-5820K scale with FSX? Compared with for Example i7-4790K. 

 

The 4790K can maybe be OC to 4,7GHz and the 5820K to 4,5 GHz. Will the extra two cores make any diffrence? And will DDR4 memory be an advantage, even if it operates on the same speed as DDR3?

 

Also one can take into considiration that a system built on 5820K would probably be a couple of hundred Euros more expensive.

 

So feel free to speculate And of course if anyone have the possibility to run some test in FSXmark it would be very interesting!

 

Markus