Simon, what A/C and addons are you using? I can't for the life of me reproduce it

Hey, using the default 737, Gex, utx, rex overdrive, all photoscenery, autogen off, fsdt, ut2 100% airliners, all sliders maxed, aerosoft sfo, manhatten,. I fly in dx 10 mode. The only areas where I notice the microstutters on 1155 is JFK, ORD, all other big cites and airports are 30-75 fps, JFK and ORD have been helped with the lower cas ram for some reason?? Small difference, but much less jerky now in those two areas.

Hi Simon,A part of me has always felt that there was something about this machine that gave me smoothness and fluidity more than most, and suspected it was the Mushkins. I too do not have the microstutters of others. The only real difference seems to be the very low cas. FSX is indeed a strange beast. Thanks for bringing this subject up.MushkinKind regards,Edit: I never tried testing it, but what do you fellas think might be the difference in FSX performance between 8g or 4g of Mushkin 6-8-6-24 with high end Sandy Bridge systems?

Despite my humble machine, I don't have micro stutters either. The limitation I have is an honest one: can get on the frame-rate deficient side in the most complex of situations, which is to be expected and is just a function of the limitations of my hardware combined with a desire to run the highest possible image complexity settings. Noel

Yesterday Gary posted a link to this thread in Simforums.com. This is what Nick had to say about it:

OK, I have let this thread go as far as I intend to let it evolve, and its not evolving it is moving the opposite direction and starting to appear as it is about internet 'pee-pee's' I demonstrated at AVSIM years ago why no benchmark setup that requires an external application such as FRAPS will produce reliable results with FSX and showed quite clearly how FRAPS interferes with benchmark results, and, that the only way FSX can be reliably benchmarked is if Aces had designed an internal benchmark mode which assured the application was running free of any external influence, plus, defined the sim code was in fact placed in a 'local mode'. Noel at AVSIM understands very well the influence memory speed and timing have on the application as well as (in his case) correct FSB and CPU STRAP setup. He and I went though this years ago with his system as he was one of the few online who actually comprehended the information I had posted. If anything his system is key to how FSX works with respect to memory choices and communication rates since his CPU and memory subsystem is not modern by any means. I am locking this thread.. please keep such discoveries and tech advice over at AVSIM where this nonsense is allowed. Have a nice day!

If Fraps is not a valid tool to bench FSX not only this stutter tests I conducted, but also FSMark11 may be pointless after all. I found this thread in a quick search. Unfortunately some posts are incomplete, and images are missing:

Second, your statement: (i) Apparently it is possible that FRAPS itself may interfere with the measuring process.You are correct. Not only did I discover that FRAPS has a defined impact on the result, I found that if the default FSX traffic is not used it will further skew the benchmark result. I discovered when I first tested FSX with FSMark that with WOAI or other addon traffic installed the average benchmark FPS was skewed. There was no consistent result possible (at that time) which could be examined to draw a reasonable conclusion. Once default air traffic was restored the results became stable and consistent. FRAPS itself can alter the test result based on the dynamics of FSX and how the priority system of FSX is addressing the flight.

I wasn't even a member of Avsim back then, so I have no idea what it's all about and I'm curious as to what makes Fraps interfere with FSX. Does anyone have a link to Nick's findings on the subject? Obviously I'm not going to ask him there, even if it's just a link, considering how he reacted to that thread. He would probably just lock it as well if I started another one or just flat out ignore it. I can see some currently active members where involved in those posts, TechGuyMaxC, Zach, Ryan... Noel? is that you who Nick is talking about?

LOL, I just realised how much forum background I'm lacking here. Searching for info I found 2 year old threads like this with pretty much the same arguments as today. Naive on my part to assume it would have been any other way I guess, but sort of explains Nick's attitude towards posts like that he locked.Still looking for the Fraps info, hope it didn't go to the internet limbo when Avsim was hacked or something :Worried:EDIT: found this too: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/206296-ddr2-ddr3-higher-timing-clock-speed-a-myth-part-6/page__p__1338225__hl__nick+fraps__fromsearch__1#entry1338225but it's hard to follow with so many things missing

Edited May 8, 201115 yr by dazz

LOL, I just realised how much forum background I'm lacking here. Searching for info I found 2 year old threads like this with pretty much the same arguments as today. Naive on my part to assume it would have been any other way I guess, but sort of explains Nick's attitude towards posts like that he locked.Still looking for the Fraps info, hope it didn't go to the internet limbo when Avsim was hacked or something :Worried:EDIT: found this too: http://forum.avsim.net/topic/206296-ddr2-ddr3-higher-timing-clock-speed-a-myth-part-6/page__p__1338225__hl__nick+fraps__fromsearch__1#entry1338225but it's hard to follow with so many things missing

Less the censorship and emotion of Nick's response, I basically agree with his findings of the day. However the world has changed and continues to evolve and the SB is unlike previous i7-chips in the way it manages memory and consequently Nick's old data needs reevaluation as it is not necessarily relevant today.Nick has claimed irrelevance on some point of order be it HD-Tune results because of the random vs. sequential result or FSMark/FRAPS result many times. Yet he has repeatedly in subsequent posts used those same tests to make his point, seemingly when it suits his purpose.If I take my computer with 1333MHz RAM and run HD-Tune or FSMark and then I take a set of 2133MHz RAM and run the same tests without any other changes, those results are valid; period. In the case of FSXMark those results need be quantified with the subjective reference to scenery and stutters; i.e. scenery is crisper, same, worse, more, less stutters or seems smoother e.t.c. equally relevant. If my results netted no tangible or subjective differences between 1333 and 2133MHZ as example, i7-2600K to i7-2600K, why would I expect anybody else’s results to be different? Therefore my results are transferable and relevant to anybody else running an i7-2600K, regardless of their particular settings, CFG e.t.c.Now what is not relevant are the results of comparing ones FSMark results, different machine to different machine, as various hardware/software and settings may differ. For instance, I could not say I get 80FPS with2133MHz RAM and you only get 60FPS on 1333MHz RAM so 2133 MHz is better.

Yeah Gary, if this is the original memory thread (or the one remaining) it was on a P35 system. There's another thread where Tim (tfc) did a similar memory test on a LGA1366 I7and Nick acknowleged what he called "Northbridge diminishing returns" or something like that. It's obvious that when the IMC moved to the CPU memory speed/latency lost relevance. I also learned that Gary's (RESET_MCP_ALTITUDE) FSMark07 flight path was designed to switch between urban and rural areas at 250 knots to help expose underperforming components like RAM, and the test flight I used for this doesn't do that. That might explain why I can't notice any more stutters, blurries or slow AG loading with slower RAM, will try later today with FSMark07, but I chose this flight simply because it seemed like a realistic demanding scenario. About that thread where the Fraps interference was discussed I wonder how he recorded frame rate without Fraps with 2 decimal digits. Does anyone know?

About that thread where the Fraps interference was discussed I wonder how he recorded frame rate without Fraps with 2 decimal digits. Does anyone know?

Ya I do not know how he did that. It appears he is saying he used the FSX Frame Counter "No significant difference between FRAPS and the FSX frame counter noted." Maybe there is a mod that will make the FSX counter show two-decimals?

Well I will agree that the FRAPS frame counter doesn't always (more like never) necessarily agree with the FSX frame counter - but I always figured it was the refresh rate of the counter. I've also noticed that if you use FRAPS to actually record frametimes and calculate the avg, min, and max frame rates, they don't agree with the avg, min, and max frame rates reported by FRAPS.With that said, I'm all for questioning the way we've been doing things and finding a better solution. But I'm a little put off by NickN's response. I also was not around for what apparently amounts to alot of history around here. If NickN has a solution, I'm all ears. But again, bashing another forum like that is immature (regardless of his reputation). In fact, it's a quite ridiculous given his reputation.

"Well I will agree that the FRAPS frame counter doesn't always (more like never) necessarily agree with the FSX frame counter - but I always figured it was the refresh rate of the counter. I've also noticed that if you use FRAPS to actually record frametimes and calculate the avg, min, and max frame rates, they don't agree with the avg, min, and max frame rates reported by FRAPS.""With that said, I'm all for questioning the way we've been doing things and finding a better solution. But I'm a little put off by Nick's response. I also was not around for what apparently amounts to alot of history around here. If NickN has a solution, I'm all ears. But again, bashing another forum like that is immature (regardless of his reputation). In fact, it's a quite ridiculous given his reputation."

I'm guessing the difference between the FSX counter and FRAPS is that FRAPS (when looking at FRAPS produced averages)is giving you an average fps over a 1 second span while FSX is giving a simple moving framerate based on FSX's internal clock of -guessing here, of 1/32 of a second.Yeah, I value Nicks Guide for setting up WIN 7 and FSX as a foundation in the process of dialing my system in, but he lost lost me a few months ago when recommended not buying the Sandy Bridge. Hell, if I'd followed his advised on hardware I'd driving an I7 9xx right now.

...Yeah, I value Nicks Guide for setting up WIN 7 and FSX as a foundation in the process of dialing my system in, but he lost lost me a few months ago when recommended not buying the Sandy Bridge. Hell, if I'd followed his advised on hardware I'd driving an I7 9xx right now.

IMO that's a good advice. The LGA 2011 based systems will probably be a much better choice for FSX than LGA 1155. I'm saving my bucks for a new build during Q4 2011 or Q1 2012. But if you are on an unlimited budget I guess building a SB system now won't restrict you from building a new system later this year.My present system is balanced and I get smooth and stutter free flights with pretty high display settings and enjoy FSX very much with this system. No need to build a LGA 1155 at his moment

IMO that's a good advice. The LGA 2011 based systems will probably be a much better choice for FSX than LGA 1155. I'm saving my bucks for a new build during Q4 2011 or Q1 2012. But if you are on an unlimited budget I guess building a SB system now won't restrict you from building a new system later this year.My present system is balanced and I get smooth and stutter free flights with pretty high display settings and enjoy FSX very much with this system. No need to build a LGA 1155 at his moment

lol .....oh, stop it!

IMO that's a good advice. The LGA 2011 based systems will probably be a much better choice for FSX than LGA 1155. I'm saving my bucks for a new build during Q4 2011 or Q1 2012. But if you are on an unlimited budget I guess building a SB system now won't restrict you from building a new system later this year.My present system is balanced and I get smooth and stutter free flights with pretty high display settings and enjoy FSX very much with this system. No need to build a LGA 1155 at his moment

Have you tuned FSX using "The Venetubo Online Tweak Tool"?

when recommended not buying the Sandy Bridge.

Did he recommend agains SB or against the 2500K specifically?

The LGA 2011 based systems will probably be a much better choice for FSX than LGA 1155.

I hope all those who decide to switch to LGA2011 from LGA1155 report what they see. The lack of channels was no impediment for LGA1155's new architecture to beat LGA1366's tri-channel by a fair margin.Even if the 4th channel gives 2011 an edge, question is how much? enough to make it a much better option? Time will tell

I came away with the impression that it was the Sandy Bridge platform. I read his comments during the early part of the SB recall. What really struck me at the time was that he didn't even have access to a Sandy Bridge when he made the recommendation against Sandy Bridge.

I came away with the impression that it was the Sandy Bridge platform. I read his comments during the early part of the SB recall. What really struck me at the time was that he didn't even have access to a Sandy Bridge when he made the recommendation against Sandy Bridge.

Do you have the link please?