Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

the_nanard

a question to i7 users

Recommended Posts

i plan to buy a i7 2600k!i'd like to know if you use your i7 with or without the hypertreading for fsx ....thanks for the answer

Share this post


Link to post
i plan to buy a i7 2600k!i'd like to know if you use your i7 with or without the hypertreading for fsx ....thanks for the answer
And if it makes difference- Good question!

Share this post


Link to post
And if it makes difference- Good question!
FSX can't use HT & some of the chips can OC a bit higher with HT disabled. Hopefully that helps some.I have HT disabled on mine & can't tell any difference either way. Other games/apps may take advantage of HT, but if you're only talking about FSX using it won't help at all.

Share this post


Link to post

FSX doesnt use HT, so your better off saving your money and going with the 2500k. The 2500k is nearly identical to the 2600k; but it doesn't have HT. Again fsx doesn't utilize HT. Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post

FSX doesn't use HT. However, if you're going to use CPU-consuming apps such as Adobe Premiere of any (strong) video/image editing software, you'll like the HT technology, it really makes a difference.So basically if you're only planning on using FSX, an i7 2600k is useless.

Share this post


Link to post

i know the use of the hyperthreading but my question was more to know if there is a bad effect in using HT with fsx!

Share this post


Link to post
i know the use of the hyperthreading but my question was more to know if there is a bad effect in using HT with fsx!
I did tests with ht on and off and different affinity mask settings and have the optimal settings for me are ht and affinity mask of 13 (this is with a 2600k). I get the same fps with ht on but on certain conditions, I get 2-3 less fps with ht off than on (I dont know why maybe because fsx isn't optimized for ht) and with affinity mask of 13.

Share this post


Link to post

HT also tends to make the chip run hotter, which if you're overclocking can be an issue, as heat tends to be a severe limiting factor in setting up an OC.

Share this post


Link to post

[JOBSCHEDULER] AffinityMask=15A yes or a no to add into the fsx.cfg if you own a 2500K or a 2600K?

Share this post


Link to post
[JOBSCHEDULER] AffinityMask=15A yes or a no to add into the fsx.cfg if you own a 2500K or a 2600K?
Should be (for 4 cores): AffinityMask=14Hyper Threading OFF, especially for better overclocking.

Share this post


Link to post

If all you're doing is FSX, get the 2500K.

Share this post


Link to post
If all you're doing is FSX, get the 2500K.
why? Like Im not being cocky,I actually don't know why and I was planning on ordering the 2600k tonight lol So get the 2500k

Share this post


Link to post
why? Like Im not being cocky,I actually don't know why and I was planning on ordering the 2600k tonight lol So get the 2500k
Because the major difference between the 2500k & the 2600k is that the 2600k has hyper-threading (creates 4 additional virtual cores). FSX cannot take advantage of more than 2 or 3 cores, so HT is completely pointless for FSX.EDIT: Regardless of which processor you buy, you'll still be extremely happy with it.

Share this post


Link to post

When I fly I usually have the following open:FSX (with FSPassengers and FSWidgets EFB)ActiveSky EvolutionFirefoxFSBuildTOPCATRadarContactNavigraph nDAC (when flying outside the US)What I've found is that my i7 with HT enabled on Win7 64bit is that all 8 cores are utilized. FSX does not use any of the virtual cores, but other programs do. This is without any core utility running (e.g., Xtreme FSX). Win7 seems to do a reasonable job of utilizing all cores on its own.

Share this post


Link to post
When I fly I usually have the following open:FSX (with FSPassengers and FSWidgets EFB)ActiveSky EvolutionFirefoxFSBuildTOPCATRadarContactNavigraph nDAC (when flying outside the US)What I've found is that my i7 with HT enabled on Win7 64bit is that all 8 cores are utilized. FSX does not use any of the virtual cores, but other programs do. This is without any core utility running (e.g., Xtreme FSX). Win7 seems to do a reasonable job of utilizing all cores on its own.
That is a consideration worth mentioning. I only run FSC & REX weather (maybe IE opened to a chart) when I fly so it hasn't hurt me.

Share this post


Link to post

None of those apps are so CPU intensive, even combined, to make an impact. HT is useless

Share this post


Link to post
None of those apps are so CPU intensive, even combined, to make an impact. HT is useless
so the only diff is the 2500k is NONE HT and the 2600K is? That's it?

Share this post


Link to post
so the only diff is the 2500k is NONE HT and the 2600K is? That's it?
Basically yes. There is a 100Mhz difference in the base clock speed, which is nothing when you'll be OCing anyway. There is also a 2MB difference in the L3 Cache.

Share this post


Link to post

L3 cache = also more important for content creation stuff, not so much gaming. If you're building a gaming machine, I think the 2500K is the better value. I made this mistake with the 860 vs. the i5 750 myself - I've ended up with HT totally off to be able to get higher OCs - could have gotten the same for less with the 750.

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like to ask a question though. I had a dual core before, from Intel, older one. I assume it was the E6750 @ 2,66GHZ. However, i decided to build myself a low budget PC, so i ordered the components like 6 months ago and it took me a month until i got it all finished.I'm still flying in FS9, but i experienced a nice performance boost. I'm using the AMD Phenom II X4 965 @ 3,40 GHZ (Quad Core). 4GB of DDR3 RAM @ 1333MHZ with dual channel. And the EVGA GTX460. I'm just wondering about the fsx.cfg file.What do i have to put in to make sure i get as much performance as only possible for FSX? I am planning my transition to FSX as soon as the NGX comes out.[JOBSCHEDULER]AffinityMask=15That's my current setting, but i also heared i should use 14 instead of 15. Is that correct? I'd appreciate an explanation.Sincerely,iK

Share this post


Link to post

Your setup should run FSX very nicely as it is. I would start running FSX now (in parallel to FS9, not instead of it) so that you have it running the way you want it before the NGX comes out. That way, you will be able to enjoy the NGX for what it is instead of having to get used to the new FS at the same time. Don't worry too much about your config as you can submit your fsx.cfg file to ******* (the FSX genius not the religious leader) for checking and tweaking. Look fo the user 'bojote' and check his signature.

Share this post


Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...