Z68 SSD Caching and FSX

[kevinc5 15]

I know that the Z68 boards are just appearing but does anyone have any preliminary sense of whether the SSD caching on these boards will benefit FSX. I'm about to pull the trigger on a Asus P678 Deluxe but am wondering if Z68 may be a better alternative. Thanks.

[cmeeks 8]

I don't think a dedicated SSD benefits FSX, so I doubt SSD caching is going to do anything different. SSD caching only reaches a fraction of the performance of a dedicated SSD anyway. If you do any video encoding, you will probably want to go the Z68 route.

[kevinc5 15]

Thanks...looks like the P68 would be more appropriate for me.

[TechguyMaxC 516]

I don't think a dedicated SSD benefits FSX, so I doubt SSD caching is going to do anything different. SSD caching only reaches a fraction of the performance of a dedicated SSD anyway. If you do any video encoding, you will probably want to go the Z68 route.

Plenty of users on these forums report that SSDs do benefit FSX, just not in terms of FPS as many may desire. What it does is decrease loading times for the app itself and textures. SSD caching as seen in Z68 chipset motherboards, given a properly sized SSD and appropriate usage model to accommodate the caching algorithm, would give a similar return on the aforementioned performance characteristics.

[dazz 69]

Plenty of users on these forums report that SSDs do benefit FSX, just not in terms of FPS as many may desire. What it does is decrease loading times for the app itself and textures. SSD caching as seen in Z68 chipset motherboards, given a properly sized SSD and appropriate usage model to accommodate the caching algorithm, would give a similar return on the aforementioned performance characteristics.

I usually agree with you, but not this timeEven Nick Needham said that SSD's only help with large photoscenery, otherwise a fast mechanical drive will be fast enough. And SSD's are too small and too expensive for photoscenery anyway. Plenty of users say plenty of things, but most of the times I found it's just placebo effect or just a marginal improvement. Just asking now: have you seen those benefits with an SSD yourself?

[TechguyMaxC 516]

I usually agree with you, but not this timeEven Nick Needham said that SSD's only help with large photoscenery, otherwise a fast mechanical drive will be fast enough. And SSD's are too small and too expensive for photoscenery anyway. Plenty of users say plenty of things, but most of the times I found it's just placebo effect or just a marginal improvement. Just asking now: have you seen those benefits with an SSD yourself?

I don't use an SSD, though I've thought about it plenty of late, specifically for FSX even. I'm just relaying second-hand information from other users here, you'd really have to ask one of them to quantify their statements.

[dazz 69]

I don't use an SSD, though I've thought about it plenty of late, specifically for FSX even. I'm just relaying second-hand information from other users here, you'd really have to ask one of them to quantify their statements.

The thing is that I've had the chance to try one and it was just faster load times. I have read as many posts claiming it was FSX heaven after FSX was installed in the SSD as posts of simmers who didn't notice any sort of ingame improvements.When you get your own SSD I'll be very interested in your personal veredict. Keep us posted!

[alainneedle1 97]

I had that discussion with Nick when I was building my new rig in this thread here about Vrap and SSD http://www.simforums...4241_page1.html if you have the time to read it all you'll see some good info on a lot of thing including the never ending subject of memory cas and what is better for FSX.Here is what he is saying on this subject (SSD vs Vrap) on the first page of this thread I just posted, in his second quote is his comment when I told him I was getting a dedicated PCI-e for FSX....lol... I have to say that I had a good time with him getting my rig up and running and overclocking it (went from socket 775 to 1366), he does know his $hit and he won't bull$hit you when he's giving you advice like it or not, I can understand his frustration with some peoples.------------SATAIII is a marketing gimmick, dont use the Marvel ports on that board. Asus has been telling people in support that the Marvel drivers for the SATAIII posts on that board are unstable and if you use the port to use the Windows7 driver that installs by default when Windows installs. But none the less, when it comes to mechanical drives and motherboard SATAIII, its a joke. You would be far better off on a 3rd party controller card with a SATAIII drive than using the motherboard ports. Instead of that expense, I would go with SSD drives and install the Intel RST drivers for the ICH10 SATA ports, a far better solution since Windows7 will configure itself correctly for SSD if it is installed on SSD. When it comes to storage performace, if you are looking for max perf then SSD is the solution. A dedicated 300-400 dollar+ PCIe x4-x8 controller card with SSD is the ultimate. The next step down is SSD drives and install the Intel RST drivers for the ICH10 SATA ports which obtains the highest perf for the least cost, next step down is a 300-400 dollar+ PCIe x4-x8 controller card and mechanical Vrap 300/600 drives, the next step down is 300/600 Vraps on the Intel SATA ports and last and for the strict budget, a 1TB or 2TB drive mechanical drive on the Intel SATA ports. You must take into account your needs when it comes to storage size too. If you use a lot of photoscenery then SSD can be limiting due to the amount of storage they allow and with any mechanical drive you must be sure to take into account the MAX fill level of those drives as 2/3 (66%) or above that value the performance will drop like a rock. I keep my mechancial drives at 50% or less for max access performance. With SSD you can fill to 90% but skip the Marvel SATAIII motherboard ports for now. I think it wont be till the next round of motherboards they get the bugs worked out of them and when I say "A dedicated 300-400 dollar+ PCIe x4-x8 controller card" thats NOT a 100-300 dollar SATAIII or SATA RAID card.. those are as much of a joke as the motherboard ports.. I am talking about professional SATA RAID cards that start at 300 dollars and can go as high as several thousand per card. The budget version of those professional cards go for between 350 and 600 dollars which is why SSD on the Intel ICH 10 ports and the RST drivers Intel provides is the best solution for perf-vs-cost as long as the storage capacity is in line with your total flight sim install and will not exceed a fill of 90% of the SSD drive.2ND quote from Nick....(2nd page of the thread)Are you looking to spend money on "the best"? Or have support that FSX will take advantage of and use, but does not require "the best" to obtain? As I posted above, owning "the best" does not translate to being worth the investment to the application. I paid 2.7M for my custom boat 5yrs ago... its worth about 1/2 that now and will always be a hole in the water I throw money into. Its the best! You wont hear different from me, but even though I can enjoy a month on the water with 60" HD and Dolby entertainment, it will never return the investment put into it. Although I do agree that SSD is best served from a PCIe port over the motherboard ports, the fact of the matter is it will never, ever return the investment to the user in FSX. The 2nd card you posted is new, it lacks what is known as TRIM and GARBAGE support.. I suggest you start reading about those items since SSD can DROP performance over time without TRIM support. Honestly, right now if you want to use SSD exclusively, then I would purchase 2 SSD drives, one small one for the OS and the largest you can afford for FSX.. and remember, MAX fill is 90%. You must figure out what your FSX install is going to require in storage capacity. If you dont see yourself using more than 60GB, then a 80GB SSD is fine! But if you need a LOT of space, (over 180+GB) especially for photoscenery which can eat up 300GB itself, then you may as well hang it up with SSD and just stick with the 600GB VRap or a 1-2TB mechanical drive. Sure.. you can buy the professional SSD PCIe enterprise RAID setups and get 1-2TB SSD.. got 3-5K+ handy? How about 15K? I'll hook you up with the best.. quit looking at toys http://www.fusionio....cts/iodriveduo/ That kind of money spent on a game/toy is really rediculous. I would just use the motherboard Intel ICH10 ports for 2 SSD drives, make SURE AHCI is enabled in the BIOS before installing Windows and install Windows7 x64 which will automatically configure itself for SSD. Then install the motherboard drivers and right after that get and install the Intel RST drivers for the motherboard ICH10 SATA system which support TRIM. Then install the rest of the drivers and the software. You will get most of the benefits of SSD to FSX that way but without the premium 1200-3000+ price tag. Is a PCIe controller better? Youbetcha! but not 10 FPS or anything worth the outrageous expense, but if thats what you want to do, then go for the PCIe MLC Perfomance enterprise RAID system but I have no idea if that card will have support issues on the P6X58D. The old SATA RAID controllers do support SSD but its not the same as a dedicated PCIe SSD cards which are just now starting to come down in price to the consumer level. 3 years ago you paid 6-10 grand for one. Next year these PCIe SSD cards will be much more affordable and more in line with what they deliver. Until then, I wouldnt bother.

[Guest PFL]

Thanks alainneedle1, I always have a blast when I read Nick´s advise, no crap, right to the point!Ok, I bought a OCZ Vertex 2 120 Gb SSD a while ago, and of course shortly after that the Vertex 3 came out, duh...120 Gb is nothing in FSX, will be filled faster then you can...etc.Next thing I got was the Asus P8Z68-V board, and on this one it´s possible to create an SSD cache!So I hooked up the Vertex 2 120 Gb with a WDC Black 1 Tb 6 Gbs 64 Mb cache.Win7 64 bit Ultimate is on a 60 Gb Vertex 2, and FSX is now on the 1 Tb WDC Black, with a 64 Gb SSD cache, which is the max. to arrange.Is it fast, is it good? Yes!Will be testing during the next weeks...AnandTech review:http://www.anandtech.com/show/4329/intel-z68-chipset-smart-response-technology-ssd-caching-review

[Dirk98 354]

Thanks alainneedle1, I always have a blast when I read Nick´s advise, no crap, right to the point!Ok, I bought a OCZ Vertex 2 120 Gb SSD a while ago, and of course shortly after that the Vertex 3 came out, duh...120 Gb is nothing in FSX, will be filled faster then you can...etc.Next thing I got was the Asus P8Z68-V board, and on this one it´s possible to create an SSD cache!So I hooked up the Vertex 2 120 Gb with a WDC Black 1 Tb 6 Gbs 64 Mb cache.Win7 64 bit Ultimate is on a 60 Gb Vertex 2, and FSX is now on the 1 Tb WDC Black, with a 64 Gb SSD cache, which is the max. to arrange.Is it fast, is it good? Yes!Will be testing during the next weeks...

PFL, please share your experiences and impression with FSX. Thanks to your headsup on 'SSD cache' now I'm thinking about ASUS P8Z68 DELUXE or P8Z68-V PRO or ASRock Z68 Extreme4.