Does the FSX crowd have an anti-AMD bias in general?I mean, we can pick nits and devilize the details from here to eternity, but isn't a fast CPU a fast CPU and a bargain a bargain?Granted, I'm not a tech-guy and there is a lot I don't know, but is it possible AMD gets slighted just because it's AMD?

I think there may be a bit of a bias against AMD just because their chips can't offer what Intel's lineup can right now. Needless to say if Bulldozer is faster than Sandy Bridge for a similar (or cheaper) price I'd be willing to bet the roles would be reversed and a lot of folks would switch back to AMD. All we really need is some good healthy competition! Right now it's Intel Socket 1155 vs. Intel Socket 1366 vs. Intel Socket 1156 with AMD sadly slipping away. I'd love to see Bulldozer come in and change all that.

Yeah, that's exactly what Intel does. New socket every time and if you want to upgrade...

In all fairness, new chips have new on-die circuit layouts that require new pinouts for logic and for power connectors. It's not like upgrading your stereo... :Big Grin:

...All we really need is some good healthy competition! Right now it's Intel Socket 1155 vs. Intel Socket 1366 vs. Intel Socket 1156 with AMD sadly slipping away. I'd love to see Bulldozer come in and change all that.

Well, if AMD drops out of the CPU market (a foregone conclusion, because folks not wanting to pay Intel prices opt for ARM processors on netbooks), then they will have more resurces to devote to their GPUs. If I were nVidia, I'd be very afraid, especially considering they are already behind in the 3 "P"s of the die-shrink race (Performance, Powerdraw, Price) and will find it extremely difficult to just skip process generations to catch-up with AMD any time soon.Cheers,- jahman.

In all fairness, new chips have new on-die circuit layouts that require new pinouts for logic and for power connectors. It's not like upgrading your stereo... :Big Grin:

Yeah, hehe. I can see how Sandy Bridge E would need a new socket with so many pins - 4 memory channels, but 1155 vs 1156 for example? at least P67 that doesn't make use of the IGP should have been possible to make it work in a socket / chipset like LGA1156 / P55 I guess. Apart of the technological limitations, I don't see Intel trying like AMD does. Like placing a DDR2 & DDR3 controller in Nehalem like AMD did in their Phenom II and Athlon II

Needless to say if Bulldozer is faster than Sandy Bridge for a similar (or cheaper) price I'd be willing to bet the roles would be reversed and a lot of folks would switch back to AMD.

I would in a second. I'll probably laugh a little bit if AMD runs Flight better and in two or three years time we're having these same discussions only with AMD/Intel switched.

I would in a second. I'll probably laugh a little bit if AMD runs Flight better and in two or three years time we're having these same discussions only with AMD/Intel switched.

LOL yeah, it would be cool to have people calling us AMD a really excited user haha.Seriously, I would switch to AMD if it was better and worth it, but I wouldn't hold my breath for Bulldozer. If they can get close to Nehalem's IPC that would be a huge improvement, but I don't see it beating Sandy Bridge

I downloaded the FSMark11 utility but soon realized that the benchmark is supposed to be run on a fresh install of FSX. That's not gonna happen since I have dozens of addons installed and so far all running smoothly which is very hard to achieve.Nevertheless, I went ahead and ran it with my actual settings just for comparison's sake. These are the results I got at 4 Ghz:2011-06-05 18:26:41 - fsxFrames: 9024 - Time: 300000ms - Avg: 30.080 - Min: 15 - Max: 39If you take a look at the official fsmark11 results post, you'll notice that the "weak" Phenom is giving the Intel cpus a run for their money, especially when you take into account that my test ran under REX 4096 HD clouds, EZdock camera, GEX, and Enbseries. All this while pushing double the pixel count of the original test. (3.7MP vs 1.8MP)

Yeah, that's exactly what Intel does. New socket every time and if you want to upgrade, you either pay ridiculous prices for old CPU's or upgrade the whole platform (so they sell new chipsets and all) That's Intel's strategy and they can abuse it precisely because of the lack of competition from AMDI know it sucks, but from a business standpoint it makes sense. They do it because they can

Yeah, well it sucks.The best 775 compatible CPU costs more than an i7SB, and a really good 775 CPU costs as much as an i5SB, and for some God unknown reason, one particular 775 CPU costs more than an i7-990 Extreme. That's over $1000! Serioulsy, these people are nuts.I might go with AMD just out of spite. :Phbbbt:

I downloaded the FSMark11 utility but soon realized that the benchmark is supposed to be run on a fresh install of FSX. That's not gonna happen since I have dozens of addons installed and so far all running smoothly which is very hard to achieve.Nevertheless, I went ahead and ran it with my actual settings just for comparison's sake. These are the results I got at 4 Ghz:2011-06-05 18:26:41 - fsxFrames: 9024 - Time: 300000ms - Avg: 30.080 - Min: 15 - Max: 39If you take a look at the official fsmark11 results post, you'll notice that the "weak" Phenom is giving the Intel cpus a run for their money, especially when you take into account that my test ran under REX 4096 HD clouds, EZdock camera, GEX, and Enbseries. All this while pushing double the pixel count of the original test. (3.7MP vs 1.8MP)

A 1090T costs $190 and a 2500K $225But if you're happy with it, enjoy it!

Yeah, well it sucks.The best 775 compatible CPU costs more than an i7SB, and a really good 775 CPU costs as much as an i5SB, and for some God unknown reason, one particular 775 CPU costs more than an i7-990 Extreme. That's over $1000! Serioulsy, these people are nuts.I might go with AMD just out of spite. :Phbbbt:

what do you have now exactly? because switching to AMD now could be more a sidegrade than anything. And unless you get a AM3+ board you'll be back to square one cause AM3 won't support Bulldozer

Another run, couple more frames min and max.2011-06-05 19:29:43 - fsxFrames: 9230 - Time: 300000ms - Avg: 30.767 - Min: 17 - Max: 43

what do you have now exactly? because switching to AMD now could be more a sidegrade than anything. And unless you get a AM3+ board you'll be back to square one cause AM3 won't support Bulldozer

An E6700 dual core at 2.66Ghz. So, given that I could glue my kid's hamster to the MB and get better performance than I am getting now, a 4X or 6X AMD CPU is still a good step up. Maybe not cutting edge, but pair it with a good mid-level card (cheapest EVGA 560) to replace my 8800GTS and I can't imagine I would be too unhappy given the $$$ to FPS-boost ratio.Mind you, if I can find a better 775 CPU that doesn't cost more than a new car, I would be happy with that and the 560 card for now.

Look at this: http://cgi.ebay.ca/Intel-Core2-Quad-8M-2-93GHz-1066MHz-BX80562QX6800-SLACP-/200499071653?pt=CPUs&hash=item2eaead0aa5And this isn't unique. This CPU is even more expensive at other places.Seriously, someone's hitting the pipe a bit hard. :Drooling:

Yeah the Core 2 Quad's are pretty ridiculously priced these days. I feel like part of that is the rarity factor since there weren't too many made (this applies more to the extreme editions) and so enthusiasts who really want them are willing to pay the price.If you want an easy socket 775 upgrade, get a cheap E8400 and overclock the heck out of it.

Yeah the Core 2 Quad's are pretty ridiculously priced these days.

Collector's value perhaps? I hear the Smithsonian is paying good money for an 8080...Cheers,- jahman.

I don't think it is so much Intel a really excited user out here slighting AMD as much as what just runs a six year old, CPU based program better. I have both an AMD 1090T/AMD 6970 system and an Intel 2600K/Nvidia 580 system so I can do research. I can squeeze out a few more FPS with the Intel but at a higher cost per framerate. My AMD system looks better but there are just a few "shimmering" issues which bother me enough to use the Intel system. AMD is not about to update drivers on that old of a game :( . But for any other game and multi-media it's AMD hands down for me.I believe you will see a shift in loyalty after MSFlight is released.I think AMD is on the right track as to where computing is headed. Raw CPU power is a thing of the past on x86 machines. It's GPU's and APU's. Watch for an announcement on June 14th.

I managed to get my CPU to a stable 4.126GHz and FSX is running really smooth. Temps are in the high 30's under load, 29C iddle. Room temp is 75F.The reason I was not seeing a difference upwards of 3.8Ghz was that I forgot to overclock the CPU/NB link. It went from 1800Mhz to 2685Mhz for a 3.5 fps gain.I'll keep experimenting since the temps are really under control. I'll keep you guys posted.