Jump to content

Archived

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

Recommended Posts

Did somebody already compare a hexacore with a quadcore cpu in FSX?I have read that 6 cores should be better in loading scenery and autogen. Frames are not influenced logically with same GHz. I'm thinking about upgrading my pc with either Sandy Bridge CPU (don't really know if it's worth it for almost 800 Hz more from 4,2 GHz up to maybe 4,8 GHz with SB) or a hexacore, but with hexacore I will not be able to achieve 4,8 GHz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2 extra cores will only help smooth things out a little compared to a quad i7-9xx but a well overclocked (4.6+) sandy bridge 2500k or 2600k will beat the 980x and possibly the 990x but at a fraction of the cost. Amd's 6 cores aren't even worth comparing to any of Intels i7-9xx's or SBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree on the AMDs. They are 45nm and old technology and you can't really go wrong with a SB CPU. If you can wait, go for the 22nm Ivy Bridge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jahman
Ivy Bridge, the 22nm die shrink of the very successful Sandy Bridge, will be a game changer because:
  1. For the first time in CPU chip manufacturing history the logic gates will be 3-D instead of the usual flat 2-D, and this means they CPUs will be faster and consume less power. Intel calls this new manufacturing technology Tri-Gate.
  2. Ivy Bridge will also implement PCIe 3.x, and thus increase PCIe bandwitdth 2x over today's PCIe 2.x.

Intel is releasing its Socket 2011 Extreme Sandy Bridge CPUs 4Q2011, so I would expect Ivy Beidge to become available by 2Q2011 (and this is just a guess). So me I will wait for Flight, Ivy Bridge and a PCIe 3.x video card for my next FS upgrade. Cheers, - jahman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did somebody already compare a hexacore with a quadcore cpu in FSX?I have read that 6 cores should be better in loading scenery and autogen. Frames are not influenced logically with same GHz. I'm thinking about upgrading my pc with either Sandy Bridge CPU (don't really know if it's worth it for almost 800 Hz more from 4,2 GHz up to maybe 4,8 GHz with SB) or a hexacore, but with hexacore I will not be able to achieve 4,8 GHz.
A i7 hexcore CPU (980X / 990X) will not run FSX better than a 2600K and it will certainly will not be better at loading scenery and autogen. Unless you are going to use programs that will make use of a hexcore chip (video encoding, etc.) save your money and get a 2600K or a 2500K. Regarding Ivy Bridge, from what I have read performance wise IB will be inline with SB unless you go to SB-E. SB-E will probably be at the same price point that the 980X and 990X are now. No one is going to know for sure about any of this until IB and SB-E actually hits the selves and people start testing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the IB is going to be much better than the SB cpus.
How should this go? SB is allready awesome and lightyears ahead of AMD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We cant really predict what IB is going to be like. Remember, FSX uses shear CPU speed. More cores does very little. For all we know (doubtful but you never know...) IB's might be terrible OCers. They could run super hot super easily or they could require high voltage levels when OCing. We just cannot tell till someone actually has tested it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SB-E will probably be at the same price point that the 980X and 990X are now.
Indeed. See http://vr-zone.com/a...ses/13298.html# <- unofficial and unconfirmed of course, but better than nothing
We cant really predict what IB is going to be like. Remember, FSX uses shear CPU speed. More cores does very little. For all we know (doubtful but you never know...) IB's might be terrible OCers. They could run super hot super easily or they could require high voltage levels when OCing. We just cannot tell till someone actually has tested it.
The transition from 32nm to 22nm as well as the coming of 3D transistors is HUGE! The combination of smaller 22nm fabrication, lower voltage requirement of 3D transistors, and inate ability of 3D transistors to operate at higher frequencies should result in huge gains. Technically speaking, the more headroom you have for voltage and temperature, the higher your OC. Obviously you shouldn't count your eggs before they hatch, but I'm with Jahman on this subject - the upgrade to IB (even from SB) ought to be significant! I'm excited for Sandy Bridge-E chips to be released only because it ought to keep IB prices low. ...not to mention PCI-E 3.0 and well timed release of nVidia Kepler 28nm GPUs! You guys who have been waiting to upgrade have no excuses when January-ish rolls around!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope that Tri-Gate is something more than just a gimmick from Intel Well, it looks like SB-E will have PCIe 3.0 in the end, and it will allow BCLK overclock (remember freebird? he was right on this one). They are spliting the clock generator so that the BCLK isn't linked to the DMI and therefore the PCIe lanes in the PCH. Question remains what's the point of a BCLK overclock when you have everything in the ring bus overclocked by simply raising the CPU multi? (CPU, L3 cache, IMC) I've said many times what I think PCIe 3.0 will bring to the table in the short term (yes, even for FSX) so I won't go there hehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we can push the boundaries with not only multiplier OCing but adding BCLK OCing too.... *praying for a 5GHz+ stable OC*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its the tri-gate technology and the 22nm technology that is going to help IB become the new SB. The smaller the transistors the more you can fit in => more speed. That is why AMD cpu's are fairly slow compared to Intel. They are all 45nm and still based on the Opteron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest jahman
...They are spliting the clock generator so that the BCLK isn't linked to the DMI and therefore the PCIe lanes in the PCH. Question remains what's the point of a BCLK overclock when you have everything in the ring bus overclocked by simply raising the CPU multi? (CPU, L3 cache, IMC)...
I think you answered your own question! Marketing strategy: Now that BLCK OC is devalued, it's no longer disallowed.
its the tri-gate technology and the 22nm technology that is going to help IB become the new SB. The smaller the transistors the more you can fit in => more speed. That is why AMD cpu's are fairly slow compared to Intel. They are all 45nm and still based on the Opteron.
What you just described are the benfits of the die-shrink alone. Tri-Gate reduces power consumption and increases speed by itself even without the die-shrink because 3-D gates are more "efficient" at switching than 2-D gates are. That's why combining the die-shrink and Tri-Gate in the same tick cycle will be such a game changer. Cheers, - jahman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest simmer9304

I actually quite like my Phenom II X6... Who would want something as fast as a 2600K anyways, you don't get to savor the textures as they pop into focus and enjoy seeing each frame lovingly displayed one by one... Lol on a more serious note I find that the X6 does well for FSX and it can hold a steady 25-30fps when I've got it tweaked right and that's all I really need for now. But I wouldn't mind some of the blazing speed that SB has to offer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially the NGX. That way a flight that lasts an hour, lasts you 10. 9 more hours of looking at every single detail in that VC....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always like to read this stuff, but I have a hard time justifying all the upgrade dollars. My AMD Phenom quad core running stock 2.5 runs FSX fine. If I REALLY crank it up and fly into Seattle, I can drive it down into the low teens, but I don't do that. I mostly fly Carenado singles, and other simple airplanes. I wonder just how much better all would look if I did drop some cash on a real hot rod machine....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did read somewhere that FSX may not in itself benefit with more than four core , but those two extra cores may help with OS stuff . Now please correct me if I am wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there's the key point! It depends on your usage. If you just like to go for the Sunday VFR in a prop, country flighing, these big fancy systems are pointless. But if you're like me, and into hardcore airlining, flying the NGX into a peak time traffic heathrow then these SB systems are almost a must.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am learning the NGX at the moment and can't wait to just cruze into EGLL with the autoland which I can't really work out, it keeps doing a wheelbarrow landing!. I get the flare in white but no rollout reading on the PFD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am learning the NGX at the moment and can't wait to just cruze into EGLL with the autoland which I can't really work out, it keeps doing a wheelbarrow landing!. I get the flare in white but no rollout reading on the PFD.
you need to switch to Fail Operative in the PMDG options. With Fail Passive you get no rolloutAlso needs to be equiped with the Collins MCP and digital stby instruments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you need to switch to Fail Operative in the PMDG options. With Fail Passive you get no rolloutAlso needs to be equiped with the Collins MCP and digital stby instruments
Yeah, I am using using the Collins. I didn't know it had that option. I will try the flight for the fourth time tomorrow. I kind fo got a flare today pretty minimal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for my late response.First of all I have to thank you for your detailed answers. My sys is an FSX PC only, so after reading all your answers I will save my money and don't buy a sixcore.Generally speaking I'm satisfied with my actual system and I think upgrading with a SB oced to 4,6-4,8 GHz won't give me so much extra power compared to my i7 920 @ 4,2 GHz.I will wait until next year, how Ivy Bridge will perform with FSX.Perhaps then it is time for a new pc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well there's the key point! It depends on your usage. If you just like to go for the Sunday VFR in a prop, country flighing, these big fancy systems are pointless. But if you're like me, and into hardcore airlining, flying the NGX into a peak time traffic heathrow then these SB systems are almost a must.
I beg to disagree if you are VFR in ORBX/FTX country (especially around the detailed addon airports)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...