I'm on the fence on this decision and was hoping someone might have a guess or better on what sort of increase in frame rate alone I could expect by making this change in CPU/mainboard/new GPU over my current machine. I'm asking about frame rate alone as a parameter of raw processing power, and am less interested in other elements of performance such as freedom from stuttering or image quality/image update rate. Just trying to get an idea if the upgrade will be worth the money and effort.If I am maxed out at say 18 fps w/ a fairly difficult scenario on my machine, what should I expect from a SB processor at 4.5Ghz w/ a suitable upgrade in video card? I'm using a 1680 x 1050 screen, though may go to 1920 x 1200 or 1080 eventually. Are we talking maybe around 25fps? For this hypothetical scenario, this is around a 38% increase in frame rate. What do you think, is that a ballpark guesstimate?Thanks for helping me decide! I was really hoping Ivy Bridge would add a really significant improvement in total performance over SB, but this seems iffy at the moment. If IB represented a 20-25% increase over SB at the same clock speed, an upgrade from my Core 2 Quad to IB would arguable be a very significant upgrade and I would be less unsure.Noel

You'll notice huge gains. I went from an Q9550 at 4GHz , to an i7 960. That was a huge step for FSX. Another decent leap came when I upgraded from the i7 960 to my current 2500k. The point is that you will see significant (huge) gains in performance.To put it into numbers as you wish is impossible for me, but I'll take a stab. Unplayable situations with the Q9550 became playable with the i7. The SB upgrade made it even better.

You'll notice huge gains. I went from an Q9550 at 4GHz , to an i7 960. That was a huge step for FSX. Another decent leap came when I upgraded from the i7 960 to my current 2500k. The point is that you will see significant (huge) gains in performance.To put it into numbers as you wish is impossible for me, but I'll take a stab. Unplayable situations with the Q9550 became playable with the i7. The SB upgrade made it even better.

Well that is encouraging if not quantified. Thanks for that!

I would say a 70 - 80% faster.Single threaded performance clock for clock is about a 50% better. So at 4.5GHz I would expect more or less that kind of performance leap.At 4.8GHz or above, it should be almost twice as fast

I would say a 70 - 80% faster.Single threaded performance clock for clock is about a 50% better. So at 4.5GHz I would expect more or less that kind of performance leap.At 4.8GHz or above, it should be almost twice as fast

so 200%

so 200%

"Twice as fast" = 100% faster (because "just as fast" = 0% faster) :Big Grin:Cheers,- jahman.

I'd say you'd get 6-8 more fps in your "difficult" situation, even with a larger monitor resolution and more AA/AF settings in the driver.

I'd say you'd get 6-8 more fps in your "difficult" situation, even with a larger monitor resolution and more AA/AF settings in the driver.

Then that's only about a 38% increase in raw frame rate. That puts these guesstimates at quite a bit of variance, from 38 -100% increase. I'd take 70%!Maybe w/ an SSD and good overclocking it would be worth the huge headache. Certainly 70% boost would do it for me w/ little hesitation. 38% is compelling, but not completely. One of my 'problems' is that I have fair performance now--I just can't do every scenario I might do otherwise. The adage for me is to set it up so that it is on the brink of too much processing demand, and I sense that is possible to do even with today's best hardware for FSX. Probably best wait n see what IB brings to the mix. Perhaps it will add another 10% or so, clock for clock, w/ hopeful improvements in overclockability. I guess that is very much an unknown at this point.Thank you for your insights ;o)

I'm only guessing based on the fact that you said you'd upgrade to a larger monitor and maybe crank the settings...I get about 18-20fps on final with the NGX VC using Orbx KSEA scenery with max autogen (approaching from the north with a view of downtown and with weather)

Ivy Bridge will probably bring 10 to 20 percent improvement (though I would err on the side of 10 for now), but not clock for clock. 38% or 70% doesn't matter - what's important is Sandy Bridge is a significant improvement over a Q9650. If you have a good GPU, even more so. I came from a Q9550 and the improvement was huge - even despite my cheap GPU bottlenecking my system. If only nVidia would release Kepler so I could drop some cash on a new GPU.Have you looked at the FSXMark11 results?

Noel,If you upgrade to an i7 2500K @ 4.5 with 8gig RAM, & gtx 570, you will see your fps double. If your worst is 9fps, expect 18fps with your new SB. If you add an SSD you will increase loading times and texture loading. Sceneries will be sharper when you fly faster.A new system doesn't guarantee that you will NOT have to make some tweaks and FSX slider adjustments. What it did for me is make it so much more enjoyable, especially when flying complex airplanes into densely populated areas.Good luck!Jose

Great, thank you all. Sounds more and more compelling. I think since I'm not in a hurry, mainly because I am not looking forward to reinstalling everything, and that includes lots of other software besides all that's involved in FSX, I probably better be patient and wait for IB just in case it's a better overclocker and for add'l benefits, plus w/ PCI Gen 3. If my current platform fails before then, or if IB bombs, then I will be OK to go w/ SB machine. Thanks again!