Intel Core i7 3930K 4.8GHz w/FSX Quick Review

[dazz 69]

Thanks for the update Jacob. Much appreciated

[n4gix 4,958]

Therefore, I conclude that the assertions made by many of you, in that FSX does not utilize all of the processor cores are indeed valid. Lastly, regardless of whether 3 cores or 6 cores are active, the FPS remains the same.

Jacob, those who made those assertions had a somewhat "unfair advantage," since they were around several years ago when Phil Taylor (the then spokesperson for ACES) was quite explicit in his statements regarding FSX being a "single-core" application. The major improvements made with SP1 and/or SP2 was providing a way to offload some of the scenery processing to core(s) other than the one FSX was using... :)Even so, I greatly admire your willingness to acknowledge this new understanding.Just for the sake of information, even Lockheed-Martin haven't done much to make Prepar3D multi-core yet...

[tfm 194]

Have you guys ever tried your LGA1366 or LGA2011 on dual channel  with two RAM sticks to see the effect vs tripple/quad channel?

Good idea: when I get some time I'll see if I can run my Heathrow / UTX / MD-11 test flight on the 1366 with just 2 slots populated. I suppose the comparison won't be quite fair as I'll only have 4Gb instead of 6Gb but (i) if there is no perceptible difference then obviously I must be wrong about the RAM channels and (ii) if there is some perceptible difference then I might be right about the RAM channels or it might just be that FSX likes having the extra 2 Gb of RAM.Tim

[Kosta 122]

Hi everyone,Just wanted to update you all on some further testing. I discovered that the PMDG 747-8i was providing a 10-15FPS increase compared to other addon's and since all of my initial testing was conducted with the PMDG 747-8i, I did experience a more fluid flying experience when I initially installed FSX. However, after further testing with various addon's and FSX default aircraft, the performance is nearly identical to a 2600K processor at 4.8/5GHz. Therefore, I conclude that the assertions made by many of you, in that FSX does not utilize all of the processor cores are indeed valid. Lastly, regardless of whether 3 cores or 6 cores are active, the FPS remains the same. Jacob

My hat down, sir. As Stephen also said, it takes quite a lot to admit that and jump over your own shadow. Welcome on AVSIM.And yes, we all do have lots of experience, and we are gonna jump at new users claiming something that we already know what's probablynot right, and we all are already very much trained for such situations. But we do welcome new users and hope that they become a useful asset, beneficial for both sides!

[alainneedle1 97]

High frame rate does not always = smoothness, here is a test I did with my rig, (6 core enable) I pushed the plane to the max (look at the speed) with Orbx scenery maxed out using Fraps (no editing), strong wind (you'll see al landing) car traffic, ground traffic +++, keep an eye on the frame rate, you still see stutterings.

[dazz 69]

Good idea: when I get some time I'll see if I can run my Heathrow / UTX / MD-11 test flight on the 1366 with just 2 slots populated. I suppose the comparison won't be quite fair as I'll only have 4Gb instead of 6Gb but (i) if there is no perceptible difference then obviously I must be wrong about the RAM channels and (ii) if there is some perceptible difference then I might be right about the RAM channels or it might just be that FSX likes having the extra 2 Gb of RAM.Tim

Thanks so much Tim. Looking forward to hearing from you on this. You could actually have 6GB in dual channel, well, sort of: with 4GB (two sticks) in channel A and 2 GB in channel B, you would have 4 GB in dual channel, and 2 GB in single channel.

[worldclassleader 0]

Jacob,You sir are a real man I can trust. It takes a lot of courage to admit that kind of error. Welcome to our community once again. I consider you to be a valuable and reliable flight simulation asset. I hope in return to be able to earn your respect also by my own actions and choice of words.Kind regards,

Stephen,Thank you for your candor sir, and I look forward to contributing and learning from you all! These are some exciting times with Prepar3D today, and Flight just around thre corner...

[worldclassleader 0]

Jacob, those who made those assertions had a somewhat "unfair advantage," since they were around several years ago when Phil Taylor (the then spokesperson for ACES) was quite explicit in his statements regarding FSX being a "single-core" application. The major improvements made with SP1 and/or SP2 was providing a way to offload some of the scenery processing to core(s) other than the one FSX was using... :)Even so, I greatly admire your willingness to acknowledge this new understanding.Just for the sake of information, even Lockheed-Martin haven't done much to make Prepar3D multi-core yet...

Wow! That's great to know Bill, thanks for pointing that out. I hope Prepar3D becomes a multi-core sim. But to be honest, as it stands, Sandy Bridge seems to be doing a pretty decent job in FSX, and with Ivy Bridge almost here, I wonder how big an impact multi-core will have in FSX/Prepar3d?

My hat down, sir. As Stephen also said, it takes quite a lot to admit that and jump over your own shadow. Welcome on AVSIM.And yes, we all do have lots of experience, and we are gonna jump at new users claiming something that we already know what's probablynot right, and we all are already very much trained for such situations. But we do welcome new users and hope that they become a useful asset, beneficial for both sides!

Thanks for welcoming me in Word Not Allowed! I've been reading up on many of the posts on AVSIM and have learned a great deal from all of you. It's great to be a part of this online community.

[worldclassleader 0]

Thanks for the update Jacob. Much appreciated

You got it Dazz! No problem!

[SAAB340 28]

High frame rate does not always = smoothness, here is a test I did with my rig, (6 core enable) I pushed the plane to the max (look at the speed) with Orbx scenery maxed out using Fraps (no editing), strong wind (you'll see al landing) car traffic, ground traffic +++, keep an eye on the frame rate, you still see stutterings.

I suspect the PCIe bus. That looks exactly like the stutters I experienced when getting PCIe bus limited at high framerate when I did desting in DX10.

[alainneedle1 97]

I suspect the PCIe bus. That looks exactly like the stutters I experienced when getting PCIe bus limited at high framerate when I did desting in DX10.

Yes, that's exactly what I think this is.

[simon747 185]

This guy says stutters are improved with his sb-e from 2600k; who knows, the eye can play tricks, thought I would share anyway...http://nzff.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=16398&st=12&start=12

[dazz 69]

He's running Bojote's affinity mask with only 3 active cores too. The task manager clearly shows it's not using all 6 cores, but only 3 and the fibers at core 0. And he mentions it doesn't make any difference what affinity mask he sets, so...Load times should be improved with 6 cores vs 4, because at load time FSX uses as many cores as available to it, but better performance, I don't think so

[tfm 194]

Good idea: when I get some time I'll see if I can run my Heathrow / UTX / MD-11 test flight on the 1366 with just 2 slots populated. I suppose the comparison won't be quite fair as I'll only have 4Gb instead of 6Gb but (i) if there is no perceptible difference then obviously I must be wrong about the RAM channels and (ii) if there is some perceptible difference then I might be right about the RAM channels or it might just be that FSX likes having the extra 2 Gb of RAM.Tim

I've just tried the 1366 with 2 instead of 3 sticks of RAM: no difference that my eyes can see. I guess that explodes my theory about the RAM!Tim

[simon747 185]

Maybe its the thought of spending the cash that makes stutters less evident; Anyhow, its all (smoothness) in the eye of the beholder I guess!