Upgrading CPU = phenomenal performance increase

[davidzill 8]

I recently upgraded from a Intel Core 2 Quad Core Q9650 (overclocked to 4.05 GHz) and built a new computer with a Core I7 2600K. This processor has turbo boost technology, and with an Asus motherboard, I just check on box to get a 100% stable GHz. With my original processor, I was getting "manageable" FSX performance and hardly "bearable" NGX performace. Hardly bearable being 12-18fps at airports and 30 fps tops at altitude.Now, with all texture settings maxed out, default FSX aircraft are for the most part holding steady at 60 fps no matter where I'm at (Vsync enabled via Nvidia inspector). The NGX is getting a very smooth 30-35 FPS while taxing around Flytampa airports and easily 60fps at altitude. This is with REX Overdrive and GEX. The .6 GHz increase normally would not register much of a noticeable performance upgrade, but the performance now is smooth, mid-high range FPS, with little to no stuttering. The Core I7 is easily overclock-able to 5GHz with some people able to achieve 5.2GHz.

[ArjenVdv 190]

A good CPU is indeed a massive performance increase. But unfortunately you just wasted 100$ buying the i7 2600K, while the i5 2500K is 100$ cheaper, and will perform identical at the same clockspeed. A i7 2600K and i5 2500K both @ 4.5 GHz = 0 difference. The i7 2600K is pretty much an i5 2500K with hyperthreading. Hyperthreading is what's costing you money. FSX can't use hyperthreading, so it's pretty much useless unless you're running programms that utilize HT like vidoe encoding.

[XCLTM3 112]

A good CPU is indeed a massive performance increase. But unfortunately you just wasted 100$ buying the i7 2600K, while the i5 2500K is 100$ cheaper, and will perform identical at the same clockspeed. A i7 2600K and i5 2500K both @ 4.5 GHz = 0 difference. The i7 2600K is pretty much an i5 2500K with hyperthreading. Hyperthreading is what's costing you money. FSX can't use hyperthreading, so it's pretty much useless unless you're running programms that utilize HT like vidoe encoding.

Fair point Arjen.But it may very well be that the OP may utilize other programs which require hyperthreading and therefore the i7 2600K was well worth the additional cost.Rgds,

[Tabs 2,790]

If you think the difference is big at stock speed, OC the thing...

[Turbine777 13]

Yeah, $100 difference is one that makes people that own the i5 feel good about their purchase and that's all it is in my opinion. Build your comps based on a 10yr old sim, then wonder why that thread you read that said "All you need is..." didn't think about opening a paint kit, using FRAPS to record FSX videos, or so many other FSX "related" things. He didn't waste anything. The i5 is a great performer no doubt, but the only ones that will put down the i7 are i5 owners. Being strapped for cash, sure it's great, and for FSX "ONLY", certainly a good, reliable and great overclocking CPU, but I wouldn't trade personally. Not even for a $300 difference.

[Foghorn 4]

Crikey, I'll put $20 on a horse......hundred bucks ain't much, about a third of a days overtime for me, but then I may be luckier than others with my income.The bottom line is buy what you can afford....Waste is a relative term.

[Heliguy 7]

Anybody got O/C settings for the 2600K? I want more FPS :(.

[Mean Aerodynamic Chord 269]

2500k is better than the 2600k? I'm on the fence.

[MrKen 3]

Anybody got O/C settings for the 2600K? I want more FPS .

How much more can you get? You're already at 4.8

[davidzill 8]

Anybody got O/C settings for the 2600K? I want more FPS .

If you have an Asus motherboard, you can get 4.6GHz with a simple "check-in-the box" in BIOS. That is my current processor speed, and it is 100% stable.

[MrKen 3]

If you have an Asus motherboard, you can get 4.6GHz with a simple "check-in-the box" in BIOS. That is my current processor speed, and it is 100% stable.

The auto OC tends to boost your vcore way too high, which will shorten the life of your cpu. I would highly recommend going into the BIOS and setting it manually. 1.35v is a good starting point for that multiplier (work it down as low as you can).

[davidzill 8]

How much more can you get? You're already at 4.8

The 2600K supposedly can easily reach 5.0-5.2 GHz, but you should be using liquid cooling. The settings are different for every processor and board. No identical board and processor with have the exact same settings. It is done through trial and error. Most of the time you will use the same setting as everyone else, however you will have to find the sweet spot for VCore setting, which may take awhile.

[Porchpup 0]

...the only ones that will put down the i7 are i5 owners.

Oh So True. I can honestly admit to wasting money on many things involving this hobby...but I don't think this is one of them.

[MrKen 3]

The 2600K supposedly can easily reach 5.0-5.2 GHz, but you should be using liquid cooling. The settings are different for every processor and board. No identical board and processor with have the exact same settings. It is done through trial and error. Most of the time you will use the same setting as everyone else, however you will have to find the sweet spot for VCore setting, which may take awhile.

I was being facetious, his 2600k is already at 4.8GHz. Check my sig & you'll see that I know a little bit about sandy bridge. Only 50% can go past 4.3 regardless of settings & of those, fewer than 10% can hit the speeds you're talking about (5+).

[Heliguy 7]

I have to admit that I stole the signature from someone else as a template all specs are there except the CPU is just clock.