Also the extra 2MB of L3 cache is a non factor, even in most synthetic benchmarks

 

Read this: http://www.simforums...topic38910.html

Scroll down until NickN's post and he says the extra 2MB cache - unlike the nonsense many people tell - actually is beneficial for FSX.

Read this: http://www.simforums...10.html<br />Scroll down until NickN's post and he says the extra 2MB cache - unlike the nonsense many people tell - actually is beneficial for FSX.

 

I know what he said and I disagree. Again, why would he recommend against SB-E if it sports up to 15MB of L3 cache vs 8MB of a 3770K?

Wouldn't OC'ing the 2700k be more beneficial than a Oc'ed 2500k ?

I know what he said and I disagree. Again, why would he recommend against SB-E if it sports up to 15MB of L3 cache vs 8MB of a 3770K?

 

Have you tested both the 2500K vs 2700K yourself actually? If not, I'd rather believe NickN. If you have, then I'm confused lol.

I think he recommends against SB-E because it's 3 times as expensive and doens't give much of an additional benefit to FSX's performance. Also many users have reported big FPS fluctuations with SB-E.

Have you tested both the 2500K vs 2700K yourself actually? If not, I'd rather believe NickN. If you have, then I'm confused lol.

I think he recommends against SB-E because it's 3 times as expensive and doens't give much of an additional benefit to FSX's performance. Also many users have reported big FPS fluctuations with SB-E.

 

You are contradicting yourself. If it doesn't make that much of a difference and it doesn't make any at all, then the L3 cache must be a non factor right?

The I7 3820 has 10MB of L3 cache (2 more than a SB/IB I7 and costs prettu much the same) and PCIe 3.0, and quad channel memory... and performance is still the same

 

You can choose to believe what you want anyway

You are contradicting yourself. If it doesn't make that much of a difference and it doesn't make any at all, then the L3 cache must be a non factor right?

The I7 3820 has 10MB of L3 cache (2 more than a SB/IB I7 and costs prettu much the same) and PCIe 3.0, and quad channel memory... and performance is still the same

 

You can choose to believe what you want anyway

 

No I mean SB-E doesn't give enough benefit compared to the 2700K to be it worth 3 times the price. What I believe, well I dunno. I'm not saying you are wrong Dazz, after all I haven't had a chance to test anything like this myself. I'm gonna be upgrading to Haswell in the spring or summer so we'll see if THAT will give us good extra performance.

No I mean SB-E doesn't give enough benefit compared to the 2700K

 

All I'm saying is that if you think that a chip with 15MB of L3 cache doesn't perform better than another one with 8MB of L3 cache, you're implicitily agreeing with me

 

I'm also holding off for Haswell, but may very well skip it if it's just a 15% faster as it's being rumored. Will very much depend on OC capabilities, but I don't think is can get much better than what we already have

don't go near Ivy Bridge!

don't go near Ivy Bridge!

Because?

don't go near Ivy Bridge!

 

Y not ? they do have a 10% increase in performance

Because?

As mentioned before, FSX heavily relies on CPU speed and not the amount of cores or threads you have. IvyBridge only beats the SandyBridge class by the 100mhz to 200mhz stock speed difference and improved integrated graphics. Who on earth uses integrated graphics these days (unless for backup)?

Furthermore, to experience more FPS in FSX (who doesn't want to?) you need higher clock speed, and to do that you need to overclock your CPU.

 

This is where the SandyBridge really comes into action. SandyBridge CPUs basically run 9 to 14 degrees celcius lower than IvyBridge CPUs.

So for instance if you're running an i5 3570K IvyBridge CPU and you overclocked it from 3.4Ghz stock to 4.3Ghz,

and I overclocked my i5 2500K SandyBridge CPU from 3.3Ghz Stock to 4.8Ghz, my 2500K would in reality be at the same temperature as yours even though I'm getting nearly 1Ghz more than you're getting out of your CPU. So If you're thinking of overclocking and don't want to risk frying your CPU, then go for the SandyBridge as they run on lower temperatures compared to the IvyBridge.

 

The heat issue with the IvyBridge processors is official. Intel themselves have admitted this and is a well known issue. If you're not going to overclock your CPU then don't buy the more expensive CPUs with the letter "K" at the end which means they're overclockable and buy the IvyBridge ones that don't have that letter and save your money

This is where the SandyBridge really comes into action. SandyBridge CPUs basically run 9 to 14 degrees celcius lower than IvyBridge CPUs.

So for instance if you're running an i5 3570K IvyBridge CPU and you overclocked it from 3.4Ghz stock to 4.3Ghz,

and I overclocked my i5 2500K SandyBridge CPU from 3.3Ghz Stock to 4.8Ghz, my 2500K would in reality be at the same temperature as yours even though I'm getting nearly 1Ghz more than you're getting out of your CPU. So If you're thinking of overclocking and don't want to risk frying your CPU, then go for the SandyBridge as they run on lower temperatures compared to the IvyBridge.

 

The heat issue with the IvyBridge processors is official. Intel themselves have admitted this and is a well known issue. If you're not going to overclock your CPU then don't buy the more expensive CPUs with the letter "K" at the end which means they're overclockable and buy the IvyBridge ones that don't have that letter and save your money

 

Sure man, you seems to have great experiance overclocking SB and IB systems ???

If you dont read this

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/391846-good-rig-slow-fsx/#entry2528701

 

I agree , ok little to positive but from 4.4 i have the same feeling .

I went from a + @5.3ghz 2700K to a @4.8 3770K that was way smother in FSX and now run @5.3.

Anyway my 2700k is one of the fastest FSMark11 SB system out there