Over the last year I added many addons an dmy system is running very stable without CTD's.

 

However running a setup with 3 monitors for my outside view I cannot lock my fps at 30 and use 1/2  refresh rate as at many detailed scenery my fps drop to 20-23..

There fore I have locked my fps to 20 and use 1/3 Refresh rate, which is smoother than just locking my fps at 24.

 

I was wondering if upgrading my 2600K , running at 4.8Ghz to a 3770K, running at 4.8Ghz would make any difference.

 

In that way I do not have to upgrade my motherboard and have te reinstall Windows, FSX and lots of addons, which cost me almost 3 weeks 3 years ago.    

3770 at 4.8. Boy do I long for that spec for ages.

 

Performance should be more than just OKAY. But you may want to look closer to your GPU since you're mentioning refresh rate, multiple monitor and suc? LOL

 

I aint helping much eh?

 

Btw, since you're up to 3770, just curious if you sell your 2600K at a decent price.

From the benchmarks that I have seen at like for like clock speeds Ivy Bridge (3770K) can be up to 10% faster in *some* applications than Sandy Bridge (2600K) how much difference it would make in FSX I'm not sure but even if you got the maximum 10% then you would only get another 2 FPS. Also 4.8Ghz is probably not going to be acheivable unless you de-lid the CPU and that risk is one you'll need to consider. I don't know how much more performance the 4770K (Haswell) will have but obviously this would mean a new motherboard etc which you've said you're not keen on.

 

Do you know that it is the CPU that is the problem rather than your video card? I suspect 2GB of VRAM is struggling with 3 moniors depending on the resolution you are running them at. Have you checked task manager to see whether the core running FSX is at 100% all the time, if it isn't then this is likely because your graphics card is bottlenecking the system.

 

I don't know what AffinityMask you are using but the fewer cores you use (minimum of 2) within FSX the better FPS you get, the tradeoff is that texture loading suffers as a result but you may find that acceptable as I assume you have scenery etc quite low to increase framrates. Assuming you have HT enabled an AM of 80 is 2 physical cores only and will give you the highest FPS in FSX, and an AM of 84 is 3 physical cores only. You could try those and see how they work out.

Ivy Bridge plus ddr3 2666 MHz Cas10 will give you 4 FPS over Sandy Bridge with 2133 MHz!

 

HLJAMES

Wait and see what Hasewll gone do .

I run 3 X views in My 737 sim 160 fov 53. o -53.

Think a need 10-15% more than i have now running the 3770k @5.3ghz

Have problems with AS EHAM for example 25-26 taxing close to the gates in bad

wheater at night.

Run 1/2 refresh locked 30. Inspector 8X 2SGSS 5760x1080 res , fsx settings

type Word Not Allowed.

 

HASSE

As I have understood from Word Not Allowed in a topic about a year ago memory above 1600 mhz does not do that much in Windows 7, when that memory has short timings.   

 

Measuring the memory from my graphics card it rarely goes over 40%.

I have the fastest GTX680 there is with 2 Gb.

 

TheTitan shows just a little more performance in general , but shows good improvement in heavy clouds.

 

If Reason still has interest in my 2600K, I might take the step to try. Price  150 euro.

• forget it,not worth the money

It's not worth the investment.

 

My initial thought is to get a Titan and then upgrade to a better CPU/RAM/Motherboard combo in a couple of years.

 

FSX is CPU dependent, but the GPU (thanks to the BP=0) has to be very good too. The faster the CPU, the faster your video card should be.

 

With multiple screens, the Titan should be amazing and you will not have to upgrade the card again. EVER! EVER!

Never have to upgrade my graphicscard again with a Titan ?

 

Beleave me, within 2 years there will be faster cards again and cards with same performance as the Titan now has , for half the money.

 

It has always been like that....

Wait and see what Hasewll gone do .

I run 3 X views in My 737 sim 160 fov 53. o -53.

Think a need 10-15% more than i have now running the 3770k @5.3ghz

Have problems with AS EHAM for example 25-26 taxing close to the gates in bad

wheater at night.

Run 1/2 refresh locked 30. Inspector 8X 2SGSS 5760x1080 res , fsx settings

type Word Not Allowed.

 

HASSE

Well, that is not too bad. I am running 1080p and with 30 FPS locked + 1/2 refresh rate I get around 24 FPS in your situation on this same airport in the NGX. However, I find no FPS limiter is needed in the NGX with 1/2 refresh rate so I don't use any without sacrificing smoothness, however, framerate is increased to around 27. Obviously, anything below 30 FPS just sucks with 1/2 refresh rate...

 

Of course I also see you're running 5.3 GHz, 3 monitors and 8xSGSS. Even for that system, those results are VERY impressive. I can imagine if I run 3 screens and 8xSGSS I would get like 20 FPS in your occasion. 

 

To answer the OP's question, I don't think you should upgrade just yet. You can expect a 10% increase at max, but with 1/2 refresh rate, anything below 30 FPS is just horrible. 

 

You'd wanna upgrade to Haswell and overclock as much as you can, and buy a GPU with at least 3 GB of RAM and preferably 4GB. 

Arjen, he is running 2XSGSS, and some AA at 8X, which one he did not specify...

 

@Gerard:

To get 4.8GHz on IB, you will need to de-lid the cpu and replace the thermal interface material, which will automatically void any guarantee... 

 

I don't think the increase in frame rate you will see will be worth the upgrade.

 

A

Never have to upgrade my graphicscard again with a Titan ?

 

Beleave me, within 2 years there will be faster cards again and cards with same performance as the Titan now has , for half the money.

 

It has always been like that....

I agree that prices tend to go down and sometimes for an even better performing card, but FSX is mainly CPU "speed" dependant so if you have a gtx 580 or better you should be ok for a while.

 

If I were building a new rig I would go with a 3770K or a 2700K and a Titan GPU. That should yield excellent performance. You will still need to play with the FSX settings, Inspector settings, and tweak the cfg.

 

FSX is a poorly coded program. But when it works, as it does on my current system, it's an amazing creation.

Are there any proper comparisons yet on how Titan performs compared to GTX 680 even in non GPU bound scenarios? 

 

FSX is a poorly coded program. But when it works, as it does on my current system, it's an amazing creation.

With the technology of nowadays, it could even be more amazing! Especially graphically and performance wise. The problem is that no developer is daring to take the chance. 

Are there any proper comparisons yet on how Titan performs compared to GTX 680 even in non GPU bound scenarios?

 

Yes there is and who do you think would use their time and expertise to perform such a test?