AMD or Intel for FS9

[Appliance 51]

Mods: Please do NOT move this topic to the Hardware forum since it is solely addressed to FS9 (FS2004) users.

 

Members/friends I have a problem.

 

Now retired, and as a pensioner,  I have been saving for quite some time to upgrade my computer. I have noted the trials and tribulations of respected members of our forum, Kiwi and Rafal amongst them, in upgrading to the previous generation of Intel chips. The results being not always as expected.

 

Like many I suppose I had hoped the 'tock' processor "Haswell" would overcome the deficiencies of 'Ivy Bridge' and would run FS9 and its add-ons most satisfactorily 'until 'the cows come home.' Early reviews have not been entirely positive however. Overclocking sees temps rise to such an extent as to warrant water cooling as a default condition.

 

Now we all know that FS9 is a single core application (unlike FSX) however I wonder whether the AMD FX 8350 (8 cores) might be a viable, and cheaper, alternative to Haswell (4 cores.)  Motherboards for AMD chips are also rather less expensive too. 

 

I am interested in smoothness rather than frames  However I need to fly into add-on airports in payware aircraft in bad weather using TripleHead2Go with many supporting applications assisting. My existing Core2Duo E8500 does struggle.

 

I would be very interested in hearing from any FX 8350 owners as to their experiences with FS9 and, in particular, whether there is real benefit in being able to offload subsidiary applications to the chip's other cores.

 

Thanks in advance for your wisdom.

[Reason 20]

Hi

 

Not sure I am able to deliver wisdom in this case. But I'd say Intel will deliver what you want as stated above. I dont know much about Haswell, but running default i5 or i7 is more than enough to get both frame rates and smoothness.

 

I'm using i5 2500k and far older GPU than yours. I'm running FS9 with nearly all sliders to the right and the I'm really satisfied with the smoothness. Please do consider intel as your next investment.

 

Cheers

[Luke 782]

 

 

I would be very interested in hearing from any FX 8350 owners as to their experiences with FS9 and, in particular, whether there is real benefit in being able to offload subsidiary applications to the chip's other cores.

 

There is - to a second core, which you're already doing. From there, your performance increases are going to come from faster cores, not more cores. Get the Ivy Bridge.

 

Cheers!

Luke

[Groovin_DC-10 50]

I'm using i5 2500k and far older GPU than yours. I'm running FS9 with nearly all sliders to the right and the I'm really satisfied with the smoothness. Please do consider intel as your next investment.

 

Cheers

 

Which sliders are you not maxing out?  I'm running a lesser cpu than yours (AMD 955BE @ 4ghz) and I have all sliders to the right.  I don't enable shadows because it eats too much fps.

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

I'd recommend Intel over AMD, because FS9 is exclusively single-threaded, and that's where AMD CPUs don't do so well. The same happens with FSX too; even though SP1 allowed it to take advantage of multiple cores with DEM loading, texture synthesis and autogen batching, everything else is still running on one thread.

 

Ivy Bridge and Haswell are extremely disappointing when it comes to overclocking. I'd recommend either buying a Haswell CPU and de-lidding it to regain the overclocking headroom (very risky), or getting a Sandy Bridge CPU.

[lodestar 186]

Sandy bridge 2500k, 2600k or 2700k are more then you need for FS9. IMHO, more important for FS9 is GPU(but you don't need more then 560ti)and right settings. I'd like to show you how my FS9 looks and perform with 2700k and 560ti. All sliders are maxed out, and everything is smooth. 

I can't speak about AMD, but some friends have got excelent performance with AMD even with fsx. 

I would go for 2700K rather then AMD, ivy, haswell etc... Just like i did actually  :lol:

[Appliance 51]

Thank you to all who have responded ... I respect your advice. 

 

Thank you also to the mods for not (yet) redirecting this thread to the Hardware section.

 

I'd still like AMD owners to chime in with their thoughts/experiences.

 

Cheers.

[Reason 20]

Which sliders are you not maxing out?  I'm running a lesser cpu than yours (AMD 955BE @ 4ghz) and I have all sliders to the right.  I don't enable shadows because it eats too much fps.

 

The sliders maxed out are everything except "visibility" and cloud draw (or in similar extent). Yes shadows can be demanding but I still tick all the shadow options and am really happy with the result. My lowest fps is somewhere in 19-22  in a very extreme condition (traffic woai 100%, KJFK FSDT and Aerosoft Manhattan using Maddog MD 82 and Activesky Evo cloud layer setting= 7)

[AVSIM Admin 4]

This is an automatic message.

 

This topic has been moved from "The FS2004 (FS9) Forum" to "MOBO, RAM, CPU's & Other Hardware". This move has been done for a number of possible reasons.

• The most likely reason is that the post was off topic.
• The topic could also have contained images or a video that were not appropriate to the original forum it was posted in.
• The images might not have been "illustrative" or "explanatory" in nature.
• The topic could have been moved because we deemed it to be more appropriately placed elsewhere.

Please ensure that your posts are "on topic" and contain illustrative images or videos as appropriate. Do not post videos or images just for entertainment purposes anywhere but in the screen shot or video forums. See our image posting rules here.

 

Members who continue to post off topic posts can be denied entry to specific forums in order to reduce and remove the practice. Your cooperation is appreciated.

[Groovin_DC-10 50]

I'd still like AMD owners to chime in with their thoughts/experiences.

 

Cheers.

 

I'm running an AMD 955BE oc'd to 4ghz with a Corsair H60 liquid cooling.  No complaints.  I'm very happy with the way it handles FS9.  I have all sliders maxed but shadows disabled.  Whenever I enable all shadows, my fps drops by half.  My biggest add on airport at the moment is Aerosoft Barajas, and with 100% traffic using PMDG MD-11 I still get excellent performance.  Same thing with default KLAX and KJFK with 100% traffic.  I don't feel the need to upgrade the CPU for FS9.  There is minimal stutters when the fps is jumping wildly but it's nothing like the stutters in FSX at all.  Still good enough for me to say it's very smooth.

Hope this helps.

 

The sliders maxed out are everything except "visibility" and cloud draw (or in similar extent). Yes shadows can be demanding but I still tick all the shadow options and am really happy with the result. My lowest fps is somewhere in 19-22  in a very extreme condition (traffic woai 100%, KJFK FSDT and Aerosoft Manhattan using Maddog MD 82 and Activesky Evo cloud layer setting= 7)

 

Gotcha.  I had difficulties maintaining high fps with REX HD clouds, so I changed the setting to DXT compression for the clouds and I'm able to max out cloud distance with very little fps impact, even in severe weather.  You should gain a significant amount of fps if you use compressed clouds, but I understand that some people don't like it and prefer HD.

[neumanix 113]

+1 for the Sandy Bridge i5 2500K.

It's everything you need to run FS9 maxed out.

It overclocks easily up to at least 4.5Ghz with a good aftermarket cooler.

You already have a good gfx card that will match a 2500k nicely.

 

Sure, Ivy Bridge is faster in IPC (Instructions per cycle), but is harder to overclock and runs hotter.

[Reason 20]

Gotcha. I had difficulties maintaining high fps with REX HD clouds, so I changed the setting to DXT compression for the clouds and I'm able to max out cloud distance with very little fps impact, even in severe weather. You should gain a significant amount of fps if you use compressed clouds, but I understand that some people don't like it and prefer HD

 

That's right. I was using AMD XII Athlon and having the issue you mentioned above. One of the many reasons migrating to intel 15 is because I really love the HD clouds.

 

Neumanix said:

+1 for the Sandy Bridge i5 2500K.

It's everything you need to run FS9 maxed out.

It overclocks easily up to at least 4.5Ghz with descent cooling.

You already have a good gfx card that will match a 2500k nicely.

 

Sure, Ivy Bridge is faster in IPC (Instructions per cycle), but is harder to overclock and runs hotter.

 

 

Hi there. I really want to overclock my i5 as for now I am running default clock speed but I am worried about the decreased longevity resulted from overclocking. I'm planning to get it 4.0 Ghz. So, do I still need water cooling or such? I am now using Contac 21 Thermaltake cooler.

[Appliance 51]

Well this thread has been a most amazing experience.

Not one of my requests has been answered.

Firstly the mods HAVE moved my post after all.  :angry: 

The wonderful respondents have not answered my specific requests. :wacko: 

This just goes to show that people these days do not listen, or read, correctly. Rather they interpret what they think the author is saying and threads go off at a tangent.

Sandy Bridge cpu's are no longer generally available in Australia. My choice was between Haswell and AMD FX-8350 in any case.

"As real as it gets" necessitates shadows being turned ON. One reason I refuse to journey to FSX.

My FS9 is flown ALL sliders maxed. I fly into payware airports, in payware airliners (Maddog, iFly, Level D, PMDG, Feelthere etc.) using real weather (ASv6.5 os FS Global Real Weather), REX cloud textures (1024), UT Canada, Europe and USA, GEPro, Pilots' FS Global Mesh 2008, ATC (Radar Contact or PFE), AI (My Traffic), MCE, FsRAAS, SerialFP2 (VRInsight Radio Stack), Vroute Premium, Navigraph Charts 4, Real ATIS Management, AES etc., etc.

I was wondering whether these subsidiary programs could be profitably 'farmed off' to the other 6 cores of the AMD FX- 8350 cpu.

Otherwise I shall content myself with a i7 4770K, Swiftech H220 water cooler, ASRock Fatality Z87 motherboard and 2933MHz ram and settle myself in for the next 5 or so years.  :lol:

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

Sandy Bridge cpu's are no longer generally available in Australia. My choice was between Haswell and AMD FX-8350 in any case.

 

You could have said that. We recommended Sandy Bridge because that's currently the best choice for FS9/FSX.

 

If you can only get Haswell or the FX-8350, get Haswell. Single-threaded performance on AMD CPUs is so terrible, and you won't get Haswell-like performance at whatever clock speed you set it to. If you want to overclock Haswell, water cooling will barely make a difference, because the bad TIM is still in there. Just de-lid it.

 

As for offloading add-ons to other cores, no, that cannot happen. FS9 is exclusively single-threaded, and those add-ons still run on FS9. They're not separate processes.

[neumanix 113]

 

 

Hi there. I really want to overclock my i5 as for now I am running default clock speed but I am worried about the decreased longevity resulted from overclocking. I'm planning to get it 4.0 Ghz. So, do I still need water cooling or such? I am now using Contac 21 Thermaltake cooler.

 

I've been using the Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme cooler which looks very similar to yours. I've never had a problem with the voltage at 1.36 and boost clock at 4.6Ghz. Temps around 55C at full load.

You should be all set for 4Ghz and above. Just go forward in small steps and check your temps while loading the CPU.