I am wondering how dramatic the impact of 5-7 GHz processors will be for FSX? Because right now even 4 GHz doesn't allow for the ultimate experience. At 5-7 GHz will this sim get a new lease on life? I cannot see how it wouldn't. Right now I have an i5 2500k with a 5850 and feel like I am just waiting for an amazing CPU, at which point I will get the next gen GPU to go with it.

 

Is the wait going to be 3 years? When does 5-7 GHz become common without OC?

It will probably still run like crap!

When 5-7ghz CPUs become common, I'll buy 4ghz one, so nothing big is gonna happen to FSX

it will never work, remember fsx came out in 2006, and its was always coded wrong.  Wishful thinking????

Shouldn't we see a big improvement with higher clock speeds?  Some of the 5GHz vids on youtube are very smooth with high settings.

Creative editing does more to the video than 5ghz will ever do.

There will probably be some new fsx guides, fsx will run very smooth at beggining. And after that everyone will start to push FSX to the new limits, and then we will start to wonder What happens to FSX when 10-12 GHz is common... and so on  :rolleyes:  

I do not think 5-7 Ghz without overclocking is going to be common anytime soon. I think clock per clock efficiency and more cores is a much higher priority at the moment. Such a chip would also need a pretty efficient cooler, the heat is still going to be a deciding factor. I do not think we would see a huge improment in FSX performance, most like bottlenecking of something else. A new better coded platform would be more welcome if you ask me.

 

 

When does 5-7 GHz become common without OC?

 

When pigs fly.

I'm confused.  People always recommend that FSX pilots OC their processor to at least 4GHz and we get improved performance with that.  Why wouldn't 5-7GHz increase performance even more?  Especially given the fact that FSX is CPU hungry.

The major hurdle is virtual address space. There will be no way to increase the VAS for fsx as a 32-bit application beyond 4Gb. So, even if we get 200fps over OrbX at FSDT Vancouver with all settings maxxed out in our NGX, it will still crap out with an OOM.

 

The only way ahead will be a 64-bit application... Whoever it may be, P3D v3 x64 or XP12 or whatever...

 

Don't you just love speculation?

 

A

 

 

Andrew Entwistle

I imagine that if we ever get to that point (and it looks like it will be a very long time before we get there in either clock speed or increased efficiency per clock), the 32 bit nature of FSX will become the limiting factor. Look at the new New York scenery that was released. Even with the world's fastest CPU, there is no way to get around the OOMs caused by detailed scenery coupled with detailed aircraft.

Is there really a big performace difference between say a dual core 2.8ghz processor like I have now to a i7 running at 2.66?. I would hate to think that after building a new pc and then being dissapointed with the results. or is it about smoothness?

 

I have seen those videos on youtube with people running at 5.2ghz and it looks completely different to my set up but I know many people use post video effects which is kind of cheating.

I'm confused.  People always recommend that FSX pilots OC their processor to at least 4GHz and we get improved performance with that.  Why wouldn't 5-7GHz increase performance even more?  Especially given the fact that FSX is CPU hungry.

Don't listen to them of course it will. People are getting 30+FPS with I7's now. Look at Froogle's 777 stream video of the upcoming PMDG 777. He was getting a solid 45fps and that was while streaming a video.. He said he had his settings maxed as well. Not sure the speed of his system, but I'm pretty sure it's a recent I7. Me I'm stuck right now with a 3Ghz C2D system. Even so with some compromises on the graphics in my VC, with the NGX I can get 20fps and still have considerable detail outside. (Extremely dense scenery, Dense autogen, water at 2xlow) and that's with 100% UT2 traffic. So increasing the processor speed will only make it that much better.

Is there really a big performace difference between say a dual core 2.8ghz processor like I have now to a i7 running at 2.66?. I would hate to think that after building a new pc and then being dissapointed with the results. or is it about smoothness?

 

I have seen those videos on youtube with people running at 5.2ghz and it looks completely different to my set up but I know many people use post video effects which is kind of cheating.

2.66Ghz is kind of low for FSX even for a I7, you really need 3.0+ (Which is borderline like mine) and preferably more in the 4+ghz range to really get the most out of FSX.

Is there really a big performace difference between say a dual core 2.8ghz processor like I have now to a i7 running at 2.66?. I would hate to think that after building a new pc and then being dissapointed with the results. or is it about smoothness?

 

I have seen those videos on youtube with people running at 5.2ghz and it looks completely different to my set up but I know many people use post video effects which is kind of cheating.

If you saw Froogle's stream or check out the live stream avsim section, they are live, so there is no way they can cheat!!

It will probably still run like crap!

 

this