When pigs fly.

There's plenty of flying pigs around here! :LMAO:

I think I'm pretty safe for at least a few years of service, I hope, w/ my current overclock to 4.43Ghz at 1.295v.  Temps are great.

When pigs fly.

 

They did already, probably all out of commission now though...

Or at least warthogs.

Well... Seven years have passed since FSX was released. Look at what has happened in those 7 years when it comes to hardware and software. Will FSX really survive yet another 7 years...? By that time FSX will be like a game from 1999 if you look at it now. Who still playes games from 1999...? Anyone...? Progress in hardware and software may have slowed down a little but we don't know what surprises are ahead. Seven years is a LONG time in computerland.

 

I personally think that IF we will still be using something that's related to FSX, it will be through something like P3D version 4.0...? However my hope is that we will be flying in a brand new sim by then (with Oculus Rift HD 3D version 3). But I have my doubts about a new sim. They would have to start working on it NOW in order to make the 2020 deadline.

New sim to replace fsx would likely merge truck, train, farm, ship sins into a vitural world. See, 3rd parties acting like construction companies building vitural world. Agree, P3d will have its finger prints somewhere in the pie. Gonna be messy process to getting it going.

New sim to replace fsx would likely merge truck, train, farm, ship sins into a vitural world. See, 3rd parties acting like construction companies building vitural world. Agree, P3d will have its finger prints somewhere in the pie. Gonna be messy process to getting it going.

 

It seems DCS has the capacity to do exactly that, but ED isn't aiming at that direction...

we are at the wall in terms of the IPC and clock rates with the current tech.

 

Not at the wall, it's more a matter of economics than any technology wall ... given the lack of interest in desktop computing these days Intel are in no rush to do anything for desktop CPUs.  For enterprise processing (servers, SQL servers, exchange servers, etc.), more CPU cores is what makes that world happen not raw clock performance ... in fact the less power the CPUs use the less costly it is to pay the power bill to keep the servers running 24/7.  Power costs are a big factor in the Enterprise/IT world.

 

However, what FSX doesn't do is use the GPU very well.  Titan is one under utilized GPU when it comes to FSX ... there is so much more GPU's can do these days to free up the CPU.  If P3D DX11 becomes a reality it'll buy some time for 64bit conversion and the need for more Ghz (at least for a couple of years anyway).

 

But whenever you talk "World Simulation" (which is what FSX tries to do) then it will ALWAYS push the envelope of GPU/CPU capabilities, always and without exception.

When you talk about CPU cache, you mean, more L3 cache doesn't really do much for FSX in terms of performance? Sorry if I misread what you were saying.

No, I meant that if you have a program which is small enough to fit in the processor cache, even the L1 or L2 which are faster, and utilizes prtty much only the processor without much addressing the main mem, you get quite linear benefit from higher clock speed of the certain processor. FSX though, like many games for example, addresses quite a lot memory and renders graphics through GPU, plays sound from sound processor etc. and all those play part in the performance of the software. FSX is not by any means utilizing only the CPU and thus linear rise in performance is quite impossible to achieve just by rising the CPU clock speed.

Not at the wall, it's more a matter of economics than any technology wall ... given the lack of interest in desktop computing these days Intel are in no rush to do anything for desktop CPUs.  For enterprise processing (servers, SQL servers, exchange servers, etc.), more CPU cores is what makes that world happen not raw clock performance ... in fact the less power the CPUs use the less costly it is to pay the power bill to keep the servers running 24/7.  Power costs are a big factor in the Enterprise/IT world.

 

I think it's a chicken and egg situation. In my opinion, desktop CPUs stagnated first, and the current "mobile revolution" is a direct result of this. With constant clock speed improvements no longer forcing people to upgrade as frequently, the industry needed to move in other directions to keep growing. One way was to take the existing "good enough" performance level and shrink it until it would work in a handheld device. Thereby Moore's law is used to make smaller, leaner chips instead of pursuing higher and higher clock speeds and more cores.

 

The lack of interest in desktop CPUs is a result of the industry deliberately steering people toward mobile through direct and indirect marketing, where innovation is still possible.

 

It will not be many more years until the performance of Smartphone CPUs match that of a mid-range Intel desktop CPU.

 

 

Titan is one under utilized GPU

 

Rob, what do you have your core voltage set at to run at 4.8Ghz?  Until I see whether or not IB-E is made w/ fluxless solder TIM I'm disinclined to overvolt my SB-E much.

It'll just mean a shorter time before you get to OOM....I recently rebuilt my system with all SSD's and pushed the CPU to 4GHz...

 

I can reboot after OOM and get back to the next OOM quicker...woohoo!!!!

 

 

Rob, what do you have your core voltage set at to run at 4.8Ghz?

 

Core voltage is not static so it will vary under load, but mine is 1.4v with Prime95 12 worker threads it will drop to about 1.36.  I'm running 32GB RAM quad channel at 1.5v.  Motherboard is Asus RAMPAGE IV GENE with BIOS rev 1305 (there is a newer BIOS rev but I'm very happy with the stability of 1305 so no desire to risk a BIOS update).

 

CPU Temps under 100% load all cores are ©: 64, 60, 62, 60, 59, 62

CPU Temps under normal loads are ©: 33, 30, 31, 30, 30, 31

 

As you can see even under max load I have about 20c headroom.  I'm using a simple H100 self contained water/air cooling setup and nothing crazy for case fans either ... I like a quiet PC.

 

System stability is all about motherboard choice and memory settings and making sure the cooling block can keep proper tension over a wide heat range as the CPU heats, cools, heats, cools etc.  Quad channel motherboards are thicker (have to be to support quad channel) and more expensive but they seem to deal with changing heat conditions better than thinner dual channel motherboards.

Core voltage is not static so it will vary under load, but mine is 1.4v with Prime95 12 worker threads it will drop to about 1.36. 

How about CPU VCCSA Manual Voltage?

 

I'm at 1.295v for CPU VCORE manual voltage, and 1.1v for CPU VCCSA.  I'm running my 3930K at 4.4Ghz and quad-channel DRAM at 2356Mhz or something close to that.

What are you using to report CPU VCORE?