New SSD and FSX install but lower fps?

[ryanbatc 12,775]

I'm trying to figure out why I'm getting about 25% less fps with my new FSX install.

 

I'm still installing stuff but with the NGX and FSDT scenery I'm getting about 10-12 fps in the VC (with weather no AI traffic)

 

I've got wide aspect and highmemfix in my cfg. I'm pretty sure I didn't run with any other tweaks. I also have nvidia inspector set to 8xS AA and 16x AF. But I wonder if it's not working - if I set filtering to none in FSX there's no AF even with nvidia inspector profile setup.

 

Also strangely enough the load times between my old gen 2 SSD and the new gen 3 are basically identical..... Surprised me a little.

 

Any ideas mainly on the fps ?

 

Edit: the title suggests I'm expecting an increase in fps with the new drive - not at all but I should at least get what I had.

[s0cks 116]

Can't help on the FPS, but yes, I noticed barely any difference in loading times between SSD and HDD with FSX. There is a massive difference with P3D though.

[BeechPapa 32]

Recently upgraded from Intel 320 (~150-200mbps reads) to Samsung 840 Pro (350-400mbps reads) and it didn't help load times. I do have more room though, so can't complain. I've noticed that between any reinstalls of W7 or FSX that performance is pretty much the same before and after tweaking. Could be a lot of things, but maybe a driver reintsall/update might help. If its not a driver/application issue, my bet is on a bad setting somewhere. Keep in mind that FSDT stuff (especially GSX) and Flightbeam rely on that Coautl Addon Manager, and one thing that really annoys me is that it can change CFG settings automatically, or even add certain sections in. When you are done installing everything, just flush out and make a new CFG to undo the damage made by overzealous addons.

[ryanbatc 12,775]

Yeah good point ... I do have a lot of their sceneries.

[PookyMacMan 4]

Are you using the same Windows installation?

[ryanbatc 12,775]

It's impossible to be perfectly identical but I've adjusted my graphical settings the same and all SP's/hot fixes are installed.

[ryanbatc 12,775]

I figured it out lol...

 

I installed CPUz to check my OC and it wasn't in place!  It must have failed (again sigh) so I set it back to 4.@ghz and it seems ok for now.

 

In a nutshell I seem to be having hardware issues and I expect I'll rebuild sometime soon.... tired of getting poor OCing CPU's GRRRR!!!  Tired of my board too....  back to asus next time.

[Capt Speirs 52]

Can't help on the FPS, but yes, I noticed barely any difference in loading times between SSD and HDD with FSX. There is a massive difference with P3D though.

 

What SSD are you running? When I installed my 840 Pros there is a huge difference.

[ryanbatc 12,775]

840 evo 500GB.  Except were you running on a HDD before your SSD?  Because I was already running on a nice gen 2 SSD..... now its a gen 3.

 

Even though on paper (benchmark) my old ssd got about 180 MB/sec read, and the new one gets 510 MB/sec - I don't see any difference in FSX.

 

I do though in BF4 and XP10 loading times have decreased a lot.

[s0cks 116]

Yeah same. P3D, XP10, and BF4 all load so much quicker, but FSX loading times are only marginally better. Perhaps if you run a tonne of addons it could be quicker.

[BeechPapa 32]

I usually put the clock speed back to default for major installs, and have forgotten to put the OC back before. Looks like in your case the mobo forgot. Maybe it unpugged long enough to lose its BIOS settings during the SSD install... might not be its fault. 

 

Haven't installed any of my Battlefield games yet, but I noticed Skyrim has about the same load times as before (current gen Samsung vs. earlier gen Intel). I could be really bad at telling micro time though. All of these SSDs just seem lightning quick, even the older gen ones. The leap from HDD is enough to make the jumps from gen to gen less dramatic. This article kind of makes an interesting point about theoretical vs. actual bandwidth and addresses the generational issue of SSDs: 

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-upgrade-sata-3gbps,3469.html

 

pay particular attention to the staggering difference in synthetic vs. real world benchmarks 

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

"I installed CPUz to check my OC and it wasn't in place"

 

You have to disable C1E, C3/C6/C7 and EIST in the BIOS. This must be done for cpuz to see your overclock

[s0cks 116]

I usually put the clock speed back to default for major installs, and have forgotten to put the OC back before. Looks like in your case the mobo forgot. Maybe it unpugged long enough to lose its BIOS settings during the SSD install... might not be its fault. 

 

Haven't installed any of my Battlefield games yet, but I noticed Skyrim has about the same load times as before (current gen Samsung vs. earlier gen Intel). I could be really bad at telling micro time though. All of these SSDs just seem lightning quick, even the older gen ones. The leap from HDD is enough to make the jumps from gen to gen less dramatic. This article kind of makes an interesting point about theoretical vs. actual bandwidth and addresses the generational issue of SSDs: 

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-upgrade-sata-3gbps,3469.html

 

pay particular attention to the staggering difference in synthetic vs. real world benchmarks 

 

Access times are the real benefit over traditional hard drives. But loading 200 small files to start a game isn't going to be noticeably quicker between older and newer SSD's (0.05 secs vs. 0.02 secs to load a 10mb file). Copying large files should be much quicker though.

[ryanbatc 12,775]

"I installed CPUz to check my OC and it wasn't in place"

 

You have to disable C1E, C3/C6/C7 and EIST in the BIOS. This must be done for cpuz to see your overclock

At one point I had c1e disabled but with those on or off I'm able to see the MHz readout and vcore .... Which coincides fairly close to the vcore in bios.

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

So your all set then