I didn't say "game changer" in my post. I know exactly what it is given that I have two engineering samples in my office right now (my company is a specialist OEM). BUT for those of use who do not overclock much, going from a 3.4-3.6 stock CPU to a 4.0 with 4.4 turbo, is a decent jump. And with 5 (real world, 4.6.4.8) on air, that a lot better than the usual 200Mhz increments that Intel foists on us. And certainly better than a new GPU for most people.

 

I would much rather have had Broadwell instead of a refresh that fixes an issue that should have never been introduced, but that's just me.

It's definitely an improvement but not really a technological one, more of a marketing gimmick that started with Ivy's crap TIM/HIS. Intel is slowing things down due to lack of competition from AMD so the not so distant 1 year tick/tock schedule is now gone. 

I still reckon the new 4790K will be a big jump for FSX, 4GHZ stock with 4.4 turbo, and up to 5 on air cooling!

Can't wait too. Looking at the benchmarks, 4.4Ghz on the 4790K is about equivalent to an overclocked 4770K at 4.6Ghz. Just imagine what's ahead in two or three years where we'll end up with a base clock 4.6 or 4.8Ghz. That could be pushed up to over 5.7Ghz by overclocking.

 

 

You have 3 GPUs installed?
Or do you mean it is a 3rd generation GPU?

the GPU really should be in a x16 slot for best performance.
I am amazed you get such good performance with that.
Cant believe it actually.

Do you have FSX at unlimited frame rates or locked at 30fps like I have it?

And, do you also use Nvidia Inspector AA filtering (things look better (less shimmers) but it costs fps)?

 

Hi -

 

Yes, it is in the slower slot on my Maximus IV Extreme -Z.  Framerates are locked at 30FPS in heavy wx, unlimited in light wx.

 

I "play" games as well, so the SLI set is running Splinter Cell Blacklist, Assassin's Creed, etc.

 

My NI is using AA filtering.  It's about a 1-2fps drop in the VC, no drop in external views.

 

In FSX, the SLI set is running as Physx processing only...

I've noticed a gain in FPS when I run FSX in windowed mode.

 

https://app.box.com/s/y8pugs9k1mwgawlo630d

https://app.box.com/s/fsr1xojqpjt2ooncfavs

There really isn't that much of a difference between an I7 4770K and an I5 3570K that you'll need a faster GPU for the I7.

 

The CPU - GPU balance mantra does not apply to FSX as it does to modern GPU limited games that make good use of the CPU too

 

You know what....this kind of discussion is always interesting.....but who am I to try to convince anybody.

I get ALL my hardware info/tips/knowledsge from somewhere else.

From someone I consider a true hardware and FSX specialist.

Since I am not a hardware specialist, all I can do is pass his info on, so that others dont get dissapointed with the hardware they buy.

That is the only goal I have when it comes to hardware discussions.....I am not out to be right!

 

And I have passed his info on to the OP.

From here it is up to the OP which way he thinks he should go and to choose what to buy.

 

The last thing I will say is that my source completely and 100% disagrees with what you are saying.

My source says....it is extremely important to match CPU and GPU ESPECIALLY for FSX....and there is a big difference between an i5 and an i7 because FSX benefits from the larger cash (I have not checked the I7 4770K against an I5 3570K but I assume the i7 has more cashe....I will leave the checking up to the OP)

 

Please dont take my dissagreeing with you personally!

 

 

It's definitely an improvement but not really a technological one, more of a marketing gimmick that started with Ivy's crap TIM/HIS. Intel is slowing things down due to lack of competition from AMD so the not so distant 1 year tick/tock schedule is now gone.

I agree on this one!! I have a current 3770 non-K and can get it to 4.3 stable, no higher.

 

 

Can't wait too. Looking at the benchmarks, 4.4Ghz on the 4790K is about equivalent to an overclocked 4770K at 4.6Ghz. Just imagine what's ahead in two or three years where we'll end up with a base clock 4.6 or 4.8Ghz. That could be pushed up to over 5.7Ghz by overclocking.

Not entirely sure how it gets more work done per clock when it is essentially still a 4770 core? 5GHz would be nice, I am thinking mid to high 4's will be more realistic to most people. Still, I will take 4.7 over my 4.3

 

 

My source says....it is extremely important to match CPU and GPU ESPECIALLY for FSX....and there is a big difference between an i5 and an i7 because FSX benefits from the larger cash (I have not checked the I7 4770K against an I5 3570K but I assume the i7 has more cashe....I will leave the checking up to the OP)

Please dont take my dissagreeing with you personally!

This is true but calling it a "big" difference is pushing it a bit, it only has an extra 2MB of Cache, 6MB vs 8MB. It probably does help, but as you say you do need to balance things, so for someone on a budget, a midrange CPU and midrange GPU could well be better than a high-end i7 with no money left over for a decent GPU... 

But Ryan, would you have done much better if you had kept your 570 and gone for an overclocked 4770k?

 

I recently went for more VRAM and a 770 coupled with my existing 3570k and my overall performance including FPS was significant.

 

Your CPU doesn't exactly do a 6GB GTX 780 much justice.

 

Regards,

 

I'm buying a 4790K and new mobo next month. And believe it or not every game I play besides FSX now runs completely maxed out just fine on the 780 at 60+ FPS - I didn't buy that card for FSX.

 Agreed, in particular because that motherboard doesn't support PCIe 3.0.

It's still not going to be a huge performance hit. At PCIe 2.0 8x you're looking at a 10 - 15% FPS drop vs 16x in FSX

I have no idea how much frame rate would drop.

Are you sure about those numbers....I mean have you tested it to come to that conclusion?

 

In the end though....I guess it all depends on how important FSX performance is for you.

I have a dedicated FSX PC that is used for nothing else!

Because I find FSX to be such a performance eater already that I will not tolerate anything that would even only cause a 1% frame rate hit.

More importantly I find FSX to be extremely unstable.....stutters/freezes/CTDs/etc etc etc.....so I would never build an FSX system with 3 GPUs in it that could cause all kinds of performance problems.

If the You use the same Pc for other games as well...then yes I can see how you will have to compromise.

 

 

And, if I purt a third GPU in a system (with the other PCIe lanes also in use with two more GPUs) would that PCIe connection not drop to 4x speed then. My Motherboard book says something like that! (different MB though).

I didn't buy that card for FSX.

AHHA, Gotcha.

Hi -

 

Yes, it is in the slower slot on my Maximus IV Extreme -Z.  Framerates are locked at 30FPS in heavy wx, unlimited in light wx.

 

I "play" games as well, so the SLI set is running Splinter Cell Blacklist, Assassin's Creed, etc.

 

My NI is using AA filtering.  It's about a 1-2fps drop in the VC, no drop in external views.

 

In FSX, the SLI set is running as Physx processing only...

I am totally amazed by your unreal (good) performance with this "cramped" (my opinion) system!

 

SLI should not help FSX....in fact I hear everywhere (including from my trusted source) that SLI could run FSX worse than one good GPU!

 

What do you mean with....SLI is running as Physx processing only?

How does that work....you are splitting FSX calculations over 3 GPUs???

I have never heard of this!

What exactly is physx and does this work on FSX?

I have no idea how much frame rate would drop.

Are you sure about those numbers....I mean have you tested it to come to that conclusion?

 

Yes, I know it cause I tested it, it's really not that hard, populating both my PCIe 2.0 slots so they run @ x8. It was back in the advent of Ivy Bridge when that self proclaimed guru you get your info from was telling everyone how we should get IB with PCIe 3.0 cause that would be the bee's knees. We had some threads over at the HW section discussing PCIe 3.0 and the impact it would have on FSX and some NickN followers went all nuts on me for suggesting it would make no difference on a typical low FPS situation (complex A/C + big airport with 3rd party scenery + maxed settings) as it was clearly CPU limited.

 

Guess what? PCIe 3.0 hasn't changed a thing in FSX

 

 

Please dont take my dissagreeing with you personally!

 

Absolutely no problem Rob.

I hope we can all simply have a polite convo on hardware and technology we can enjoy without going personal. You can pick your hardware specialist and I'm certainly not one.

 

 

My source says....it is extremely important to match CPU and GPU ESPECIALLY for FSX....and there is a big difference between an i5 and an i7 because FSX benefits from the larger cash (I have not checked the I7 4770K against an I5 3570K but I assume the i7 has more cashe....I will leave the checking up to the OP)

 

With all due respect, he doesn't make any sense to me

 

He used the same cache argument (and tripple channel vs dual channel memory, or 6 vs 4 cores) to make his case that a 980x was superior to the new Sandy Bridge back when it was released... now he's recommending Haswell which sports less L3 cache and is a lowly quad core with a dual channel memory controller.

 

He also makes no sense in the CPU - GPU balancing thing when apparently now you absolutely should pair a 4770K with a 780. 3 years ago a GTX480 was a perfect match for his 980x... Only that from a 980x to a 4770K there's like a 50% performance jump core for core while the GTX 780 is about a 100% faster than a GTX480, and I'm not even factoring in L3 cache and triple channel as those are non factors, although they were for him

 

BTW, the day I completely lost respect for him was when a guy with a new 4770K asked him what would be a good GPU for Haswell. Nick had been bashing the 600 series GPU's no mercy for weeks, then he suggests a 770... only that a 770 is a 680 rebrand with higher stock memory clocks. When I pointed that out he replied in a disgusting, rude and insulting fashion, banned me from the forums, deleted the posts and then started recommending the 780. What a joke.

 

I've seen plenty other things from him that even a regular gamer knows are flat out wrong, like when he told someone that a grayed out setting in Inspector meant that it was disabled when actually it's using the default profile setting for that.. I could go on and on (don't get me started on Hyperthreading)

 

I honestly feel for his followers as they missed out on the single biggest performance jump in CPU performance in years, Sandy Bridge, just to have them waiting 2 and a half years for a marginal 15% perf boost over Sandy Bridge in Haswell

Wow dazz.......that is a strong opinion you have there about him!

I am not going to try to defend him.......he wouldnt care.......and I dont have the knowledge anyway.

 

You seem to have good points and a lot of knowledge about hardware too.

 

Too bad that knowledgable people often can't get to a joined conclusion :-(

The truth is usually somewhere in the middle right?!

It seems like someone always just HAS to be right.....and the truth or facts get lost.

 

And then we.....the amateurs.....end up having to guess what/who is wrong or right.

It just sucks!

 

I ended up in team Nick, lol.....my system is running well.....so I guess I will keep that Tshirt for a while ;-)

 

Lets us stop talking about him though ok.....I did not mention his name for a reason.

I am totally amazed by your unreal (good) performance with this "cramped" (my opinion) system!

 

SLI should not help FSX....in fact I hear everywhere (including from my trusted source) that SLI could run FSX worse than one good GPU!

 

What do you mean with....SLI is running as Physx processing only?

How does that work....you are splitting FSX calculations over 3 GPUs???

I have never heard of this!

What exactly is physx and does this work on FSX?

 

Oh, she ain't cramped...

 

Before making the move to P3D, I had very few issues with my system.  Framerate was great, and I received several "dislikes" under the old system when I asked "What's an OOM and how do you get one?"

 

Yes, I went to NCP before every flight and selected "Use these GPU's as PhysX only" for the SLI set.  Only NVIDIA has this PhysX engine, and it calculates physics for real-time impact and flight characteristics as well as other things.  I don't pretend to fully understand it enough to explain it.  Basically, it crunches the numbers for your sim physics calculations.  Please see here.  When playing SC or AC, I would switch cables and use the video outputs on the SLI set for video and the stand-alone 760 for PhysX. 

 

EDIT - I had PhysX turned on and my sim seemed to run smoother.  Officially, PhysX isn't supported by FSX.

 

Everyone here has to find their own "works best for me" solution.

 

P3D is a DX11 sim, so my whole system is down right now waiting on a new cable and a triple SLI adapter.  SLI doesn't help FSX, as you and I both said.  But it does help P3D tremendously.

 

There's a lot of individuals here who are hardware gurus.  I say this without disrespect intended.  Then, there are some in all forums (not just flight sim) who think they know everything.

 

I have a pretty trick system, and I'm no kid.  I've been building computers for gaming as a hobby since 1992.  This system works because of several things -

 

1.  a Sandy Bridge mobo running Ivy Bridge BIOS.  That really helped me to expand my overhead on the system by taking the best of both worlds and putting in one unit.

 

2.  32mb of fast RAM and both the sim and the OS running on separate SSD's.  Both drives are on my Intel fast I/O bus and not on the slower bus.  Remember that with a 32Gb app, the bottleneck is the data path through the system.

 

3.  A 3770K OC'd to 4.9GHz.  Smokin'...

 

4.  The GPU ONLY gives fast renders; it doesn't speed up FSX, but it can smooth out FSX.  Two different things. This is my opinion based on my experience.

 

5.  Read sentence #3 on item #2.  This should be your mantra.  Data through the system as fast as possible. 

 

6.  Look for these things -

• a mobo with the fastest data path you can find that you can afford - look at the number crunching abilities in the reviews, not the GPU framerates 
• a mobo with fast, friendly OC abilities.  I recommend ASUS ROG boards, it's all I use, many here will have an opinion otherwise.  Read the reviews.  ASUS and ASRock are leading the pack right now.
• The newest, fastest CPU and RAM you can afford, plus two fast SSD's and one 1TB mechanical drive.  You want the future upgrade path, so read the white papers and developer news.
• Keep your pagefiles and user files on the mechanical drive.  BTW, you don't need a Velociraptor, a 7200 RPM Seagate, WD, or Toshiba is fine.  I use Seagate and WD.
• You will get more bang for your buck with a 760 or 770 overclocked than a Titan.  Don't waste your $.
• Keep your pagefile small.
• Get a good power supply.  I recommend Corsair.  850W minimum.

 

 

I'm buying a 4790K and new mobo next month. And believe it or not every game I play besides FSX now runs completely maxed out just fine on the 780 at 60+ FPS - I didn't buy that card for FSX.

I am doing the same, just waiting on them becoming available through our supplier, they are showing 9 July as ETA. (For CPU) Out of interest, what motherboard are you getting? I have been looking at Gigabyte Z97X range. Wont touch ASUS. Currently have a Z77X-UP4TH and it has been flawless.

Wont touch ASUS.

Just interested, May I ask why?