Need 2600K@4.8 Ghz performance , but on a 6-core CPU

[GSalden 4,650]

The title says it all.

 

I know have the 2600K and it is running very well.

However , as I almost only have photo scenery with ag my last 3 cores always stay at 97-100% because of having just 3 terrain cpu threads.

Sometimes in very detailed scenery I can see the scenery getting sharped just in front of me.

The use of FSX FA already made things better, but I am looking for a bit more.

 

I know that the 4790 performs slightly better in OC than a 3930 or 3960.

 

What would be wise here ?

[Charlatan 68]

Hang on a few months if you can for the new 5xxx chips, these are the new Haswell-E chips and should be what you are looking for

[GSalden 4,650]

That's probably the wisest thing to do.

Thanks.

[dazz 69]

In the meantime, enable HT and run AF=248 for 4 texture loaders or 254 for 6 texture loaders

[GSalden 4,650]

@Dazz :

 

Why would you advise having HT on ?

Probably then my OC has to be less.

 

Currently I am using AF at 14, so 3 terrain threads.

 

I will try with 4 terrain cpu threads, to see if it will help.

But also I will keep an eye on the load on core 0, because overloading core 0 might cause stutters. 

[dazz 69]

 

 

Why would you advise having HT on ?
Probably then my OC has to be less.

 

100MHz, maybe 200Mhz. My 2600K does 4.7 with HT on and the same voltage as 4.8 w/o HT

 

 

Currently I am using AF at 14, so 3 terrain threads.

 

That's actually 2 T&T loaders. core 0 for fibers, core 1 for the main scheduler, cores 2 & 3 for T&T loaders

I assumed you were running AF=15 since you said you had 3 T&T loaders

[GSalden 4,650]

You are right.

 

14 --> core 0 =system / core 1 = main / core 2 + 3 terrain

Will try 15 --> core 0 system + main / core 1 + 2 + 3 terrain

 

But I have read several people reporting stutters with 15. 

Then perhaps HT on and 254 .

 

At 4.7 GHz my system remains stable. 

[dazz 69]

You are right.

 

14 --> core 0 =system / core 1 = main / core 2 + 3 terrain

Will try 15 --> core 0 system + main / core 1 + 2 + 3 terrain

 

But I have read several people reporting stutters with 15. 

Then perhaps HT on and 254 .

 

At 4.7 GHz my system remains stable. 

 

Try a few affinity masks and see what works for you 

AF=248 would leave core 1 dedicated to the main thread, at the expense of 2 texture loaders

AF=252 gives you those extra couple T&T's for a total of six, but you have the main thread sharing core 0 with the fibers just like 15 does with no HT

[SAAB340 28]

@Dazz :

 

Why would you advise having HT on ?

Probably then my OC has to be less.

 

Currently I am using AF at 14, so 3 terrain threads.

 

I will try with 4 terrain cpu threads, to see if it will help.

But also I will keep an eye on the load on core 0, because overloading core 0 might cause stutters. 

Not sure if you've seen my latest look in to textureloading. I posted it in the photoreal support forum this time.

 

There you can see how different affinity masks and storage affect texture loading. This is the main content from the thread:

 

Affinitymask 84 equals 14 in your case.

 

Not sure if you tried activating HT on your 2600K yet and if you've had any success? I'd try HT-on and AM 244 to start with.

 

The best upgrade path is using quad core with HT - having the scenery on SSD - getting a hexacore with hyper threading.

 

As has been said, your best bet is waiting for the new Haswell-E processors if you're going down the hexa core route. The Haswell architecture IPC is way better than Ivy-Bridge and if it clocks to 4.2GHz its outperforming SandyBridge @ 4.8GHz when it comes to FPS. The improvement Sandy-Ivy is way smaller than Ivy-Haswell. It obviously depends on how well it will clock. Unfortunately we'll have to pay top dollar for the DDR4 RAM right now.

 

 

 

AF=252 gives you those extra couple T&T's for a total of six, but you have the main thread sharing core 0 with the fibers just like 15 does with no HT

You forgot that the Main thread is also assigned by the affinitymask on this one Dario. So 252 is a no-no affinitymask as it puts main thread on core1 together with a T&t loader.

 

 

 

AF=248 would leave core 1 dedicated to the main thread, at the expense of 2 texture loaders

This one is one that should perform the same as AM=244.

 

Essentially 244 or 248 is what you want to try when you activate HT if you prefer AM=14 to AM=15 for performance reasons when you don't use HT on your CPU.

[dazz 69]

 

 

You forgot that the Main thread is also assigned by the affinitymask on this one Dario. So 252 is a no-no affinitymask as it puts main thread on core1 together with a T&t loader.

 

Ouch, my bad. you're right. That should have been 254 for 6 T&t's & the main thread in phys core 0 with fibers, just like 15 with no Ht, but having all T&t cores hyperthreaded. Thanks.

 

I'll check out your new thread for sure. I'm curious, have you tried with a more realistic LOD like 4.5 or 5.5? I can't even run 5.5 in my photoscenery + 3rd party airports + complex a/c without running out of memory

[GSalden 4,650]

I tried with several AM settings and with HT disabled and enabled.

The Windows taskmanager was my reference on how the cores were loaded.

With no AM setting I was satisfied.

 

Then I tried a different approach. I removed the Jobschedular entry in the fsx.cfg file.

I booted FSX.

Then I opened the taskmanager to set the affinity for FSX .

After several tests for my system it was best to use core 1-7 and leave core 0 alone.

All cores had a load of 50-60%.

 

With AM set to 14 ( no HT ) core 0 was always around 50-60% , the other 3 cores almost all of the time 100%.

With AM set to 15 core 0 was always 100% , the other 3 cores 70-80%.

 

The thing that surprised me was that with HT + AM 254 the load was different than doing the same through the taskmanager...

[SAAB340 28]

I tried with several AM settings and with HT disabled and enabled.

The Windows taskmanager was my reference on how the cores were loaded.

With no AM setting I was satisfied.

 

Then I tried a different approach. I removed the Jobschedular entry in the fsx.cfg file.

I booted FSX.

Then I opened the taskmanager to set the affinity for FSX .

After several tests for my system it was best to use core 1-7 and leave core 0 alone.

All cores had a load of 50-60%.

 

With AM set to 14 ( no HT ) core 0 was always around 50-60% , the other 3 cores almost all of the time 100%.

With AM set to 15 core 0 was always 100% , the other 3 cores 70-80%.

 

The thing that surprised me was that with HT + AM 254 the load was different than doing the same through the taskmanager...

I tried assigning cores in task manager before and it's a cause for stutters and poor performance. I looked in to it and as far as I can remember its due to that FSX always assigns affinity (remember that there are default ones assigned depending on your CPU config even when no jobscheduler entry is in the cfg) and when you have both fsx and windows task manager assigning affinity you break it.

 

 

 

I'm curious, have you tried with a more realistic LOD like 4.5 or 5.5? I can't even run 5.5 in my photoscenery + 3rd party airports + complex a/c without running out of memory

I can imagine that the OOM comes very fast with LOD9 in those conditions. If I fly around default landclass for a while with that LOD setting even with default planes I'll get OOMs pretty fast too=(. But the way I use photo scenery I simply find it too blurry with lower LOD even  when its fully loaded. So I stay away from complex VAS eating addons for that. A shame you need a lot of threads as you bump up that LOD setting above max default 4.5. Plane photo scenery is a lot better over landclass with autogen when it comes to OOMs.

 

What would you like to see tested at lower LOD settings?

 

I did these test a few years ago to show how extra cores/threads mattered to FSX:

(note, not the same test as the one above so the below ones are comparable against each other but not to the one above)

 

I think you've already seen them before but having done these tests I decided myself my next upgrade would be a 3930K

[GSalden 4,650]

Quote : "I tried assigning cores in task manager before and it's a cause for stutters and poor performance. I looked in to it and as far as I can remember its due to that FSX always assigns affinity (remember that there are default ones assigned depending on your CPU config even when no jobscheduler entry is in the cfg) and when you have both fsx and windows task manager assigning affinity you break it."

 

With al settings I tried only through the taskmanager I am not getting the situation that one or more cores are loaded 100%.

For photo scenery loading that looks like a good thing.

 

However, today I will be testing further. As I have a 2/3 full size 737-800 cockpit using the Ifly Cockpit Builders Edition , my server displays no gauges .

I am going to do some fraps tests to see what fps I get with which AM . Then some tests without the AM entry and affinity assigned in the taskmanager.

 

As far as I have seen it the framerate is about the same. Also I am using FSX Fiber Accelerator. Because I am using photoscenery only with autogen and custom 3d objects the texture loading time has my priority.

[GSalden 4,650]

After 3 hours of testing I came back to AM=14 set in the fsx.cfg file.

It shows that core 0 is at 50-70% at core 1-2-3 are at 100%, but...it is the most smooth out of all tests I did.

 

Using HT on with core 0 unchecked and core 1-7 cehcked was the almost the same smooth experince, but some blurries appeared. Even with the cores showing a load of 50-60%.

 

For me the best thing to do is wait for the new proecessors to appear and use an 8-core, so I will have plenty cores for terrain/texture loading.  

[SAAB340 28]

 

 

I'm curious, have you tried with a more realistic LOD like 4.5 or 5.5?

Your question actually made me go back and have a look at that. It's been posted in the photoreal forum thread but this is the result image for the textureloading:

 

For me the best thing to do is wait for the new proecessors to appear

 They look very nice indeed. i7 5820K now gives us FSX users a good value 6-core CPU and i7 5960X gives us an expensive 8-core monster. If only DDR4 was a bit cheaper...