Getting a new system for FSX

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

My recommendation would be to turn HT off and use AM=14, but I know there are others who like HT on..

[TheFamilyMan 280]

The benefits of using AM settings (and using none at all) are pretty much tied to the software mix of individual systems.  That being said, using AM=252 in fsx.cfg would probably yield terrible performance for any hyperthreaded (HT) system (BTW where did you get that value?).  FSX itself does not benefit from HT, though it's not harmed by it either (except for AM values which put the main thread and a texture loader thread on the same physical core, e.g. 252).  I suggest not using any AM value initially and take it from there (and beware that the placebo effect can be overwhelming).  I hope that system has a pretty good CPU cooler, for running a haswell OC with HT on really boosts temps, and that's why lots of OC'ed FSX system owners disable HT (myself included).  BTW, that is a really great system for FSX.

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

Agreed... AM=244 might be worth a try if you have HT enabled

 

11 11 01 00

 

or AM=84

 

01 01 01 00   which is essentially the same as 14 with HT off  (1110)

[orcunizma 2]

The benefits of using AM settings (and using none at all) are pretty much tied to the software mix of individual systems.  That being said, using AM=252 in fsx.cfg would probably yield terrible performance for any hyperthreaded (HT) system (BTW where did you get that value?).  FSX itself does not benefit from HT, though it's not harmed by it either (except for AM values which put the main thread and a texture loader thread on the same physical core, e.g. 252).  I suggest not using any AM value initially and take it from there (and beware that the placebo effect can be overwhelming).  I hope that system has a pretty good CPU cooler, for running a haswell OC with HT on really boosts temps, and that's why lots of OC'ed FSX system owners disable HT (myself included).  BTW, that is a really great system for FSX.

 

I've read it on the internet that AM=252 is 11 11 11 00 are you sure on that? And the system is water cooled and passed huge stress tests without issues

 

Agreed... AM=244 might be worth a try if you have HT enabled

 

11 11 01 00

 

or AM=84

 

01 01 01 00   which is essentially the same as 14 with HT off  (1110)

 

I will try those out soon as my FSX is installed. So if I set AM=244 it uses all of the virtual cores except 3 right? Which in the second one only 3 of the cores, and the other 5 being left off

 

Best Regards

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

 

I will try those out soon as my FSX is installed. So if I set AM=244 it uses all of the virtual cores except 3 right? Which in the second one only 3 of the cores, and the other 5 being left off

 

Best Regards

 

Correct

[orcunizma 2]

Correct

 

So I will probably use the first one to make the most out of it, thanks for the help. Now the only question is if AM=252 is really that wrong or not

 

Best Regards

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

There is no right or wrong here... it is a matter of trade-offs.

 

But remember that FSX loads up the first core that it has access to with it's main rendering load (the one responsible for fps..)

 

The other cores are used for texture loading..

 

So, 252 allocates both virtual cores on the second physical core to FSX - and FSX will fully load this core anyway..

 

So that is why that decision would raise eyebrows.. -_-

 

252 = 11 11 11 00

[orcunizma 2]

There is no right or wrong here... it is a matter of trade-offs.

 

But remember that FSX loads up the first core that it has access to with it's main rendering load (the one responsible for fps..)

 

The other cores are used for texture loading..

 

So, 252 allocates both virtual cores on the second physical core to FSX - and FSX will fully load this core anyway..

 

So that is why that decision would raise eyebrows.. -_-

 

252 = 11 11 11 00

 

Alright so AM=244 feels just right or which one would you use? This is the only thing im unsure at about FSX

 

Best Regards

[SAAB340 28]

Alright so AM=244 feels just right or which one would you use? This is the only thing im unsure at about FSX

 

Best Regards

Use 244. FSX still has several more threads that arn't and can't be assigned with the affinitymask and those can utilize all your cores.

 

Do not use 252 as has been pointed out earlier its a bad setup that induces stutters and FPS drops.

 

Finally, put both OS and FSX on the SSD. That will give you the smoothest flight.

[TheFamilyMan 280]

Do not use 252 as has been pointed out earlier its a bad setup that induces stutters and FPS drops.

 

AM=252: been there, done that...you will get the above results using it even with that OCed DC processor.  As for which AM value is right?  Try them all (no none at all) and see which works best for your setup; there is nothing to lose doing this, except for some of your time, of course.

[orcunizma 2]

Alright guys many thanks!!! Finally my problems solved! ^_^

 

Happy flyings! :-)

 

Best Regards

[GSalden 4,678]

So what AM do you use now ?

[orcunizma 2]

So what AM do you use now ?

 

The truth is I didn't even need to set any tweaks in the FSX.cfg and it still was running at 30 FPS locked without problems + all sliders to the max. But im using AM=244 just in case.

 

Best Regards

[orcunizma 2]

Turned HT completly off and deleted AM off the .cfg it caused blurries. VSYNC at 1/2 and frames locked and stable at 30.

 

Best Regards

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

Happy it is working!