What are the Best Performance Tweaks?

[Midnight Music 252]

Caution using the FIBER_FRAME_TIME_FRACTION=0.01 It can help with FPS in some instances, but it introduces blurriness, especially in addons. The default 0.33 seems to provide a good balance. Again, the CFG is best left alone with only a slight help from NVI as suggested on many posts here. Don't pin your sliders to the right, find that good balance.

[smpetty 6]

A lot of talk about overclocking your CPU.  It can be an expensive endeavor (new or additional case cooling, decreased lifetime of CPU and motherboard components) and you're looking at around a 10% gain in CPU speed. Since CPU speed is only one of several determinants of actual computing power, you'll gain less than 10% in game performance.  So best case scenario, you may go from 40 to 43 fps.  Is that really worth the trouble?

[JacquesBrel 641]

A lot of talk about overclocking your CPU.  It can be an expensive endeavor (new or additional case cooling, decreased lifetime of CPU and motherboard components) and you're looking at around a 10% gain in CPU speed. Since CPU speed is only one of several determinants of actual computing power, you'll gain less than 10% in game performance.  So best case scenario, you may go from 40 to 43 fps.  Is that really worth the trouble?

 

Yes it is for some, because A. overclocking often takes only little time and effort with today's hardware and software, and B. any potential decrease in the CPU lifetime is often irrelevant compared to the hardware upgrade cycle of most users. I usually upgrade my CPU and motherboard every 2 - 3 years. If overclocking means the potential lifespan of my CPU goes from 6 years to 5 years, that's not an issue for me.

[ErichB 3,651]

Yes it is for some, because A. overclocking often takes only little time and effort with today's hardware and software, and B. any potential decrease in the CPU lifetime is often irrelevant compared to the hardware upgrade cycle of most users. I usually upgrade my CPU and motherboard every 2 - 3 years. If overclocking means the potential lifespan of my CPU goes from 6 years to 5 years, that's not an issue for me.

 

 

Not so long ago, overclocking your PC was always highly cautioned against unless you had Ph.D in Computer Science or bought it overclocked from the manufacturer - which they all do these days.    Surely it must take more than time and effort to ensure you don't land yourself in a world of pain.

[smpetty 6]

Yes it is for some, because A. overclocking often takes only little time and effort with today's hardware and software, and B. any potential decrease in the CPU lifetime is often irrelevant compared to the hardware upgrade cycle of most users. I usually upgrade my CPU and motherboard every 2 - 3 years. If overclocking means the potential lifespan of my CPU goes from 6 years to 5 years, that's not an issue for me.

 

It is much easier to do low to mid level overclocking - I've done it for years.  And I agree that the real cost in equipment is probably negligible for those of us that keep near the bleeding edge of technology.  But again we're talking about really small increases in actual computing power.  When CPU clock speeds were lower, overclocking had much more potential gain than it does today.  And in those days, the lion's share of the computing power rested on that one CPU chip.  But today we have far less to gain in actual clock and bus speed increases relative to the stock speed of the components, and our mighty GPUs carry a big load of the work, particularly in games and simulations. Paying extra for overclock-friendly CPUs, paying extra for cases and fans and powerful air/fluid CPU coolers, putting up with small increases in system instability... all of it seems to be overkill when the actual gains are so small.  I OC out of habit and because I enjoy tinkering - I've been building my own PCs for decades.  In my experience, it is almost impossible in real world use to tell whether or not I'm using my OC profiles or the default stock profiles.  In P3Dv2, with overclocking I pick up about a 5% increase in frame rates which is imperceptible to my eye.  The sim is butter smooth regardless.

 

YMMV :-)

[Jiri Kocman 20]

I'm not HW specialist but my overclock of Devils Canyon was don during one minute. I just set my multiplier for 1,2,3,4 cores load to 4.6GHz, ok I'm on water cooling, with cheap Tranquillo rev3 air cooler I had 4.4GHz - it means that under load of 3 or 4 cores I have still full turbo frequency.

 

 

I can go to 4.7, CPU stability test rusn perfecly all day long but P3D crashes quickly. But I have heavy oveclocked GPU, and only 500W PSU, so there is potentially problem with enough power supply. I planning PSU upgrade in january as my P3D load on plug is 400W and PSU under this is really loud as my radiator fans spins up to 800RPM max.

 

Hope that new PSU can push my 4790k to 4.7+ and my GTX980 go over 1509MHz stabe in P3D. I can run 1579Mhz (very close to reference GTX980Ti performance) in 3DMark11 and few game tests, but P3D will crash immediately.

 

 

Now I'm on only one performance tweek in P3Dv3 - Affinity Mask. I did some experiments - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2rNHJ7Xz08 - AM84 is best, but some blurries, so I try something else and for now AM244 works perfect for me. First core and thread is not used by P3D, second core is used without thread and res are cores and threads. In scenario from video I'm on performance between AM84 and 85.

 

For sure, I run high settings - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIhcNDzfp8Y

 

 

There was one hint - use Sparse Grid SuperSampling in NI. Yes, it is great with fighting shimmering, but there is think that have to be mentioned that you have to set same MSAA in P3D to make it work.... But with GTX980 even overclocked as my one, there is not enough performance for smooth run in heavy clouds. GTX980Ti is needed and for best two GTX980/980Ti in SLI even only FullHD resolution

[rcladin 4]

A lot of talk about overclocking your CPU.  It can be an expensive endeavor (new or additional case cooling, decreased lifetime of CPU and motherboard components) and you're looking at around a 10% gain in CPU speed. Since CPU speed is only one of several determinants of actual computing power, you'll gain less than 10% in game performance.  So best case scenario, you may go from 40 to 43 fps.  Is that really worth the trouble?

Yes absolutely, changing 2 parameters in the UEFI/BIOS, takes 30seconds and worth the 10-15% boost in numbers, its like extra performance for free.  I don't buy the decreased lifetime of the CPU, never had this and overclocked CPU's for year and years and still going strong, just need to keep an eye on temps to work out the sweet spot for the overclock.

[Poppet 710]

My i73930k default core clock is 3.2 and turbos up to 3.8,  ive never had a problem with performance.  I have clocked it up to 4.1 only because i could really, if there is an increase in performance its very small and don't notice it.  I get a better score on 3DMark but i don't notice any in game difference, simming or gaming.   

[Baber20 1,475]

A lot of talk about overclocking your CPU.  It can be an expensive endeavor (new or additional case cooling, decreased lifetime of CPU and motherboard components) and you're looking at around a 10% gain in CPU speed. Since CPU speed is only one of several determinants of actual computing power, you'll gain less than 10% in game performance.  So best case scenario, you may go from 40 to 43 fps.  Is that really worth the trouble?

Definitely is. And it's no trouble at all. Going from 3.9 to 4.4ghz gave me an fps boost of 7 frames in almost all situations. Definitely worth it IMO if you have the luxury of having a decent cpu with a good cooler.