Yes, I have not changed anything in the bios and in fact set bios to default a few days ago. I will make a short video showing what happens. 

Mines the opposite, just slightly slower to reach unblack plane with no AM, took a second longer to get weather in, and longer to close by about a second.

After a few more swapovers...with 340 the weather is there with the plane from the unpause. There's possibly a slight delay with the clouds popping in with no AM, but there's no differences really at all otherwise.

As it happens I gave someone an AM to use 5 cores of a 6 core just yesterday, because they asked about photoscenery and the possibility of different loading strategy within the sim threading. I've not heard back but some have said more threads can help in those cases. Worth checking at least, but from the many tests I've made there's no difference allowing all the cores to run the sim, 6(12) or 8(16), the chip just gets hotter and eats VAS without the AM, that's a certainty.

What number should I use to help with this problem? Six core 5930k currently at 340.

you can try other AMs, like

4 cores HT enabled 340 or 680

5 cores HT enabled 1364 or 2728

6 cores HT enabled 1365 or 2730

 

then you can try doubling up secondary threads per core like

6 cores HT enabled 4085 or 4090

 

4072=(11,11,11,10,10,00) might be worth a try.

 

When doubling up threads like that on an HT enabled system, the threads, often only at 30%, can better utilise the core at 60% with two.

Hi Steve,

 

LOL, you don't give up, do you?! Don't worry, I fully intend to explore this further once I start overclocking. I will be aiming for 4.0-4.5GHz and that should be achievable with the Corsair Hydro Series™ H110i GT 280mm cooling the CPU. So far, CPU temps have not risen above 35degrees C. Rest assured I will be keeping your helpful suggestions in mind. I appreciate your persistence and the time spent trying to keep us all on the straight and narrow. I suspect that, for all its might, my 5960X at BCLK currently may be bottlenecking the two STRIX GTX 980s in P3DV3. We shall see.

 

I've been interested in Flight Simulation since those heady days of FSII and Bruce Artwick. Over the past few years, while I always seem to be able to extract quite decent performance from each system build, nevertheless it was evident that my hardware choices have been less than optimal and I was always playing catchup. This will likely be my last rig and I was determined that things would be different and so I resolved to build a high spec system which, hopefully, will last a few years and, possibly, beyond. It was always intended primarily for flight simulation and gaming. Prepar3D V3, MS Flight, Skyrim (heavily modded), The Witcher 3, Elite Dangerous, X-Rebirth, GTA and Project Cars are all handled with aplomb with bags of headroom to spare, so I am pretty confident that this time around I have made the right choices. The build and software installation has been relatively straightforward with very few problems encountered along the way. Windows 7 64bit sits on its own SSD drive and appears rock solid stable.

 

Once again, many thanks for all your help and guidance.

 

Regards,

Mike

It's all for fun. Mostly the performance is the same.

 

With a mega airport and complicated aircraft and crushing settings, 3960x+GTX680, no improvements with texture loading time AM 340 and no AM. Maybe slightly worse rotating the outside view with no AM, but could be subjective. Those guys with four core CPUs need not worry, you'll get practically the same performance with three cores if need be, just share out 4 LPs to avoid maxing terrain loading as shown with 116. It's all in the mind, get on and fly. :smile:

Steve,

 

Last week I switched from 1392 to 340 and it flies great.

 

However, on my server I also need to run :

Project Magenta MCP , SIOC, Cockpitsonic tq, Opus ( buttkicker ) and Fiber Accelerator.

 

Will they be devided over all cores automatically or do they all want to be on core 0 ?

 

Is AM with the above still good enough ?

 

Thanks,

Gerard

Hey Gerard, Well unless they have a routine that starts them up on certain LPs, and few do, the jobscheduler will take good care of them and if they stop and start they may come back on little used LPs anyway. So many prefer to utilise an AM to mask off one or more core of the CPU from the sim, leaving them free of the sim to soak up other tasks. With 340 you've got a core free in front and behind the four cores running the sim, so these two spare cores should have plenty of bandwidth to soak your addons up.

Thanks Steve.

Your blurry textures may be something else like mesh resolution eats away at LOD.

Steve just curios about what this means?

 

Thanks,

gb.

Hi gboz, if you install a high res mesh, it uses up resources of the sim and the effective LOD is reduced and in the worst cases can be seen with mountains popping up easily in view.

you can try other AMs, like

4 cores HT enabled 340 or 680

5 cores HT enabled 1364 or 2728

6 cores HT enabled 1365 or 

Steve,

I just recently installed an i7 4790K and with all of the discussion about turning off hyperthreading, would it make sense to exchange is for an i5 4690K?

Not really, I would go for i7. The spin about turning off HT is because the HT on situation is not fully understood.

Not really, I would go for i7. The spin about turning off HT is because the HT on situation is not fully understood.

Thanks for the response. So if it seems best to turn off HT, what benefit would an i7 have over an i5?

If HT is best turned off, why do you think it costs more?