fsx-ms Minimum FPS for a smooth FSX

[vortex681 806]

I always associated low FPS with stutters... is that not right ?.

 

I have posted another thread asking for advice on my setup... I.e should I keep HT on or off on my rig... specs in my signature below.

 

Stutters are like random micro-freezes whereas very low FPS give a continuously flickery/jerky display when the image is moving or you're panning your view. FPS doesn't necessarily correlate directly with stutters. You can have high FPS with stutters and low FPS without, although the lower you go the more flickery the image becomes (which can sometimes be more distracting than the odd stutter). I have my FPS limited to 30 in FSX and set my vsync to 1/2 the monitor refresh rate in NVIDIA Inspector and find that it's a smoother, cleaner image for me than setting unlimited FPS in FSX. FSX is not like a modern game with regards to FPS; 20-30 FPS can look smooth in FSX whereas it would look like a slideshow in a modern first-person-shooter.

 

With regards to HT, I also have an i7-920 (overclocked to 4GHz) and have tried HT on and off (AM set to either 84 or 14 respectively). Although some people claim to get better performance with it off, I didn't notice any difference between the two so left it on. Try each setting and see how it works for you. It's worth noting that the CPU tends to run a little hotter with HT on but that wasn't an issue for me - my CPU rarely gets above the mid-to-high 60s, even when working hard.

[ozflyer 2]

Stutters are like random micro-freezes whereas very low FPS give a continuously flickery/jerky display when the image is moving or you're panning your view. FPS doesn't necessarily correlate directly with stutters. You can have high FPS with stutters and low FPS without, although the lower you go the more flickery the image becomes (which can sometimes be more distracting than the odd stutter). I have my FPS limited to 30 in FSX and set my vsync to 1/2 the monitor refresh rate in NVIDIA Inspector and find that it's a smoother, cleaner image for me than setting unlimited FPS in FSX. FSX is not like a modern game with regards to FPS; 20-30 FPS can look smooth in FSX whereas it would look like a slideshow in a modern first-person-shooter.

With regards to HT, I also have an i7-920 (overclocked to 4GHz) and have tried HT on and off (AM set to either 84 or 14 respectively). Although some people claim to get better performance with it off, I didn't notice any difference between the two so left it on. Try each setting and see how it works for you. It's worth noting that the CPU tends to run a little hotter with HT on but that wasn't an issue for me - my CPU rarely gets above the mid-to-high 60s, even when working hard.

I have mine running at 3.8GHz, with HT on and AM as 244. my temps get to 73C under full load for a short period, mostly stay around 60C in FSX.

 

Struggling to get mine to 4GHz. Currently I am on 200bclck and 19 multiplier for a 3.8Ghz.

 

I think my mbo likes the 19x... 20x is not stable at all.

 

I might try a 211x19 or 191x21.. all this till December when I will go for the upgrade..

[vortex681 806]

I have mine running at 3.8GHz, with HT on and AM as 244. my temps get to 73C under full load for a short period, mostly stay around 60C in FSX.

 

Struggling to get mine to 4GHz. Currently I am on 200bclck and 19 multiplier for a 3.8Ghz.

 

I think my mbo likes the 19x... 20x is not stable at all.

 

I might try a 211x19 or 191x21.. all this till December when I will go for the upgrade..

 

Luckily my motherboard let me select a 4GHz overclock automatically (Asrock X58 Extreme - 200 bus, 20 multiplier, 1.36v). I tried 4.2GHz but it was not as stable - it's rock solid at 4GHz. I'm planning on a summer upgrade to an i7-6700k to go with the GTX 970 I'm using at the moment.

[ozflyer 2]

Luckily my motherboard let me select a 4GHz overclock automatically (Asrock X58 Extreme - 200 bus, 20 multiplier, 1.36v). I tried 4.2GHz but it was not as stable - it's rock solid at 4GHz. I'm planning on a summer upgrade to an i7-6700k to go with the GTX 970 I'm using at the moment.

Whats your temps like at 1.36v.

 

I am getting 3.8Ghz at 1.2875v.

[vortex681 806]

Whats your temps like at 1.36v.

 

I am getting 3.8Ghz at 1.2875v.

 

Low 40s at idle, high 60s under load using a Corsair H110i GT Hydro cooler. I'm happy with the temps as it's quite a large overclock (from 2.7GHz).

[robb13 22]

I would also like to know, when all these specs get quoted...  please state the power usage per hour and also who pays the power bill. I choose a lower power bill over higher fps performance. My 4yo pc only draws 20watts/hr on basic performance with a 4core i3  3.2ghz processor with radeon HD5450 card (now considered sub-standard by most) and LG 100hz TV 42 inch screen drawing 55 watts/hr on power saver.. i.e. very cheap to run for hours but the trade-off is 30 fps ocassionally spiking into the 40s is an optimum result. Fortunately I get smooth scenery down as low as 15fps although the jitters begin when I close in on an orbx airport. I run ASN but no other commercial terrain /weather/ scenery software other than orbxAU and airports and various freeware scenery add-ons. I prefer to keep what PC power I have left for runnng all the other hardware of which I have a fair bit. In short maximising fps is just one component of the overall consideration and not the end goal in itself..