Cured my stutters like never before.

[swiesma 625]

I only see one major difference. I have 6 cores, you have 4. I am running with HyperThreading off. Per Rob's recent and fantastic P3D write up, P3D prefers 6-8 cores. If P3D will eat as many cores I can throw at it, the Dual Xeon 2667-V3 build with a total of 16 cores/32 threads would be a holy grail.

 

All i wanted to say is that I do not see any differences in gaming performance between a M.2 SSD and a SATA SSD.

P3D is running very well on my system - no complaints here :-)

[JimmiG 244]

If you run Performance Monitor and monitor disk transfer rates while running P3D, you'll find that it doesn't come close to saturating even SATA HDD's (except for a few brief seconds while initially loading the flight). The bottleneck isn't the transfer rate from the drive. There just isn't a lot of data to transfer (a couple of hundred megs for textures, some tens of megabytes for the mesh and a few hundred kilobytes for the landclass). The real strain on your system is compositing all the different datatypes into a complete scene (landclass, vector, mesh, autogen).

 

A clean install of Windows+P3D however is very likely to improve performance by clearing out junk and traces of old sins and tweaks gone wrong.

[ffantasy67 51]

If you run Performance Monitor and monitor disk transfer rates while running P3D, you'll find that it doesn't come close to saturating even SATA HDD's (except for a few brief seconds while initially loading the flight). The bottleneck isn't the transfer rate from the drive. There just isn't a lot of data to transfer (a couple of hundred megs for textures, some tens of megabytes for the mesh and a few hundred kilobytes for the landclass). The real strain on your system is compositing all the different datatypes into a complete scene (landclass, vector, mesh, autogen).

 

A clean install of Windows+P3D however is very likely to improve performance by clearing out junk and traces of old sins and tweaks gone wrong.

 

LM's "strongly recommending" SSD drives anyway for v3, there must be a reason for that.

 

Cheers,

[swiesma 625]

LM's "strongly recommending" SSD drives anyway for v3, there must be a reason for that.

 

Cheers,

 

The jump from a HDD to a SATA SSD is way bigger then from a SATA SSD to a M.2 SSD.

 

The switch from HDDs to SSDs is one of the biggest single performance gains in computer technology in I would say the last 10 years.

[brianbash 26]

Hey everyone, my name's Brian, and I am an Addict.

 

"Hi Brian"

 

I've been using since I was 12. My father is a great man, but he bought me FS4 for my mac and I have relapsed hundreds of times. I started cooking paint's and objects into my new FS5 system (A solid 386) back in '97. I come up with excuse after excuse, but in the end, especially nowadays, it just keeps getting cut with more addons. I don't think I'll ever be able to quit. I've accepted that. I come here for the support for when I do too much, when I just can't stop tweaking.

 

I only have one problem with the 12-step-climb program. I will never admit I'm powerless of my addiction. I'm strong and I will prevail! You'll see!!

 

 

[Guest]

I really depends on what and how many add-ons are installed.  

 

You'll see a difference:

 

1.  When loading aircraft/vehicles

2.  If you have a lots of PR scenery enabled

3.  Recording video while flying (especially 4K)

 

U.2 doesn't go thru the SATA interface so access is faster and requires less CPU time.  One metric to look for is IOPS (input/output operations per second).  Sustained transfers at the SSD or higher level is less significant for P3D.

 

HD 15,000 rpm about 200 IOPS reads

SSD 80,000 IOPS reads 

M.2 130,000 IOPS reads

U.2  300,000 IOPS reads

 

Since P3D is primarily all about reads, biggest jump will be moving from HD to any of the three SSD, M.2, U.2 ... agree you will not see much of a difference between SSD, M.2, and U.2 in P3D.

 

The less the CPU has to wait for data the better overall performance.  P3D does perform considerable I/O from seemingly unrelated data/BGLs.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[brianbash 26]

I really depends on what and how many add-ons are installed.  

 

You'll see a difference:

 

1.  When loading aircraft/vehicles

2.  If you have a lots of PR scenery enabled

3.  Recording video while flying (especially 4K)

 

U.2 doesn't go thru the SATA interface so access is faster and requires less CPU time.  One metric to look for is IOPS (input/output operations per second).  Sustained transfers at the SSD or higher level is less significant for P3D.

 

HD 15,000 rpm about 200 IOPS reads

SSD 80,000 IOPS reads 

M.2 130,000 IOPS reads

U.2  300,000 IOPS reads

 

Since P3D is primarily all about reads, biggest jump will be moving from HD to any of the three SSD, M.2, U.2 ... agree you will not see much of a difference between SSD, M.2, and U.2 in P3D.

 

The less the CPU has to wait for data the better overall performance.  P3D does perform considerable I/O from seemingly unrelated data/BGLs.

 

Cheers, Rob.

You know too much...you and your "Logic Cubase"

 

...I stil await your answer on if your Rokit6's were still rockin...

 

Check out what I have now for my FOH console....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMxipjuwYZg

 

and yes, it will easily fit in my Super Viking that I plan on getting in couple of months. Im selling my Aztec. 2-engines puts it into the 2-boat category...unreasonable expense

 

Who wants to go for a flight?!

[Guest]

 

 

I stil await your answer on if your Rokit6's were still rockin

 

I don't have the Rokit 6's, I have the VXT 6's and a pair of Genelec 8040B (upgraded from teh 8030B).  

 

But that eMotion LV1 ... so configurable ... I've been using older Mackie motorized mixer with Logic ... how's the touch sensitivity in the LV1?  Any delay or over sensitivity?

 

Cheers, Rob.