FSX DX10: Upgrade GPU or CPU?

[Soulflight 95]

Quick question for my further plans. Since it is obvious that DX10 mode depends more on GPU performance than DX9 mode, the question comes up for me what to replace next.

 

Currently I use a Phenom II X4 965 BE @ 4,1 Ghz and a 560Ti. Both are not the newest pieces of hardware. Money is tight for me so I only have the option of upgrading one by one.

 

I can either get a better GPU of the 7th or 9th Generation of nvidia, or get an AMD FX8350 which runs 4,0 at stock and should easily do 4,5 or 4,6 based on my experience with my existing CPU.

 

What would you go for?

 

And I know there are a lot of people out there who would recommend me to go for i7, but those are more expensive and I would need a new MoBo for that.

[Jim Young 2,356]

FSX depends on the CPU performance than the GPU.  In regards to the GPU, you only need to make sure it is at least DX10 compliant (all modern GPU's are compliant).  DX10 is just another technology that allows your simulator to display - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirectX.  For that to work, the simulator (FSX) must be properly programmed to render DX10 technology.  Unfortunately, Microsoft got rid of the FSX team before it had time to truly program DX10 technology properly.  Therefore, they call it DX10 Preview.  DX10 Preview was okay as it showed shadows inside the cockpits and it increased the fps for many but it has many anomalies.  Fortunately for us, Steve's DX10 Fixer fixes those anomalies with patches.  P3D is FSX but is being continually updated and it is now using DX11 technology.  For instance, you can see cloud shadows on the ground giving additional immersion into flight simulation.  So, just continue to get a decent CPU/GPU (Intel and NVidia recommended) and that should suffice.  I recommend NVidia cards as ATI/AMD refused to update their drivers when Microsoft Vista and FSX were first released.  Therefore, anyone who had an ATI card then had to buy an NVidia card to run FSX when it was first released.  Therefore, Microsoft's FSX Team used Intel CPU's and NVidia video cards when they programmed FSX.  The current ATI/AMD cards work well with FSX now but I'm personally partial to Intel/Nvidia.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Best regards,

Jim

[Soulflight 95]

Yes, I am using Steves Fixer already, thanks. I am mostly looking for a way to improve my PC's performance in densely populated areas when flying stuff like the NGX or 777. Most of the time my performance is already pretty good. Getting rid of my nice CPU is a bit of as shame though.   The one I have now runs 4,1 Ghz at stock voltage.

 

However, it is AM3 running in an AM3+ Board, so I have some headroom there and could even get an Octacore with 4,1 stock speed for that one.

[Jim Young 2,356]

When you have a program (FSX) that was not programmed for modern computer systems, you are bound to run into some issues regarding performance.  Performance has always been a major subject since FSX was first released in 2006.  But, back in 2006, we struggled to get 15 fps and marveled at those who got 20-25 fps.  The Sandy Bridge chipset from Intel (the release of the first i7's) significantly improved performance but it had a downside as we went to Microsoft 64 bit OS's and had 4GB's of VAS.  Individuals raised their settings thinking they could run FSX close to max with commercial addons (you can run FSX at max settings with default scenery and aircraft all day long.  You'll see high fps throughout any flight).  Then we decided to buy eye-candy addons.  Things really went South then.  So, you will not get great performance with commercial addons.  It's not FSX's fault.  It's the commercial addon's fault as they decided to make exceptional scenery and aircraft.  So you will have to live with modest settings throughout any flight simulator experience IF you want to enjoy the sim. 

 

AMD/ATI  CPU's and GPU's are great today.  It's just that they were not used when FSX was developed.

 

Best regards,

Jim

[Afterburner 373]

You need to keep in mind that a DX10-operated FSX is still heavily bound on the CPU - and that includes features like water effects, ground shadows, mesh complexity, etc. Some of the few features where DX10 has an advantage over DX9 is the bloom effect (no performance hit in DX10, massive performance hit in DX9) and cockpit shadows. Other than that, you will benefit from a sizable reduction in VAS consumption.

[Soulflight 95]

I took a few measurements with nvidia inspector and the windows task manager. In a heavy-use area like EGLL with any complex addon planes, my CPU usage is constantly 100 % on all three cores FSX uses with AFM=14. The GPU usage, however, never went over 50%.

[sloppysmusic 169]

Been doing extensive testing recently pushing systems to limits after a new i7-6900k went south on me and had to be returned.

I7_3770 8gb ram gtx750ti pushing out 4k single screen all settings maxed except traffic 50% and water mid high averaging 28 fps orb x regions with ftx global plus vector maxed plus as 2016 down to 22 large add on airport.

Switched out for 1080 founders edition card fps improvement at most 2_3fps in all areas. Using 2 extra windows @1080p 750 dropped to 10fps 1080 dropped to 15.