Rob Ainscough

i9 7900X vs. i7 5960X - P3D V4 performance results 85% FPS increase

Recommended Posts

I must admit these results seem almost to good to be true, but I double checked and verified -- perhaps there was something wrong with my P3D V4 installation on my 5960X but my test flight was visually identical on both systems.

Graphics configuration files and scenario file is here.

Add-ons used:

Orbx FTX Global
Orbx Freeware EU Airports
Orbx OpenLC EU
Orbx OpenLC NA
Orbx Trees
FSUIPC5
Aircraft is the default A36
Location EGFF - RWY 12 loop (Left Hand Pattern)

There were other add-ons installed but not being used, ASP4/ASCA, FSDT GSX, FSFX Packages, UTLive (set to 0 AI), RAAS Pro 64bit (disabled for aircraft)

5960X fraps data (raw csv data) avg. 28 FPS

uc?id=0Bw0Q-fAfEZwycUFhdlBtbFl1Ykk

7900X fraps data (raw csv data) avg. 52 FPS

uc?id=0Bw0Q-fAfEZwyTFE2ZmJNS1lyMkk

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Graphics settings

uc?id=0Bw0Q-fAfEZwyTzlqMUZKcVBLZ1E

uc?id=0Bw0Q-fAfEZwyLVNzU3lXU0VXSm8

uc?id=0Bw0Q-fAfEZwyLW5wRlFvak5tYjg

uc?id=0Bw0Q-fAfEZwyd0FGejduUUJwTG8

uc?id=0Bw0Q-fAfEZwyek0tOEdIUTNIemc

Cheers, Rob.

EDIT: In both test cases, TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 was used.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for posting.

Impressive improvement. It won't be long before I update my hardware. Nice to see the new Intel offerings are doing the job.

I don't see what graphics card you are using...I'm guessing a nvida 10xx?

Share this post


Link to post

Might be related to the architecture update? I mean, the 5960X is based on the Haswell architecture and the 7900X is based on the newer Skylake Architecture?

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, RichieFly said:

I'm guessing a nvida 10xx?

Yes, nVidia Titan X (pascal).

Cheers, Rob.

Share this post


Link to post

This really sounds to good to be true Rob.

Only if you delete your 5960 P3D setup and reinstall it all you will know for sure..

Share this post


Link to post

Dear Santa. I've been a very good boy this year, so peerrrlllleeeeeeaaaaaasssseeee...

Share this post


Link to post

If this is true and nothing was wrong with your old installation...then we will have a very interesting topic to follow!

Again, wife doesn't like this, wallet doesn't like this, credit card doesn't like this, paypal doesn't like this...the list goes on...

Hoang Le

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I had similar results as Rob using a 7700k (5.1ghz) coming from a 4770k (4.7ghz)... I'm also using a Titan X pascal SLI config... Maybe the RAM speed has its share (32gb running at 3866mhz). Regarding the settings difference: water and shadows in high and using dynamic light and lens flare... texture 2048 and texture_size_exp=9 (I like faster loading times)... I'm also using UT2 Live (85% comercial - 85% general) and same addons. Flying from Lax (Orbx SOCal) with a2a 172 gives me mid 30s to mid 40s from the VC and better frames (stay between 40 - 50) from the outside view.... in remote areas like CAG4 (Orbx PNW) I get even 100+ from the outside view... I think I'm going to uninstall P3D v3... :)

Share this post


Link to post

Well, this could change my plans :huh: 

Thanks for posting this. I hope nothing was wrong with previous P3D installation

Share this post


Link to post

Well, he's posted the settings and the scenario, so let's give him some more results to compare to, to see if it really is this good! I'll run the same scenario with my lowly 3930K/1080ti setup and post back my results. I mean, it would be amazing if it really was giving this kind of performance and i'd def be looking at one if it's anywhere near this good!

Thanks for posting as ever Rob..

Share this post


Link to post

Rob, 

 

Excellent results - can you check with some major addons as stress test - Orbx California Regions with KLAX and PMDG 777 (or something similar) with AI and scenery set to max (or close to it).  I would like to see the stress results.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post

I tested using his files and graphic settings.  I'm running a 7700K at 4.5 with a 1080ti on 4K monitor at 60hz.  I usually only run 30hz so this is not my usual way to run the sim.  I usually run quite a bit lower settings as I'm a tube flyer so I don't need all the autogen etc at FL390.

According to a FRAPS avg test: 

48 fps average with no AM and HT on.

49 fps average with 245 AM and HT on.

 

Just for fun I used the PMDG 747 in the same situation and had an avg of 37 fps.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, KenG said:

245 or 254 AM?

245  Use 6 out of 8 cores on HT.

Share this post


Link to post

2 physical and 4 HT leaving 2 physical for other tasks... An interesting choice might have to try that myself. 

Share this post


Link to post

Don't run 4K and I'm running 2048x2048 textures at 2560x1440. However at the same location I  had all of dynamic lighting, landing lights and lens flare on, also FXAA on with all of the OP noted settings. Results:looking down the runway around 52 fps, looking to my left around 62 fps. Airborne doing a circle around the airport 45 fps average.

 

i7-7700k 4.2 GHz, DEEPCOOL GAMMAXX 400 CPU Cooler 4 Heatpipes 120mm PWM Fan with Blue LED, ASRock 270 PRO4 MOBO, ZOTAC ampExtreme 1080 8GB, 32 GB DDR4 Ripjaws, Thermaltake Core V71 Case, RM850xCorsair psu, ADATA M.2 2280 240GB SATA III TLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) WIndows 10 Pro, 2 TB Samsung and 3 TB WD HDs .

 

Share this post


Link to post

FYI, when running these tests I was NOT using any AffinityMask setting for the 5960X test and for the 7900X test.  Normally I run my 5960X with:

[JOBSCHEDULER]
AffinityMask=21829

I specifically did NOT want to use an AM in my testing because it will take some time for me to figure out a good AM setting for the 7900X.  So to keep the playing field un-skewed I operated both CPU tests with NO AM (which means default is all cores).  HT was enabled in both case.  My 5960X does produce better performance results with the AM above but again trying to make this Apples to Apples compare.

Both tests did use TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 which will have a tendency to stress the GPU side but my objective was to NOT max out the GPU at 100% loads which is what DL would do with 4XSSAA at 4K res, hence DL disabled.  I wanted to ensure that neither the CPU nor the GPU were hitting 100% load as that would mask results in favor of one or the other component.

I'll post the actual flight video later if anyone cares to duplicate the same flight.

I'd love to see other's results, but it's important that you use the same exact settings as I provided and remove any AM settings you might be using, otherwise it will not be an Apples to Apples compare.

Cheers, Rob.

 

Share this post


Link to post

I'm interested to see how it performs against a Ryzen 7 @ 4Ghz, if anyone can use the same settings with Titan X Pascal or GTX 1080 Ti

Share this post


Link to post

a very usefull share ..

i was considering 7740x only to take advantage of its higher clock by overcloking it to 5.1ghz. this was based on the hypothesis that P3D V4 is not that good at utilizing multiple cores that good . Apparently 7900x is giving good fps in Rob's experiment. .

so whats the "verdict" on a higher clock 7740X / 7700K (5.1ghz) vs a lower clock speed 7900X ??

Share this post


Link to post

I'd like to replicate this and report, but show us what u do during the flight.

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post

I have been running an i5 2500k (@4.5 Ghz ) for years now not really understanding how an upgrade would benefit me (i5 vs i7, more than 4 cores etc.). I also have a 1080 card.

I run only Orbx scenery (Globle Base + OpenLC NA + Vectors + HD Trees). 

I am willing to upgrade for at least a 50% fps increase so that I can then invest in a weather addon. My P3D settings are very similar to what Rob has posted and I can maintain a solid 24 - 26 fps over moderate cities...Miami, Philadelphia etc.

Can anyone suggest a CPU (not quite as high as the i9 7900x) that could pretty much get me a 50% increase over my current results? i really just want a solid 30 fps with a weather addon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, FlyBaby said:

I have been running an i5 2500k (@4.5 Ghz ) for years now not really understanding how an upgrade would benefit me (i5 vs i7, more than 4 cores etc.). I also have a 1080 card.

I run only Orbx scenery (Globle Base + OpenLC NA + Vectors + HD Trees). 

I am willing to upgrade for at least a 50% fps increase so that I can then invest in a weather addon. My P3D settings are very similar to what Rob has posted and I can maintain a solid 24 - 26 fps over moderate cities...Miami, Philadelphia etc.

Can anyone suggest a CPU (not quite as high as the i9 7900x) that could pretty much get me a 50% increase over my current results? i really just want a solid 30 fps with a weather addon.

 

I went from a 2500k to a 7700k.  More then worth it.  Probably not going to get a 50% increase but I do get a solid 30fps with heavy addons.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

So glad that I decided to wait for P3D v4 to be out for a while so these kind of results can begin filtering in and making the hardware upgrade decision clear.  I expect by the fall when I am ready to upgrade this will be very clearly settled.  Thanks for spending the money and testing Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.