This question is similar to another one I asked recently about hard drive speed but wanted to keep this one specific to the processor core counts.

So here goes. Recently I started flying faster jets and when getting lower to the ground the dreaded blurries show up. My question is IF anyone is interested in trying.

Pick a saved flight, ORBX or Megascenery is fine and record the time it takes to load up the scenery.

Then go into the BIOS and enable only six cores. Pick the same flight plan to load and record the load time. (If you only have 6 cores to start, go to the next step)

Then go into the BIOS and enable only four cores. Pick the same flight plan to load and record the load time.

If you want to take it a step further hit advance up to 4x for 10 seconds once the sim is loaded and ready for flight (just after take off) then back to normal and see how fast the sim can recover. I'm betting the 8 core folks can recover pretty quickly.

I would love to get actual numbers of improvements for these tests. I have conducted the same tests with my 4 core processor and going down to TWO cores is a massive hit in load times. But I'm unable to verify how well this scales. Depending on the results I see  I may be forced to upgrade...Thanks for anyone willing to try this out. By the way anyone having some crazy 16 core monster and wants to try this out let us know the results of that too. 

 

Hard drive speed is going to play a major role in "loading" (not rendering) scenery. 

Your post is not specifying which sim. If you are talking P3D which version?

If 4.4, did you do a clean install? You should not be having any blurries with your system, I don't. Try deleting shaders folder and the P3D.cfg and let them rebuild.

 

Edited January 23, 20197 yr by pracines

20 hours ago, pracines said:

Hard drive speed is going to play a major role in "loading" (not rendering) scenery. 

Your post is not specifying which sim. If you are talking P3D which version?

If 4.4, did you do a clean install? You should not be having any blurries with your system, I don't. Try deleting shaders folder and the P3D.cfg and let them rebuild.

 

Thanks for the reply...

That's what I thought too.. However I bought a much faster SSD then my old SSD and I saw NO difference in load time.

Regarding P3D 4.4

Just to clearify the blurries are NOT under normal flying conditions, the blurries were part of a test of advancing the time rate to produce blurries and see how quickly the scenery can recover with 4, 6 or 8 cores, as a difference to see how much more cores assist with loading times only. (not a FPS test in anyway). 

Has anyone tried adding an Optane to cache the scenery data?  I’ve been considering this for a new build  

Kevin

Blurries are not about number of cores. Search "blurries Rob Ainscough" for a description of  why "blurries" are created and how to solve them in P3D v4.3 and v4.4.

The overgeneralized bottom line...turn down your scenery settings and double the VRAM on your GPU. 🙂

Edited January 24, 20197 yr by Henry Street

I5 8600K with essentially two cores disabled (AM85),.loading times were significantly longer than 6 cores with no AM

It also depends of using 1 or multiple view displays ...

16 hours ago, Henry Street said:

Blurries are not about number of cores.

The more cores the better

On 1/24/2019 at 9:54 AM, mpw8679 said:

The more cores the better

Sure but if I go from a 4790k 4 cores @ 4.8 to a 9600k with 6 cores at 4.8 is there really gonna be that big a difference in scenery load times?

1 hour ago, turboken said:

Sure but if I go from a 4790k 4 cores @ 4.8 to a 9600k with 6 cores at 4.8 is there really gonna be that big a difference in scenery load times?

Going from a 7700K with HT enabled to a 9600K I noticed faster load times,  less scenery shifting, and less scenery loading pauses.  Not a huge difference but definitely noticeable.  I have since upgraded to a 9700K and it is better yet.  IMO eight physical cores is the sweet spot.

This blows away the old assumption of FSX not needing nor utilizing more than 4 cores.

On 1/25/2019 at 10:19 PM, mpw8679 said:

Going from a 7700K with HT enabled to a 9600K I noticed faster load times,  less scenery shifting, and less scenery loading pauses.

But did you have a clean install of the OS on the new system? That alone would probably make a big improvement even with the same processor and MB. Also, the newer chipset would make a small difference as would faster RAM if that was changed. Did you use a different type of drive (SSD rather than HDD)? This would make a BIG difference in loading times.

1 hour ago, vortex681 said:

But did you have a clean install of the OS on the new system? That alone would probably make a big improvement even with the same processor and MB. Also, the newer chipset would make a small difference as would faster RAM if that was changed. Did you use a different type of drive (SSD rather than HDD)? This would make a BIG difference in loading times.

Fresh OS install each time.  Samsung SDD. 7700K, 9600K, and 9700K

1 hour ago, mpw8679 said:

Fresh OS install each time.  Samsung SDD. 7700K, 9600K, and 9700K

A fresh OS and SSD will make things appear much faster. These two things alone make it very difficult to attribute any performance improvement directly to your new CPU.

44 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

A fresh OS and SSD will make things appear much faster. These two things alone make it very difficult to attribute any performance improvement directly to your new CPU.

Holy cow dude.

7700K- Fresh OS install, same ram, same hdd, and test.  Fresh install was not any faster then my old install.  I keep a very clean and sleek system.

9600K- New mobo, fresh OS install, same ram, same hdd, and test

9700K- Same mobo as 9600K, fresh OS install, same ram, same hdd, and test.

All done with 1080ti, ORBX global, ORBX NA land class, and UTX USA v2

7700K HT disabled< 7700K HT enabled< 9600K< 9700K