Jump to content

fghdgdfdfgfgf

Members
  • Content Count

    925
  • Donations

    $25.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by fghdgdfdfgfgf

  1. Oh stop it! I don't have the 9700, but I have played with different AM values on the 8600K and can tell you that it wasn't hard to imagine the value of having the two extra cores the 9700 brings to the table. Look, I just paid $500 to upgrade my 8600K to an 8086 .....I strongly considered the 9900/9700 after those AM tests. Yes, I don't expect you to understand why the $500 on a 8086 .....but, I think it's safe to say I value things in my sim experience that you don't. -cheers
  2. I walk into a store. On the left, in the clearance section, I see a 6700 on sale for $500. All things being pretty much equal, I see a 9700 on the right for $2500. I am, without a doubt, going take the 9700 -based on all the data, both real and empirical, that is readily available both here and elsewhere. Absolutely no doubt. Don't get lost in your facts, go out and buy one and then come back and tell me that your P3Dv4 experience is only 25% better. LOL, I saw a 40 to 60%+ boost going from a 4670K to an 8600K. The 4670 isn't that far from the performance level of the 6700 ....based on your logic.
  3. A stock 9700 will destroy a stock 6700 with p3dv4 ....They're not even close. In some situations (and in the right hands) the performance difference could be doubled. And the really cool thing about the 9700 is that it's plug-n-play .....no hyperthreading to deal with and a typical user will have no need to use an affinity mask.
  4. Yeah, and it's not often, but I'm with Ray on this one. OP, I wouldn't, couldn't and don't give ah #$@ about your cup of coffee and what the weather is like out your window while reading in this forum ....name the ##@@ developer! so that others are advised. And when understanding of said issue is reached then so are we informed ....of the do's and don't s 🙂
  5. -when was the last time you refreshed your shader cache -have all sounds preloaded via the fmc "pmdg options"/sound menu ....and does the sound device match what you believe to be using -try locking the fps -corrupt or poorly configured hardware/software -you don't have you puter specs listed .... if it truly happens all the time then maybe your hardware doesn't match your settings. Can you make it not happen? There is a newer thread on the topic at the PMDG forum ... I don't have the issue, but I am on an older version.of the 747
  6. You won’t be disappointed with the 9700 ....a significant upgrade over what you have now and nearly plug-n-play.
  7. No. played with it a little ......for certain, it sucks cpu cycles. I do use it for video, though ....yeah, it shines there. :-) now back to the topic <big grin> aida to match hwinfo ...what I'm running at now . Oh, and a aida score that a 9xxxx can't get within a 1/2 hour of :-)
  8. My 8600K could do 5.0 / 4.6 ring with mems at 4133 c17 out of the box. Before I retied it, it was doing 5.2 / 4.8 4200 c17 ....with latencies well under 40ns. heck, I'd venture to say that not even 20% of the 9900k's can do that. My 8086? ....destroys my 8600k on every level. Complex scenes? While airborne 9700 cant do it any better ....maybe a lil easier but probably not better, unless you're doing something exotic, but when you get to the airport you're going to wish you had more horse power. Very few 9xxx can match the average 8xxxx in max clock speeds.
  9. Glad you asked ....but it's not that easy. Are we talking p3d v4? If so, there's heck of a lot more going on than meets the eye. The below link is an image of same flight but on the ground. Notice the real time core usage? there's only a few cores working, right? Also, notice the frame rate? I could have a hundred cores on the cpu and I'd still have only a couple cores working for me with same frame rate as the linked screenshot. The only thing that's going help me get that fps up while on the ground at this airport is faster cpu speeds (memory helps, too) not more cores, am or hyperthreading. The extra cores on the 97xx and 99xx are nice, and as Steve W. has pointed out, with some fancy AM can get the cores to work as effective as a 6 core running a few GHz higher .....but this typically is only true at cruise altitude. On the ground taxing, during take-off roll and rotation, on the short-final, during flare and landing roll at a mega airport ...it's all about Mhzeees. Myself, I recently chose the 8086 over the 9900K. I felt I could not only get a superior overclock with the 8086 but also superior memory/cache performance over the 9900K. Oh, and the six cores are plenty. .https://i.imgur.com/4frSPCJ.png edit: Oh, I do have an 8600K just sitting here in front of me not doing anything ....will do 52/48 all day long. Oh, and the IMC on thing is not bad either. Interested? ....Take a chance on the 8600k over the 9600K, if budget is important. But I'd probably take the 8700K or the 9700 over the 8600K and 9600K if I was starting from scratch and on a budget.
  10. Well, lets stop guessing .... 🙂 The below graphic says the extra cores on the 9700 are useless is the captured scene. Furthermore, the graphic shows us that the nearly completed sfo to lax flight was pretty darn tough on the system ...but the humble 100i V2, with no help from the two sleeping stock case fans, was able to keep things fairly cool -ambient 73F. Not throwing shade on the 9700 as I think the cpu is more than capable.
  11. I don't know about the other tanker fields but the tanks by LAX can be turned on/off, might be part of the Manhattan Beach BGL. I'll take a look, It's been awhile since I played around with the BGL's around LA. Me thinks my BGL setup goes back to my Haswell days.
  12. LAX to Long Beach loop .....some stutters to be sure. Pauses? You tell me. Now I have the obvious Orbix So Cal .bgls disabled plus object flow and "new lights". Been meaning to post this much earlier ...sorry about the timing.
  13. hmmm ....I thought it had everything to do with engine disintegration not taking the wings. no? I did like sitting over the engine in the DC10 ....that engine placement was really out there.
  14. happy customer here..... https://vimeo.com/314251213 LAX on approach this morning ...1440P, 8xmsaa, 4xsgss, texture exp 10, most gates filled (fraps-30fps locked)
  15. Thought I'd post picts of todays work ....mostly pointed at Westman: <g> https://imgur.com/Roi0ZeP note:every thing in picture is at 5.5/5.0 ring 4200 C17
  16. Yeah, I'd be shocked if the my 8086 couln't do P3D stable at 5.5 (1.55v) with little or no avx offset -with a real cooler using the mobo's LN2 mode. I did boot to 5.6 {1.6v) today, but cpuz crashed at the bench run ....I do think 5.6 benches are possible if I use the LN2 mode to remove some of the circuit breakers. :-)
  17. correction: single core cinebench score is actually 245 .....the multi core score is at 5.4 (could not complete run multi at 5.5). ----sorry
  18. 5.5 3345 bonus 5.5 stuff: cpuz 666 / cinebench 1/1 241 - all cores 1 thread 1405 / Realbench "Imaging" 306 17.3 sec / Aida 4200 c17 62GB read/write 36.5ns 5.4 3285 5.0 3040 4.8 2920
  19. I5 8600K with essentially two cores disabled (AM85),.loading times were significantly longer than 6 cores with no AM
  20. Well ,,, don’t know I have a meaningful answer to that, outside of my own experience with P3d and my hardware. I was sold on the importance memory and p3d with a test I did last spring at lax. Long story short I saw 10% boost in FPS going from 3200 c14 with XMP memory timings to 4133 using a bios memory preset. buried deep in recesses of the ROG forums is a 4400 vs 4133 bench post from a user that breaks down the memory universe to the sub atomic scale. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?101819-DDR4-4400-vs-4133 bare in mind this is an apple to apple comparison that really splits hairs. after reading it try to imagine the performance difference between a system like mine and another user with an 8700k running 2660 MHz c16. Take the pi score bench time delta from slowest to fastest, a nearly two seconds difference, Now imagine applying that to p3d .....2 second is 60 frames lost if running at 30 fps.
  21. No 'c'mon man' award for you then... Sorry to have to do this to you Mike, but after reading Bob's post you’re going to have re-accept the 'c'mon man' award ..... sorry man, All in good fun, of course.
  22. Oh, and they 'may' be selling over rated or mislabeled "hi-speed" "low cas" ram to 'sophisticated' buyers also ...
×
×
  • Create New...