worldclassleader

Hi everyone, Just wanted to share my findings on the 4790K. In short, I've purchased 6 different Haswell CPUs that I've used over the past year or so in client builds and best OC has been 4.7GHz. My first purchase of the 4790K has gone well so far: 5.0GHz (stress tested Aida64 9 hours; 25 passes with IBT). I'm certain it can clock higher Batch Number: L336D105 (Micro Center, Chicago, IL) 1.40Vcore Disabled Hyper-threading (I always disable HT) Delid Liquid Metal between die and Intel heat spreader Cool Jag TIM between CPU and XSPC Raystorm waterblock Swifttech MCP35X Pump Dual 240MM rad 2 ASUS Poseidon GTX 780s SLI

You can pickup an EVGA 1300G2 that's rated at the very top; right next to Corair's AX lineup for only $195. You can read up on the reviews on the Web; but if you're going to pick up a 1K PSU, you won't find a better power supply for the money with a 10 year warranty too. EVGA sells custom braided and colored PSU cables as well. I own the PSU. It's been very reliable: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438011&cm_re=EVGA_1300-_-17-438-011-_-Product Specs: Custom Waterloop 2 ASUS GTX 780 Poseidon's in SLI ASUS Z97 Deluxe Intel Core I7 4790K 5GHz (1.40Vcore) 4 2,350 RPM High performance fans 3 1600RPM fans Lamptron Fan Contoller 4 Sticks of RAM (DDr3 2400MHz) 4 SSDs 7 USB Devices Power supply is rock solid,

Thanks!! I'll give it a go this week!

Hi all, I lost my copy of FSX and decided to purchase Prepar3d Academic version instead. Is there anyway to install third part aircraft, such as PMDGs 747 and 737 without porting them FROM FSX? I'll buy FSX again if needed,but just wanted to check-in with the AVSIM community to see if there was a work-around. Thanks!

You got it Dazz! No problem!

Wow! That's great to know Bill, thanks for pointing that out. I hope Prepar3D becomes a multi-core sim. But to be honest, as it stands, Sandy Bridge seems to be doing a pretty decent job in FSX, and with Ivy Bridge almost here, I wonder how big an impact multi-core will have in FSX/Prepar3d? Thanks for welcoming me in Word Not Allowed! I've been reading up on many of the posts on AVSIM and have learned a great deal from all of you. It's great to be a part of this online community.

Stephen,Thank you for your candor sir, and I look forward to contributing and learning from you all! These are some exciting times with Prepar3D today, and Flight just around thre corner...

Hi everyone,Just wanted to update you all on some further testing. I discovered that the PMDG 747-8i was providing a 10-15FPS increase compared to other addon's and since all of my initial testing was conducted with the PMDG 747-8i, I did experience a more fluid flying experience when I initially installed FSX. However, after further testing with various addon's and FSX default aircraft, the performance is nearly identical to a 2600K processor at 4.8/5GHz. Therefore, I conclude that the assertions made by many of you, in that FSX does not utilize all of the processor cores are indeed valid. Lastly, regardless of whether 3 cores or 6 cores are active, the FPS remains the same.Jacob

Hi everyone,Just wanted to update you all on some further testing. I discovered that the PMDG 747-8i was providing a 10-15FPS increase compared to other addon's and since all of my initial testing was conducted with the PMDG 747-8i, I did experience a more fluid flying experience when I initially installed FSX. However, after further testing with various addon's and FSX default aircraft, the performance is nearly identical to a 2600K processor at 4.8/5GHz. Therefore, I conclude that the assertions made by many of you, in that FSX does not utilize all of the processor cores are indeed valid. Lastly, regardless of whether 3 cores or 6 cores are active, the FPS remains the same. Jacob

Nope, not a placebo; definitely not that. I can't argue with you as well, as you and many others at AVSIM have tested different CPUs with FSX and know your stuff. It will be great to see additional comparisons by those in the AVSIM community that implement SB-E and share their results.Thanks for your feedback!Jacob

I see...so then, those extra cores/threads will be utilized by FSX to load textures during game-play? Therefore, is it fair to reason that a SB-E [6-core] CPU will provide the best overall experience, as those extra threads take some of the burden off the primary CPU core(s), and is the reason that in my observation the 3930K "feels" more fluid compared to the 2600K at the same speed?

Ok, got'em. Question, were you referring to my FSX config file? If so, here it is: http://dl.dropbox.co...1327404/fsx.CFG

Sounds good Dazz....nope, I don't own any of the addon's you mentioned above.

Will do..thanks Stephen! ;) +10000000 lol....thanks Dazz.. ;)

Thanks for the tips Word Not Allowed! I just ran the FSXMark2011 benchmark having applied the 1364 Affinity Mask you suggested and the test results for all four tests were identical to my initial tests using an affinity mask of 1344. So...go figure....lol...=) I'd be glad to give it a shot! I own the following FSX PMDG add-ons:MD-11NGX-737 800/900747x and the 8i expansion model That's really interesting; I wonder if the Triple-Channel memory on the X58 platform has a positive effect on FSX, compared to SBs dual channel? Ofcourse, then we got SB-E with Quad-Memory. I'm assuming this has been addressed some where on AVSIM as well..

Same here...I can't explain it either, but having used [several] 2600K's at 5GHz and 980x/990x with the exact same [density] settings on many builds for customers in the Chicagoland area this past year, the 3930K is definitely my choice for FSX today. I don't discount the validity in your statement either Dazz; I just cant explain the performance increase...I just can't. Plus, I don't know how FSX works "under the hood," other than setting the Affinity Mask.=)

Hey guys...Here are some photos of my 3930K build...

Stephen,That makes sense; especially considering that many of you have been experimenting with various configurations as they relate to FSXMark2011. It will be interesting to see how other SB-E benchmarks compare with mine. Well, glad I could contribute to the community! I'll post some photos of my 600-GT build to this post, which should be further towards the bottom..Best,Jacob

That's right...I noticed that in the settings. Another observation: Using the same FSXMark2011 settings on a 1920x1080x32 resolution, Ground Environment Extreme Enhanced North America, REX 2.0, and PMDG's 747-8i at Chicago's O'Hare Airport, I would achieve 20FPS parked on the runway with the 2600K at 5GHz. Whereas, the 3930K at 4.8GHz was idiling between 30-40FPS. Therefore, I reason that the 3930K is definitely an improvement over the 2600K. It will be great to compare my SB-E results to others as they become available. =) +1

I know right!! LOL.....I can't explain it...perhaps Microsoft can...hehehehe

Thanks...posted the results in that link. Checkout the benchmark results; I ran several different 'affinity mask" tests, but a decimal value of 1344 was best, and HT was enabled.

First, here's an overview on my system specs: Intel Core i7 3930K 4.8GHz (HT enabled), 1344 Affinity Mask ASUS P9PX79 PRO ASUS ENGTX570 DCII (2 in SLI) 16GB DDR3 1600MHz RAM, 16GBs in Quad Channel (4GB per stick) 64GB Crucial M4 SSD (OS and productivity software on this only) 1TB 5400RPM Western Digital HDD (running FSX and games on this HDD) Cooler Master 1200w PSU (80 plus gold) Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit Sharp Aquos Quatronn 40inch LED 1920x1080 FSX w/Acceleration, GEXe, REX, PMDG 747x and 8i, MD-11, and 737 NGX. (all add-on's uninstalled for this test...that "sucked"..lol) here are my 5 minutes test results using default settings with no add-ons: Min Max AvgTest 1: 23 60 37.78Test 2: 22 62 47.323Test 3: 30 60 46.833Test 4: 29 62 46.613What's really intersting is that my average was about 5FPS higher using REX 2.0 and Ground Environment Extreme Enhanced (North America). Also, I experimented with various Affinity Mask's, such as 62, 63, 3549, 4095, and 2730, but 1344 gave me the best results as noted in the benchmarks above.Lastly, I've used many processors to test FSX, including most recently, Intel's i7 920/930, 950, 970, 990X; and from Sandy Bridge (SB) the 2500K, 2600K, and 2700K. Compared to SB, the 3930K "feels" more fluid at the highest [density] settings and eye-candy (e.g., flare, shadows, etc) at 1920x1080. Therefore, I don't believe the FSXMark2011 benchmark is [entirely] valid because the 3930K is superior to the 2600K at 5Ghz in demanding settings; at least in my experience. Perhaps there are tweaks I'm not aware of (?) that facilitate higher FPS, as some of the 2600K benchmarks on this website exceed my results; most notably due to higher Ram speeds and tighter timings.Here are the modifications I've made to my config file:[bufferPools]UsePools=1RejectThreshold=98304PoolSize=8388608HIGHMEMFIX=1AffinityMask=1344I hope this helps..and please feel free to contact me regarding any tips you'd like to shareBest,Jacob

Compared to the 2600K at 5GHz, the 3930K "feels" much more fluid to me; there's no question. However, I'm using DDR3 1600MHz ram and based on some of the other 2600K FSXMark2011 results, it appears that faster ram with tighter timings has a significant [positive] effect on FPS. Therefore, I think it's possible to net even more performance out of this CPU.Also, I can't explain why the FSX config file reflects a different "ProcSpeed" number. I'm going to try disabling SpeedStep tomorrow and see what that brings.I just posted my FSXMark2011 results in this post as well.

Hi Stephen,Thanks for your feedback and sharing the FSXMark11 benchmark software. Well, I've got some interesting results. First, here are my results using default settings with no add-ons: Min Max Avg Test 1: 23 60 37.78Test 2: 22 62 47.323Test 3: 30 60 46.833Test 4: 29 62 46.613What's really intersting is that my average was about 5FPS higher using REX 2.0 and Ground Environment Extreme Enhanced (North America). Also, I experimented with various Affinity Mask's, such as 62, 63, 3549, 4095, and 2730, but 1344 gave me the best results as noted in the benchmarks above.Lastly, I've used many processors to test FSX, including most recently, Intel's i7 920/930, 950, 970, 990X; and from Sandy Bridge (SB) the 2500K, 2600K, and 2700K. Compared to SB, the 3930K "feels" more fluid at the highest [density] settings and eye-candy (e.g., flare, shadows, etc) at 1920x1080. Therefore, I don't believe the FSXMark2011 benchmark is valid because the 3930K is superior to the 2600K at 5Ghz in demanding settings; at least in my experience. Perhaps there are tweaks I'm not aware of (?) that facilitate higher FPS, as some of the 2600K benchmarks on this website exceed my results; most notably due to higher Ram speeds and tighter timings.Here are the modifications I've made to my config file:[bufferPools]UsePools=1RejectThreshold=98304PoolSize=8388608HIGHMEMFIX=1AffinityMask=1344I hope this helps..and please feel free to contact me regarding any tips you'd like to share or if you need me to explore different test scenerios.Best,Jacob

Here you go: "ProcSpeed=10425" If ithelps to know, I have Intel SpeedStep enabled as well, so perhaps that's why the number is low, as the processor runs at about 1600MHz when idle.