Jump to content

cmeeks

Members
  • Content Count

    913
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About cmeeks

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Texas

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi Ken! Well I decided to go ahead and build up a new system for the new flight sim. I managed to get my hands on a Ryzen 5600X and I'm running a RX 5700 XT graphics card until I can get my hands on a 3080. Just got it up and running Friday night. I'll be honest though - I just saw the news (I'm out of the loop) that PMDG isn't coming out with the 737 until Q3 2021. I might have waited to build a computer til then had I known that hahaha. I'm curious if anyone has or is going to develop a benchmark for FS2020 - especially with all the new hardware rolling out. I have neither the know-how or the time anymore!
  2. Looking at that review, the answer to how important VRAM is is right in front of you. Just look at the 3090 vs 3080 benchmark at 4k resolution. 24GB VRAM vs 10GB and the jump is only from 42 to 45 fps. And we can’t even say the 3 fps improvement is due to the additional VRAM on the 3090. I think it’s a clear choice to go with 3080. I actually camped out at Microcenter overnight. I’ve never done that hahaha. I was approx #50 of 200 when the manager came out in the morning and announced they only received 12 cards. I managed to score a Ryzen 5600X at least. Anyway, looking at these reviews, I think I’m going to target a 3080 rather than 6800 XT.
  3. Thinking I will. Pricing out a new computer build, but may wait a month or two for first impressions on what hardware seems to work best. Someone develop a benchmark ASAP please! I'm just getting back up to speed... are we going to have PMDG add-on planes for this anytime soon? I also like the heavy metal.
  4. Sorry for the issues guys! I did some reorganization of my dropbox folders the other day and didn't even think about the FSXMark11 files being linked there. Looks like you guys quickly got the links repaired. The link in my signature is also functional again. I'm glad to provide a stable trustworthy environment to host such files and will be more careful with this next time. Regards, Corey
  5. It's in the PDF, but you really must read the PDF line by line to catch it. I recommend highlighting the PDF as you work your way through it to avoid missing anything.
  6. You're certainly not the first to forget that little gem, John. Perhaps we will vote that one out of the next FSXMark version. It was put in there because I figured it's how most people were running their systems. Good catch, Howard.I thought your results were a little high at first, but once again, the FSXMark test proves to be very consistent. There's been lots of debate regarding what conclusions to draw from the results, but If nothing else, they let you know if your system isn't functioning as it should. Thanks for taking the time to retest! I know it's difficult to find the patience to do when you're chomping at the bit to get in and enjoy your new hardware.
  7. Keith,Thanks for your efforts and welcome to the forums! I posted your final result (42.2 avg) in the results spreadsheet. It's interesting to see that changing the memory from 2T to 1T had no effect on the minimum frame rate - only on the maximum.
  8. Very well done, sir. You made it just a little harder to reach the top of the list!
  9. I love this forum! Pierre, that's an AWESOME use of the results! If you don't mind me asking, what was your R^2 value for the final formula? Seems like the constant for the CPU multiplier should vary based on the CPU socket due to differences in IPC. Perhaps if we used a CPU benchmark score instead of the raw CPU speed, we could get a more accurate formula. After all, we know that an i7-920 at 4.0GHz < i7-2500k at 4.0GHz, for example.It would be really cool if we could find independent hardware benchmarks that relate well to FSX performance to run a multiple regression analysis on. Something like:A*(IBT Score) + B*(GPU Passmark Score) + C*(MaxxMEM score) = FSX performanceThat way people wouldn't have to jack around with doing a fresh FSX install and making sure to run the FSX benchmark properly. We would still need some people to contribute results for the sake of regression.The question is, how do you determine what variables even affect FSX performance? Passmark performance, for example, could be completely irrelevant or just a bad indicator of FSX performance. I think it has something to do with p-values and statistical significance or something like that... I was terrible at statistics.Finally, it seems like the model representing FSX performance wouldn't be linear... but I wouldn't know how to generate any other model in the first place. It would need to be able to indicate a bottleneck in the system caused by a terrible GPU matched with a really high end GPU, for example.
  10. I'm not sure how you figure it's the CPU. Comparing his result with the other 1366 benchmarks leads me to think it's the GPU. That 590 just isn't playing well with FSX. I would expect a result in the mid 30s with a 580 instead.
  11. A new GPU and a decent OC is all that's holding you back!
  12. Corey,

    Just thought I'd drop a hello and let you know I appreciate the info you put out there on the M-R-C&O forum.

    Joe "Superglide" Brown

  13. I've been busy with research this week and have just been to lazy to get it done. I will do it very soon, though unless Word Not Allowed beats me to it.
  14. Given your clock speed and your high memory latency, that seems about right
×
×
  • Create New...