• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Neutral

About ant_1984

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Melbourne, Australia

Flight Sim Profile

  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines
  1. No I haven't delidded. Not really interested in going down that path to be honest. I'm running a H110 and temps when gaming peak at 60*C. That's the hottest I've seen it get unless stress testing. Sorry, haven't run cpu mark or anything like that.
  2. Just FYI, my 4.5Ghz 4770K is yielding better results than my 4.9Ghz 2600K. The average improvement was about 5FPS if I recall correctly, so there is benefit but it's up to you whether it's worth it to you. 4770K does have some other benefits such as supporting pcie3.0 as well as more native SATA 6GB/s and USB3 ports.
  3. I just recently tried overclocking my 780 and in testing the average FPS in FSX increased by about 2FPS. So whilst not mind blowing it can make a difference, and the little 1-2FPS from here, there and everywhere all add up. This was tested using the FSXMark11 test flight plan with the average calculated based on the last 4 flights out of 5 flights conducted (the first flight you load in FSX will always have lower FPS due to tecture loading etc, so this result gets discarded)
  4. Don't hold the 780 back to a lower temperature like 70C, by doing that you're likely limiting the performance it's going to give you in the sim and not letting it stretch it's legs so to speak. If you're letting the 780ti max out at it's throttle point of 83C, then let the 670 and 780 go to their throttle points too so you can get a more fair and accurate representation of the results. Otherwise your results may be skewed. Hell, you can let the 780 run up to 90-95C if you're keen on overclocking. Not suggesting you do this though. lol. If I'm overclocking my 780 I set my temp target at about 84C and have no throttling whatsoever. Just my 2c. Also, don't forget about fan profiles. These can impact things too. If you make a change on one card, make the same change on the other.
  5. I'm not sure sure if you looked at Noel's system specs, but he just upgraded and couldn't really do much better. lol FSX is a strange beast and even the fastest system will drop FPS with the right combination of settings/scenery/weather/AI aircraft etc. We all know that FSX will not be officially optimised any further so in my humble opinion GSync is not going to have a lot of benefit for FSX unless you are always running more than 30FPS, which can be a struggle coming into a complex busy airport even on the best system when settings are cranked. P3D 2.0 will hopefully provide a performance and visual boost compared to FSX, negating this sort of issue
  6. Oh I understand that, but looking at it from a purely FSX based perspective, the time where smoothness is not always there(atleast from my past experience) is around a complex airport and frames may drop below 30. Unfortunately GSync will do nothing for you there due to the 30Hz lower limit. If you're pushing frames higher than that then absolutely it will benefit you. There are arguments for and against having FPS set to limited and unlimited but lets not go there with this discussion. So far as other games go, it will provide an improvement without doubt, whether that improvement is worth the cost of upgrading a monitor remains to be seen. I don't seem to have issues with tearing/stuttering on my system that I've noticed. Time will tell how beneficial this will be, however I sincerely hope they do go ahead with a so called "DIY GSync Upgrade" so that users don't necessarily need to run out and buy a completely new monitor if they want to take advantage of this. I truly do hope though that this does bring a big benefit to PC gaming, any new tech improvement like this is welcome in my eyes.
  7. Others have touched on it already but just thought I'd through in my 2 cents here. Just been reading up more on GSync and according to a number of articles it enforces a minimum refresh rate of 30Hz (Same as current 1/2 Vsync tweak). If the frame rate drops below 30 fps, the display will present duplicates of each frame. So as far as FSX goes with 30FPS being considered the goal for most and most users experiencing dips below that, I don't see this actually providing much if any benefit to FSX unless your frames are at 30 or more ALL the time. And as we all know FSX is CPU limited and those drops in frames tend to come in and around a complex airport, which is exactly where we are looking for that smoothness. Other titles will benefit far more than FSX as I see it. Interestingly though it looks like some monitors will have a DIY GSync upgrade
  8. ant_1984

    FTX global trees on runways and ramps?

    lol. Thought the "Lumberjack" was a joke too. Love it!
  9. Hmmm that's what I was thinking would be the case too. Oh well, I'm sure we'll have it posted here that a new update is available anyway. Never bought anything else through FSS Store before.
  10. Hi Steve, Thanks for the update. I'm assuming we'll be notified here on the forums when the fixes are released? Just a question, how will the fixes be made available, through a seperate download or do we have to reinstall from FSS? Cheers.
  11. ant_1984

    5.0 Ghz - Wow

    I'd say you'd be able to overclock at least somewhere north of 4Ghz with the cooler you have. Have you tried it at all? Just keep an eye on temps. You may not get as high as with say custom water cooling. No need for phase change cooling.
  12. ant_1984

    5.0 Ghz - Wow

    Is your 3960X running stock at the moment? How high do you want to overclock? You don't need phase cooling to reach a decent overclock unless you're really shooting for the moon. Also I know you already have a GTX 690, but in all honesty you'd be better running a single GTX 680/780 since FSX/Prepar3d makes no use of SLI. The 690 will ofcourse run other games better.
  13. ant_1984

    5.0 Ghz - Wow

    The price in that link looks like a rip off. Isn't this the same product but for $300 less? I agree with Oscar though, as far as FSX/Prepar3d, I doubt that would beat a 4770K. A "stock" 4770K beats the AMD 9590 on a lot of the benchmarks based on the reviews. It's got nothing to do with how many Ghz it's running. Comes down to the performance of the chip itself. i.e my 4.5Ghz 4770K performs better than my 4.9Ghz 2600K. Not to mention FSX/Prepar3d won't make use of all 8 cores.
  14. ant_1984


    I was just talking in general terms. I know there will be some difference but should be barely noticable in general use as you said. To update my findings, my board doesn't have the ability to disable my second graphics cards pcie 3.0 slot so I haven't tested running one card at x16 vs x8. I'll play around with that if I have time over the weekend. I found my RAM had two different XMP profiles which oddly enough are identical to each other, but in the process of testing I ran FSXMark 11 again on both profiles with identical results. Now the interesting part. Before the last run where I was getting about 48 average I had run Razer Gamebooster to close any programs etc. This time I didn't. Results are below. Using Gamebooster: Without Gamebooster: I was able to replicate the results, so it wasn't just a one off. I'm not sure what Gamebooster was doing to hurt my results but needless to say I won't be using it anymore. I've now hit the 50 FPS average I was looking for but I'm sure I can squeeze out a few more FPS if I learn how to tighten up my RAM timing a bit more and also bump up to 4.6Ghz (probably my limit without delid if I care about my temps when running stress tests). Overall observation just watching the tests running. The increase in average FPS over my previous 4.9Ghz 2600K system is only about 3-4FPS but in terms of smoothness, to me it was noticibly smoother. It might just be a placebo, but I think it has more to do with the minimum FPS not dropping below 30.