Jump to content


- - - - -

FSX and clock speed vs number of cores.


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#21 Zboe

Zboe

    Private Pilot - VFR

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 191 posts

Posted 13 June 2010 - 01:59 PM

View Postjcrouse55, on Jun 13 2010, 02:43 PM, said:

And how is it possible that you know i7 better than those of us that have built a system and used it? You seem to be making all kinds of differing statements, and if you know all about i7's then why are you asking all the questions? Just build your PhenomII x6 and enjoy FSX!  Happy Flying.


Aside from cheerleading for Intel have you said anything useful at all?

Edited by pulluporcrash, 13 June 2010 - 01:59 PM.


#22 jcrouse55

jcrouse55

    Commercial Pilot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,755 posts
  • Location:Tarpon Springs, Fl

Posted 13 June 2010 - 02:03 PM

Sure have and if you choose to ignore it, thats your choice! And I simply asked a question that you failed to answer. How can you possibly know more about i7's than anybody that owns one when you are the one asking questions.

#23 _BD6_

_BD6_

    June '10 Screenshot Hotshot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,577 posts
  • Location:Massachusetts, USA

Posted 13 June 2010 - 02:03 PM

View Postpulluporcrash, on Jun 13 2010, 02:59 PM, said:

View Postjcrouse55, on Jun 13 2010, 02:43 PM, said:

And how is it possible that you know i7 better than those of us that have built a system and used it? You seem to be making all kinds of differing statements, and if you know all about i7's then why are you asking all the questions? Just build your PhenomII x6 and enjoy FSX!  Happy Flying.


Aside from cheerleading for Intel have you said anything useful at all?
There is no question the AMD route would be cheaper, I guess the question is if it can easily overclock over 4ghz (never mind higher numbers). If it can do that, then I would definitely say its a good bang for the buck, and  "future-proof" (never believed in that though, but future programs should start utilizing more cores. Then the 1090T or 1050(?) should definitely hold its own and perform close to the i7's with hyperthreading and cost less.

#24 jcrouse55

jcrouse55

    Commercial Pilot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,755 posts
  • Location:Tarpon Springs, Fl

Posted 13 June 2010 - 02:13 PM

Here is the best CPU for FSX at under $200.00. http://www.microcent...duct_id=0331303

#25 pyruvate

pyruvate

    Orville Reincarnate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,126 posts
  • Location:Here be maple leaves

Posted 13 June 2010 - 03:54 PM

Sheesh, is this a Intel vs. AMD Flamewar now? :hrmm:

Best bang for the buck = X6 1055T.

I bought it because I needed a computer which is FAST for video editing, video rendering, video encoding, and photoshop.  They'll definately make well use of those 6 cores.  I didn't go for the i5 750 because the X6 1055T outperformed it in what I'm intending to use it for, and the AMD route worked out much cheaper.  Plus, I got a deal with the CPU + RAM.

I do play FSX and other games as well but I can give up a few slider notches for faster video rendering etc.

#26 _TW_

_TW_

    First Class Member\Screenshot Hotshot of 2004

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,474 posts
  • Location:Baden-Baden, Germany

Posted 13 June 2010 - 05:11 PM

Most 1055T chips will reach 4GHz, but make sure you've got a decent performing motherboard to go along with the chip.  The X6 chips also run quite cool, which is always a plus in my books.  Clock for clock, the i7's are usually ahead of the X6.  FSX will not make full use of the 6 cores on that chip, so yes an i7 system will probably run faster, but not by very much.  If you have a lot of programs that can fully utilize up to 6 cores (or more), than the X6 1055T would be the best choice in terms of performance/cost.

#27 pyruvate

pyruvate

    Orville Reincarnate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,126 posts
  • Location:Here be maple leaves

Posted 18 June 2010 - 06:17 AM

OK, now I've got my Phenom X6 system running, I'll tell you about FSX performance soon :hrmm:

#28 -Dexter

-Dexter

    Supersonic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,183 posts
  • Location:West Virginia, USA

Posted 18 June 2010 - 09:02 AM

View Postbangalore_fellow, on Jun 18 2010, 07:17 AM, said:

OK, now I've got my Phenom X6 system running, I'll tell you about FSX performance soon :hrmm:
When you get back, I'd be interested to know what's happening with those extra two cores. :hrmm: AFAIK, Flight Simulator isn't using them. But I dunno!

#29 pyruvate

pyruvate

    Orville Reincarnate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,126 posts
  • Location:Here be maple leaves

Posted 18 June 2010 - 01:57 PM

View Postpwn247, on Jun 18 2010, 07:32 PM, said:

View Postbangalore_fellow, on Jun 18 2010, 07:17 AM, said:

OK, now I've got my Phenom X6 system running, I'll tell you about FSX performance soon :hmmm:
When you get back, I'd be interested to know what's happening with those extra two cores. :( AFAIK, Flight Simulator isn't using them. But I dunno!

You're right, I just installed SP2 and yeap, as predicted FSX is :hrmm: .  Not using the processor NOR GPU.  How the :hrmm: did MS code this game? ;)  This setup glides so well in everything else!  Photoshop CS5 is so so smooth and fast :P Lovely seeing stuff like video converting etc. make all processors go to 100%;this thing is FAST!  But such a shame to see it sitting idle for FS :blink:

Posted Image

I'll try some tweaks etc. and then, I'm back to FS9 again :lol: I just can't use this...

And I have a:

Phenom II X6 1055T
Radeon 5750
G.Skill 2x2GB 7-7-7-21 DDR3 1333
ASUS M4A87TD EVO - AMD870 chipset mobo

Edited by bangalore_fellow, 18 June 2010 - 01:58 PM.


#30 _BD6_

_BD6_

    June '10 Screenshot Hotshot

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,577 posts
  • Location:Massachusetts, USA

Posted 18 June 2010 - 07:04 PM

have you used the affinitymask or setaffinity tweak?