!! Windows 7 no longer supported !!

As Microsoft will stop supporting Windows 7 on Jan 20th we will be unable to test any of our
products on that platform. It may work, or it may not, but no guarantees from our side. 

Jump to content
lexicon66

FSX Performance

Recommended Posts

FSX seems to be either the most demanding SIM ever or the worst optimized game ever made. I am running a q6600 at 2.6GHZ/4G RAM and a 9800GT (8800GT) is the same damn thing I got ripped by NV. I get 30 to 50 FPS but low 30's FPS seem to really affect the quality of fight. But what does it take to get FSX running good at full settings? Are we expected to run this game at 8FPS? I installed FEX which actually helps performance even though it looks better (HD clouds ECT). Is any one running a 280 NV or higher what is your performace like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FSX seems to be either the most demanding SIM ever or the worst optimized game ever made. I am running a q6600 at 2.6GHZ/4G RAM and a 9800GT (8800GT) is the same damn thing I got ripped by NV. I get 30 to 50 FPS but low 30's FPS seem to really affect the quality of fight. But what does it take to get FSX running good at full settings? Are we expected to run this game at 8FPS? I installed FEX which actually helps performance even though it looks better (HD clouds ECT). Is any one running a 280 NV or higher what is your performace like?

To get a better framerate, FSX requires CPU power, not GPU power ... frankly, a Q6600 ist absolutely NOT high end ...

check this out : http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=21858

cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The saying goes that for FSX the CPU determines your framerates and your GPU determines how pretty and shiny it all looks. Upgrading your GPU, even to a GTX285, is not going to do anything for your framerates in FSX that the 9800GT will not (given your current CPU).

If you are having FPS issues (who isn't?!) then I suggest you start here. If you are prepared to optimise your system and to bring down a few sliders here and there you can achieve very acceptable framerates. Do yourself a big favour and forget about running FSX with all sliders maxed out, forget bloom and keep your AI traffic as low as possible, if not off.

Please note that FEX, especially so with the SHD update, is going to have a MAJOR impact on framerates. I recommend that if you are using FEX then do not insall the SHD update for the time being.

If you need any further assistance please shout.

Konrad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some interesting developments about the use of multiple cores and some owners of Q6600 have reported substantial gains in smoothness and in some cases fps, by altering the affinity to use only three out of four cores.

Avsim has a thread on it but as they now require registration to enter their forums I don't propose to provide a link. You can find it if you need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon, thanks for the AVSIM thread heads up. I dare say you understated a bit with the word interesting. This looks (potentially) VERY interesting indeed!!!

Konrad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At altitude with the F-16 im in the 200's. Down in the weeds its in the 30's. It was 50's but I applied the max autogen 6000 per square tweak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At altitude with the F-16 im in the 200's. Down in the weeds its in the 30's. It was 50's but I applied the max autogen 6000 per square tweak.

1. DO NOT use the autogen restriction lines in the configuration file for buildings and trees if you are using SP1/SP2. In most cases those lines will throw off the priority system and make the sim run/stutter worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the end to all of our frame rate problems.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Extreme-Gaming-PC-In...A1%7C240%3A1318

It isn't, FS relies on processor SPEED, not accumulated computing power. 3.2 Ghz on multiple cores was not the assumption ACES made when developing the core of FSX.

FSX cannot take full advantage of dual SLI, much less quad SLI, and there is simply no evidence that ever-expanding RAM is capable of being utilised by FS. So you are simply wrong.

The only - ONLY - point on which this computer may deliver improved performance is by the adoption of Solid State Drives.

But even then, the implications and results for FSX have barely been touched upon, much less seriously analysed. Frankly, you could spend one fourth as much as still see the same FSX performance. And use the rest of the money for proper flying lessons.

Do try and be sensible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't, FS relies on processor SPEED, not accumulated computing power. 3.2 Ghz on multiple cores was not the assumption ACES made when developing the core of FSX.

FSX cannot take full advantage of dual SLI, much less quad SLI, and there is simply no evidence that ever-expanding RAM is capable of being utilised by FS. So you are simply wrong.

The only - ONLY - point on which this computer may deliver improved performance is by the adoption of Solid State Drives.

But even then, the implications and results for FSX have barely been touched upon, much less seriously analysed. Frankly, you could spend one fourth as much as still see the same FSX performance. And use the rest of the money for proper flying lessons.

Do try and be sensible.

Whew! And I thought I payed allot for my rig!

I believe Snave to be correct. I have noticed that I see virtually no difference in fps when I run mine in SLI or not. Also FSX does not seem to recognize all my ram or extra cpu's. I have seen a performance increase over my last rig (quad core 2.66, 4gb ram & 1gb nvidia card) but not as large as one would expect given I am effectively doubling my old rigs specs.

Slipstream, mine is not an autogen restriction. In fact it is setting it free. With autogen set to max I believe it will display on the order of 2000 object per square (the actual number escapes me at the moment) but I am forcing it to display 6000.

I also get no stutters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't, FS relies on processor SPEED, not accumulated computing power. 3.2 Ghz on multiple cores was not the assumption ACES made when developing the core of FSX.

FSX cannot take full advantage of dual SLI, much less quad SLI, and there is simply no evidence that ever-expanding RAM is capable of being utilised by FS. So you are simply wrong.

The only - ONLY - point on which this computer may deliver improved performance is by the adoption of Solid State Drives.

But even then, the implications and results for FSX have barely been touched upon, much less seriously analysed. Frankly, you could spend one fourth as much as still see the same FSX performance. And use the rest of the money for proper flying lessons.

Do try and be sensible.

Then please point me to your hypothetical PC that will cost approx 1,000 Pounds and deliver the exact perf as the one I suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion.

Just get a Dual Core at 3.3 Ghz and overclock it till 4 Ghz with a good air heatsink or u can try and overclock ur current processor...

CoreDuo processors really behave good with overclocking but i dont own one so searching the internet for ur CPU overclocking skills would be advisable.

That way u wont have to change motherboard and buy a new computer and will improve ur FPS.

As all guys said here... the CPU is the bottleneck and if u can spend a few more buy also a 10.000 rpm hard disk.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Overclocked dual core CPU around 4+ gHz, 4gig RAM, ONE GTX285 level card, one SSD with 64 gig to hold both OS and FSX and a 10,000rpm HD and you WILL match the performance of a £4,000 rig. In fact you could probably achieve that with used components for a lot less than a thousand pounds. I believe Mathijs has mentioned this before, and I concur.

There is a diminishing marginal return on performance from upgrading components that makes FSX completely unsuited for bleeding-edge new technology, or even many established high-performance standards that simply do not supply the cost-effective performance increase desired. Dual SLI and Quad SLI is a perfect example. On the other hand, some of the newest developments migfht play to FSX strengths and minimise the weakness - FSX relies on vast amounts of file swapping as sequential reads and loads are installed to the sim. The I/O of the solid state drive seems ideally suited to this application and should massively improve loading times. But fps remains a function of CPU speed, NOT power.

But don't let me stop you spending £4,000 to prove me wrong. You can do what you like with your own money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly.

Overclocked dual core CPU around 4+ gHz, 4gig RAM, ONE GTX285 level card, one SSD with 64 gig to hold both OS and FSX and a 10,000rpm HD and you WILL match the performance of a £4,000 rig. In fact you could probably achieve that with used components for a lot less than a thousand pounds. I believe Mathijs has mentioned this before, and I concur.

There is a diminishing marginal return on performance from upgrading components that makes FSX completely unsuited for bleeding-edge new technology, or even many established high-performance standards that simply do not supply the cost-effective performance increase desired. Dual SLI and Quad SLI is a perfect example. On the other hand, some of the newest developments migfht play to FSX strengths and minimise the weakness - FSX relies on vast amounts of file swapping as sequential reads and loads are installed to the sim. The I/O of the solid state drive seems ideally suited to this application and should massively improve loading times. But fps remains a function of CPU speed, NOT power.

But don't let me stop you spending £4,000 to prove me wrong. You can do what you like with your own money.

I wish I had 4 Grand to spend on a PC. This is actually good news, for me anyway. I posted a query over at the REX forums asking for tips on up-grading as I really cannot be bothered installing everything again (on a new rig) to be honest. My Mobo can handle any core 2 duo at 65nm, so I just need to find the best one to purchase and then find someone to fit it for me. Any ideas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...