MYTHBUSTERS

[NicksFXHouse]

[quote]Careful.. or you guys are gonna push me back to my original arguments.. over a year ago

[NicksFXHouse]

[quote]Or (and you guys will have to do the math)....

Let's say we have $700 for comparison sake..

What ratio gives the best REAL performance ?

A $300 CPU with $400 worth of RAM WAY

[Brett_Henderson]

I never give much thought to computer prices .. And I'm not a Yuppie either (I'm retired at age 47 and blow all my money flying  ::)  ) .. I just hate to waste money on computer stuff. It's not a budget breaker to spend $3,000 on a computer,, but it's foolish to be doing it every year or so  

If FSX takes a $5000 computer to be enjoyed.. then that's what I'll spend.. I just want to get the most for the $$$.. That's all..

[Viper22]

Cool find Nick, lots of good information there.

@Viper, you really should change your sig

Cheers
Cameron

I know, but the stupid profile page always crashes whenever I try.  Im just too good for it

[congo]

[quote].. And I'm not a Yuppie either (I'm retired at age 47 and blow all my money flying

[Brett_Henderson]

Tropics near glaciers ?  Is that some new weather phenom that the global warmers have dreamed up to confuse us  

I'd say, "If you're ever state-side, I could use a good navigator".. but alas.. the latest band of hand-wringers might have outlawed general aviation by that time  :'( .. so I just might be moving to Australia and take you up on that offer..

[congo]

[NicksFXHouse]

And I'm not a Yuppie either (I'm retired at age 47

I tried that... The first year was great because I went around the world but finally went nuts after 2 years and decided to do a 6 month on/off routine. It keeps me from spending all my money on the boat and also keeps me busy so I dont go stir crazy.

[Brett_Henderson]

Hey.. here's a quick question.. kinda related..

I just got FSX and have found that I can get it running quite playably (Athlon64 3700 @ 2.6ghz   eVga 7800GT @ 512/1200..  1GB 3200 )...  Autogen is out of the question if I want to fly near airports (have AI at 50%)..

Will another 512mb of RAM make a difference ?

[congo]

Yes, it will make a difference. It will kill off dual channel memory mode and drop your memory bandwidth considerably. Not a good thing. Also, if the timings of the 512mb stick are slower than the presently fitted ram, you'll get a further decrease in performance if your timings are set by SPD in BIOS, or possibly a system crash if your timings are tweaked higher than the added stick will handle.

Adding system ram to modern rigs that support dual channel memory needs to be done carefully, ensuring that all the ram is compatible enough to maintain the dual channel memory mode.

Your manual will show you how to maintain dual channel mode and it will show a diagram of the module installation for that mode.

Some mainboards, due to chipset limitations, will suffer somewhat in performance if more than two memory slots are filled. On these boards, it's better to fit 2 x 1gb modules rather than 4 x 512mb modules for example.

Brett, you need to somehow determine which hardware, or combination of hardware, is holding you back in FSX, or, if indeed one of the in-game settings is profoundly affecting your display.

It's no good chasing up 2gb of expensive new ram if the CPU or Video card is actually the culprit.

I am a little confused now as to the actual hardware requirements for a smooth FSX experience, the coming days and weeks should clarify that as users report their experiences. Suffice to say, I'm a little surprised that you say autogen is out of the question for you Brett, that does not bode well for many a simmer with lower spec than yours.

[Brett_Henderson]

Yeah.. I'm learning again..  Honest  :-[  I did know about the dual channel mode.. It just slipped my mind in this refelxive search for playability. I mindless denial, if you will.

I experimented with some more RAM.. and you hit every scenario EXACTLY. Slower performance and even boot failure. I had this Corsair RAM tweaked to perfection (2.5, 3, 3, 8  T1).. and with the hardware and O/C-ing I listed above.. I could quite literally max out every setting in FS9 and get seamless performance.. with only a slight burp or two around O'hare (because I have it so loaded with PAI that AI planes are waitng for spots to park or vanishing in lines of 5 to take off). I don't like to throw frame rates around, so we'll just say that anything below 16fps is when it gets burpy... anything over 20 and it's seamless.

Anyway let me share my experiences with the relevant settings.

resolution;  1024x768x32
bi-linear filtering on (AA on the card)
Texture resolution: high
no lense flare or light bloom or shadows
LOD radius: small
Mesh complexity: 39
Mesh res: 76m
Texture res: 5m
Water: mid1.x
land details checked
scenery complexity: dense (any less and your airport buildings are poor quality)
Special effects: medium
cloud distance: 60mi
cloud deatails: medium
road vehicles: 0%
Airline AI: 38%
GA AI: 70%
Airport vehicles: medium

Now.. I have to decide if I'm going to fly little or large airports. Flying small airports, I can run autogen at "normal" and those settings give a nice experience..

Flying in and out of Columbus (KCMH) , autogen must be off completely.

If I want to go into a scenic war-zone (O'hare).. not only can there be NO autogen..  the AI has to be off too.

[Brett_Henderson]

I'm starting to wonder if there's a sane man's desktop computer in existence that will run FSX maxed out..

These 64 bit CPUs are worthless on XP.. and so are the dual core CPUs (when it comes to FSX)..

Will the combination of two CPUs handling data in 64 bit chunks even be able to do it ?

Isn't that gonna be Vista's claim to fame ?

Will FSX on Vista be able to avail all that hardware magic ?

[congo]

Thanks for sharing those settings with us Brett.

I thought FSX was going to fully support dual cored cpu's as well as SLI  ???

64bit cpu's are not worthless on XP, they allowed a doubling of memory bandwidth compared to the 32bit cpus, this is what pulled AMD out of the bandwidth  stone age and made them so competitive with P4's.

[Brett_Henderson]

So.. as is.. with XP.. a dual-core cpu would be a significant upgrade for running FSX ?
?

And I was under the impression that a cpu capable of handling 64 bit chunks..  HAD to have a 64-bit O/S running ?

[congo]

I can't answer the first question accurately for you, because I'm not sure. Does the documentation that came with FSX show dual core support? As far as I was aware, it should implement it.

Even if you did buy an X2 cpu, you may not experience any (or little) benefit from the upgrade if it's the graphics card that is holding you back. I haven't been following FSX's progress since release, I'm generally a slow adapter to all things new in hardware and software.