Quad Core

[Mike..]

I just got my Q6600 in today. Quick question as far as this CPU goes. It came with what looks to me like a pretty beefy fan assembly. Any reason why I can't use what it came with versus buying another fan altogether? Don't get me wrong, I have been advised to get that Zelman fan for my CPU and intend to later. I just want to get this rig built and make sure it runs correctly first. If I can use what came with it, it will take a chunk off my build bill and I will only need to worry about getting my vid card and hard drive.



Mike

[NickN]

You can use the one that came with the processor... just dont plan on any overclocking and dont expect temps to be super cool

[Mike..]

Ah I see. So as long as I am running it out of the box I should be fine. If I bump up the CPU, spring for the Zelman. Got it.



Thanks
Mike

[Schnyd]

So on the quad core note i'm looking at a snall incremental upgrade, I'l currently running:

AMD 4400+ Dual Core Brisbane
4 gigs Ram
8800gts 320mb (last years model)
Vista 64

I'm thinking of doing 1 of 3 things and I'm looking for what would boost FSX the most.

Option #1 - CPU change to 5000+ Black. (3.2 ghz overclocked) $129
Option #2 - CPU change to Phenom 9600 Black Edition $239
Option #3 - Video Card change to the new 8800gts 512 $320

In the past I would upgrade my Video Card everytime. But I'm not sure when using FSX which one I will gain the most with.

I have verified that my motherboard will support the Phenom.

[NickN]

your motherboard may support it but be aware AMD Phenom is not what its cracked up to be

They bombed out completely in head to head tests with Intel

and just because a MB says it supports the CPU does not mean you get full support of all features. It just means it will run the CPU. The mB itself must be certified (not just the BIOS, the electronics) to full support next gen processors.



At any rate you want both the fastest CPU and the fastest video card which are matched so I would say the 3.2G and GTS (Option 1+3) will be the best choice price wise 2+3 will work too

but do not expect miracles

for that you need to go to Intel

FSX is a CPU killer... the faster the CPU and more cores the better but it also needs a 512MB (or better) video card too pushing those cores

[Schnyd]

Thanks for the quick reply. I was thinking that option #1 and #3 would be best as well but I was unsure of the Quad core factor.

This is just an incimental upgrade and I will be looking to switch to Intel in a year or so. I may also do nothing at all for a while. I average about 15 fps right now and I would say 90% stutter free. I do notice that Active Sky impacts me the most as far as performance.

As far as AMD goes I've been such a fan of theirs for so long I'm having a hard time coping with the idea of going intel. I've held out for a while but with there forcast for the next couple of years so gloom I can't justify sticking with them much longer.

[NickN]

Thanks for the quick reply. I was thinking that option #1 and #3 would be best as well but I was unsure of the Quad core factor.

This is just an incimental upgrade and I will be looking to switch to Intel in a year or so. I may also do nothing at all for a while. I average about 15 fps right now and I would say 90% stutter free. I do notice that Active Sky impacts me the most as far as performance.

As far as AMD goes I've been such a fan of theirs for so long I'm having a hard time coping with the idea of going intel. I've held out for a while but with there forcast for the next couple of years so gloom I can't justify sticking with them much longer.

Yes, I was hoping for a rabbit out of the hat too, but unfortunately the rabbit died

There is hope but I can not discuss that right now. Keep your eyes pealed around May if that might come into play

As for ASX, use the Windows task manager/process tab and set the Xengine affinity to the 2nd core on the AMD slug.. (uncheck core0 and leave core1 checked in the affinity settings) That must be set every session manually.

That should relieve much of the weather engine drag and make sure you are not pushing the default ASX settings too high. Some of those really nail a system hard

as for cloud textures I would not use anything else but FEX @ 1024x1024 x DXT5

[Gypsy_Baron]

-SNIP-

As for ASX, use the Windows task manager/process tab and set the Xengine affinity to the 2nd core on the AMD slug.. (uncheck core0 and leave core1 checked in the affinity settings) That must be set every session manually.


-SNIP-

A little utility called "WinlauncherXP" will let you setup the affinity for
programs that you wish to have set when you launch them.

It will have a list of the programs you have added and you simply
click on the program in the menu list and it will launch the program
as well as set the affinity. It may have other capabilities but the
affinity setting feature is all that I use it for.

So with the above scenbario, you could have two menu items, FSX and ASX.
Each with it's own affinity settings and two clicks of the mouse and
both programs are launched with the settings you specified.

Beats going into Task Manager , IMO. I also use SeeSaw Pro to set
the affinity of all other running processes. Even those that Task Manager
won't let you change.

  Paul

[raptorx]

Hi Nick, After all the reading I've done I'm still not sure if I want to replace my 3.8 E6850 core2duo with a Q6600 quad core.  I know I will need to overclock the quad core.  

Do you think I will get better FSX performance with a Q6600 at, say 3.2GHz then the E6850 at 3.8?

your motherboard may support it but be aware AMD Phenom is not what its cracked up to be

They bombed out completely in head to head tests with Intel

and just because a MB says it supports the CPU does not mean you get full support of all features. It just means it will run the CPU. The mB itself must be certified (not just the BIOS, the electronics) to full support next gen processors.



At any rate you want both the fastest CPU and the fastest video card which are matched so I would say the 3.2G and GTS (Option 1+3) will be the best choice price wise 2+3 will work too

but do not expect miracles

for that you need to go to Intel

FSX is a CPU killer... the faster the CPU and more cores the better but it also needs a 512MB (or better) video card too pushing those cores

[NickN]

Unless you upgrade the video card too, I would leave it alone.

A quad will improve things, flight load times, scenery loads in turns, allow you to offload more to the last core where the least is being run, etc but in your case you have a video card that is already restricted so unless you upgrade that I do not see the value.

Personally I would but I have money to burn.

And I would say it would not be too hard to have the Q66 running 3.4 fairly easy on a decent cooling solution. 3.6 would require an advanced solution and then there is the PSU. To change the card and go to a quad, abdm clock it all, your buying a "true" 750watt PSU or better, not some thermaltake or OCz junk marketing, it better be a good unit.

[raptorx]

I've got a PC Power & Cooling Silencer 610 watt continuous PSU.  My air cooling is pretty good with a Zalman 9700, At least I think it is, I have an Antec 900 case and there's so much airflow that I have to blow all the dust out every two weeks.

I am difinitely upgrading my video card, I just have to wait till Feb. when the "fixed" cards are released, or go for a 8800GTX now.
(I have money to burn too-although likely not as much as you).

3.2 GHz on the Q6600 is my conservative estimate.  If my cooling is good enough I would hope to push it higher for sure.

Thank you Nick.

Jim

[NickN]

[quote]I've got a PC Power & Cooling Silencer 610 watt continuous PSU.

[macca22au]

If you have money to burn, as you say, why on earth don't you go for the quad of the 6850 or the new 9650.  Or even wait for the 9670? or 9770 (sorry I can't recall the designation) which is alleged to be 4 gigs.

Right now you can do better than the QX6600 so why give yourself the angst with what is rapidly dropping to a medium-high processor when a higher end solution is available.

I also went for a 1000w solution and got rid of the troubles a lack of supply causes - including pink outs.

[raptorx]

'cause I don't have THAT much to burn.  If a $300 Q6600 will perform like a $1000 QX6850, or, with a decent overclock, perform better then my 3.8 E6850, then I can justify the expense to myself.  Especially if I can resell the E6850 for a little $ to offset the cost.  That would be worth it to me if I kept the same fps in the sim with improved load times and a little more smoothness here&there.  That could last me for 6 months or so until I could really save for better.

Of course the better solution is the penryns, I agree.

Right now my's sim's not too bad, I've witnessed the improvement over the last several months as I've slowly built my system up from a E4300 at 1.8GHz and a 7800GTX to the E6850 nicely overclocked.  My video card's not that great (8800GTS) but that'll change soon enough (say-sometime in mid Feb  ;)).  

It looks like SP1 & SP2 really make a quad worth while, even an lowly Q6600 (overclocked!).

-Jim



[quote]If you have money to burn, as you say, why on earth don't you go for the quad of the 6850 or the new 9650.

[raptorx]

So maybe a quad (card), then a Silencer 750, then a card (quad).

[quote][quote]I've got a PC Power & Cooling Silencer 610 watt continuous PSU.