New Computer?

[olderndirt]

With a PSU of 650w, and a 8800 gt or gts or gtx, i spend $300.For now i get 25 fps with mine in FS9 with 80% traffic and with Aerosoft pro airports and pmdg, level D and so on

Excuse me for butting in.

[Flight Ace]

Taken just now on my i7 system:




As you can see, all 4 cores were being used...

They all averaged out at about 80%, Core 0 (1st core) being the most stable


That was with autogen set to VERY DENSE, over London, with FPS locked at 30, no stutters WHATSOEVER...

I dare you to try to get that performance with the same settings as mine (not just autogen, but everything else) on a dual core

SubZerO,

I cannot resist a

[SubZer0]

Flight Ace,

I neglected to mention that I'm using the FPS limiter tool for FSX, and have it set at 30fps. For it to work correctly, the FPS in-game has to be set to unlimited. So, although the game shows it set to unlimited, the FPS limiter I use is limiting it to 30fps, allowing for a smooth, stutter-free flight locked at 30fps

Had I not been using the FPS limiter tool, those shots I'm sure would have exceeded 40 FPS without trouble.

On the first two shots, your dual core managed to get 21.5 fps and 31.5, both on unlimited. The i7 would have pulled 40+ on each of those shots set to unlimited, with the right video card and memory.

[757200ba]

I dont think im confused.YOU ARE.
See the graph on the first core and compare it with others.
I know, you might not see, that the first one is stable and the others go to a high and then down.
Your photos dont mean anything.They just show that one of the cores works more than the others like it was said by one of the posts.Try on Heathrow with full traffic.Not over London at 2000ft where autogen had made all the work.Thats why you have 41 fps and then they go down to 31 and 21fps as you fly low.And i believe that sometimes you have like 70 to 80 fps, at 20000 ft or something like that.And could you give me a reason why to set fps to unlimited?When your eyes only see 24, and you want your pc to go in highs and lows?And if you use 30 limit, why it goes to 41 and 45???.
There are not CONFUSED people here.Just "poor curious" trying to help.WITH AVERAGE MACHINES
TC

[SubZer0]

[quote]I dont think im confused.YOU ARE.
See the graph on the first core and compare it with others.
I know, you might not see, that the first one is stable and the others go to a high and then down.
Your photos dont mean anything.They just show that one of the cores works more than the others like it was said by one of the posts.Try on Heathrow with full traffic.Not over London at 2000ft where autogen had made all the work.Thats why you have 41 fps and then they go down to 31 and 21fps as you fly low.And i believe that sometimes you have like 70 to 80 fps, at 20000 ft or something like that.And could you give me a reason why to set fps to unlimited?When your eyes only see 24, and you want your pc to go in highs and lows?And if you use 30 limit, why it goes to 41 and 45???.
There are not CONFUSED people here.Just "poor curious" trying to help.WITH AVERAGE MACHINES
TC

[757200ba]

PLEASE BE CAREFULL WITH WORDS YOU USE.
ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE WRONG.AND YOU ARE THE ONE THAT CANT READ.YOU STATE YOUR POINT AND DEFEND IT.WICH I THINK ITS CORRECT.I RESPECT THAT I DONT THINK I HAVE OFFENDED NOBODY.AND IF YOU READ THE POSTS YOU COULD SEE THAT ON THAT POST and i said that my "know how" on multi cores is limited.I just stated what i read.Never i wanted to offend nobody.Or being agressive with " WHERE DID YOU GET THAT IDEA FROM"And when you talk (and this you can take to the bank) DONT GENERALISE.Talk for your self and dont try to speak for anyone, after all we all want to learn.
My statement about eye fps was..movies are at 24 fps and they look good if you could have your sim like that you would be happy, so you would not need more. If miss understood, sorry.The human eye is not only limited to those 24, i just used as an reference (if miss understood, IM SORRY)

And let me tell you this.You have a WONDERFUL machine, and its very good material, some very expensive.To the point that some of us cant reach (but that is MY problem), but believe me in what I TELL you, after spending the money I would feel a bit frustrated having Heathrow (default) with 25fps at a 1000ft.And i will tell you why.From where i stand i see its the default Airport ,and i can count 3 airlines (BA, Virgin, BMI),and if at a 1000 ft you get 25fps, how many you get at the gates ( this is a question, not being ironic).Once again, I tell you.I dont know much about multi core, but i can also can tell you, that there are many guys saying that its not worthy. Now to a person that have MONEY, that doesnt matter they buy what THEY read, and they work their way up to get good configurations.I never said that your cores would not work on FSX, what i said and Flight ace said the same.FSX will USE 90% one of them and 10% the others, and I ASKED if that was a patern, if it was always like that.And i think everybody that read that could think: Ok if in a quad core, only one core is used 90% and the other 10% are used on the other cores ( this is not my statement, but i find it very interesting, because i want to learn) what is the advantage ( FOR FS not other aplications).
So that leves the questions:
Should i buy a quad core for FSX? Even knowing that the other 3 cores will only use 3.3333 ( yes i used the calculator)of the work load?
Or there is something else that is going on?

Sub Zero if i ever offended you in anyway, or ANYBODY here, IT WAS NOT MY INTENTION, AND IM SORRY ALL IF I OFFENDED ANYBODY.

LEt me even tell you this my fs machine is a dual core at 2.8 i dont even know what is the true speed on that. Is it 2.8+2.8=5.6 (no calculator used

[SubZer0]

TC,

I highly respect that last statement. I am now clear about your intentions in this thread. Thank you, and no hard feelings on either side.



Firstly... the human eye FPS issue is not really fully understood. I can tell you, however, that in FS I notice a huge difference between 24 and 30 fps... I've tried it lots of times, believe me!

In other games, such as Crysis, or Call of Duty, 30 fps is considered very low and very choppy gaming... 40+ however, is seen as smooth game-play. As you read on that link, it depends on so many things...

Yes, having a quad-core is a big gain over a dual-core. You, Flight Ace and I are all correct that the last 3 cores don't work as much as the first one (on a constant rate), but the point is that they are still there and they are indeed working at all times. Windows Task Manager isn't so accurate on showing core usage, so that picture I showed earlier is just an idea, but it is very incorrect. In reality, the numbers of core usage are much, much higher.

On a dual-core, I believe it is the same. The first core always works more than the second core, but the second still works. On a quad-core, you still have 2 more cores than a dual-core, and they DO make a difference in performance. It's the same thing as having 2 more workers.

As for that image I took over Heathrow, I also get the same FPS (26) at the gate and while taxiing.

As for your dual core speeds... it's neither. It's just basically having 2 processors both working at 2.8ghz. They both work separately.

[757200ba]

The reason i use 20fps is, that i used unlimited before.Sometimes i had them like 80 to 90 fps in some parts or views.But as soon i changed the views, the fps would drop to 29 to 45.When caming from those values, i could see those stops.Now (this is my experience) when set to 25 evenwith those drops, believe it or not i cant see the diference.
So on a 28GHz dual there are 2, 2.8 working?Ok that i can understand.I will dig deeper anyway.
Once again many thanks.

By the way have you tried this, well this is for duals, but anyway i discover this in a forum, try on yours i will try on mine.

"I've read this from a free download this morning, so I thought I'd post it on here for those that dont know.

Dual core processors: FS9 allegedly doesn

[Flight Ace]

[quote]The reason i use 20fps is, that i used unlimited before.Sometimes i had them like 80 to 90 fps in some parts or views.But as soon i changed the views, the fps would drop to 29 to 45.When caming from those values, i could see those stops.Now (this is my experience) when set to 25 evenwith those drops, believe it or not i cant see the diference.
So on a 28GHz dual there are 2, 2.8 working?Ok that i can understand.I will dig deeper anyway.
Once again many thanks.

By the way have you tried this, well this is for duals, but anyway i discover this in a forum, try on yours i will try on mine.

"I've read this from a free download this morning, so I thought I'd post it on here for those that dont know.

Dual core processors: FS9 allegedly doesn