FSX & SLI

[ATI_7500]

I know, but you had all the overclocking in between.


Gonna keep on testing 'though. And I'm wondering how Nick is doing with his experiment...

[Black ZR-1]

If everything went well he should be finishing up writing his thank you speach  :D

[justpassingthrough]

I got an email from him.

He said the idea worked surprisingly well and much better than originally anticipated. He said even with formula results that were very promising, without trying it on many systems he would not know if the results he got would be consistent, especially with those who think they can just load

[justpassingthrough]

Your settings are working very well, Black ZR-1.

Exception: TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=360


But I'm not there yet...not yet...

Don

[Nick N]

It will be interesting to see if what NickN posts may lock you in closer than trial and error

It might


I dont have time to post the writeup, but since a picture says quite a bit I will post some snags from the test run. I augmented the frame number so it can be seen



Keep in mind, this was done on a 3 year old motherboard system with an AGP video card (special G71 core AGP 512 card) and even when frames dropped, it was hardly noticed

















I

[richardd43]

Will someone please pass the aspirin bottle?

[Black ZR-1]

[quote]It might


I dont have time to post the writeup, but since a picture says quite a bit I will post some snags from the test run. I augmented the frame number so it can be seen



Keep in mind, this was done on a 3 year old motherboard system with an AGP video card (special G71 core AGP 512 card) and even when frames dropped, it was hardly noticed

















I

[ATI_7500]

Interesting indeed...very interesting.


And seeing the relation between stepped up settings and an increase in system performance makes me regret that I didn't look for my FSX's "sweet spot" before overclocking.

Would've made things so much easier...

Ah well, back to the FSX.cfg then I guess. :/



P.S: Black ZR-1, could you do me a favor and give [url=http://www.majorgeeks.com/3DMark06_d4935.html]3D Mark 2006[/b] a go on your system and post back your result?
Settings would be 1280*1024, no AA+AF, and all graphics settings set to "high performance" in the NVidia drivers.

If there really is a formula-ridden relation between hardware capabilities and FSX settings, I'd like to know if I could raise my settings according to the percentual difference between your PC and mine.

[Nick N]

Interesting indeed...very interesting.


And seeing the relation between stepped up settings and an increase in system performance makes me regret that I didn't look for my FSX's "sweet spot" before overclocking.

Would've made things so much easier...

Ah well, back to the FSX.cfg then I guess. :/



P.S: Black ZR-1, could you do me a favor and give [url=http://www.majorgeeks.com/3DMark06_d4935.html]3D Mark 2006[/b] a go on your system and post back your result?
Settings would be 1280*1024, no AA+AF, and all graphics settings set to "high performance" in the NVidia drivers.

If there really is a formula-ridden relation between hardware capabilities and FSX settings, I'd like to know if I could raise my settings according to the percentual difference between your PC and mine.

The test system is my grandson

[ATI_7500]

Okay, so is there actually a true and honest benchmark? What about stuff like SuperPI for the CPU?

I would say based on the fact that you are CPU 'up' and video card 'down' that you will not be faster in FSX than Black ZR1 but either equal or less.

In the terms of clocking, yes but generally "down"?

and as miltest pointed out, high velocity blur is one of the known issues with FSX at this point in time.

Oh, okay.

EDIT: If you will list your system specs and the speed/timing that the components are running I will post a set of numbers for you to try with recomendations, using the method I did for the test tower I am working with.

Okay, consider me your lab bunny then.


I guess CPU-Z will do...

http://home.arcor.de/justasoldier/component_speeds.jpeg

http://home.arcor.de/justasoldier/curre ... clock.jpeg


Nick, I can't comment on traffic sliders, since I'm running only add-on traffic for both airlines and GA.

[Nick N]

Okay, so is there actually a true and honest benchmark? What about stuff like SuperPI for the CPU?

I would say based on the fact that you are CPU 'up' and video card 'down' that you will not be faster in FSX than Black ZR1 but either equal or less.

In the terms of clocking, yes but generally "down"?

and as miltest pointed out, high velocity blur is one of the known issues with FSX at this point in time.

Oh, okay.

EDIT: If you will list your system specs and the speed/timing that the components are running I will post a set of numbers for you to try with recomendations, using the method I did for the test tower I am working with.

Okay, consider me your lab bunny then.


I guess CPU-Z will do...

http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o183 ... speeds.jpg

http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o183 ... _clock.jpg

SuperPi and other similar types of tests are fine since they are strictly a number crunching benchmarks and results can not be skewed. Threre are also a few other tests out there (names escape me right now) which are much better for 3D render judgments.

3DMark was designed to work the gamers heads and that competition mentality they have. It was designed to allow the hardware manfactures quite a bit of open doors in ways to screw with the results.


I will run some calc's based on your system and post them back later but for now I have to run

[Nick N]

Nick, I can't comment on traffic sliders, since I'm running only add-on traffic for both airlines and GA.

Hmmmm

May be an issue since what I did was use the default system to set things up. Had I done it any oither way the results could not be universal because every add-on plane is different. Once dialed in then adding the traffic becomes easy to set up because you already have the sim elements dialed in and traffic numbers would be the only influence on the system at that point.


We will try it the way you have it set up now. Post the traffic slider numbers you are using so I can take those into account.

[ATI_7500]

Code: Select all

AirlineDensity=85
GADensity=30
FreewayDensity=0
ShipsAndFerriesDensity=25
LeisureBoatsDensity=25

Freeway is okay. I can live without the cars.

[Nick N]

Code: Select all

AirlineDensity=85
GADensity=30
FreewayDensity=0
ShipsAndFerriesDensity=25
LeisureBoatsDensity=25

Freeway is okay. I can live without the cars.

No no no

You have to set things up right and cars are part of that equation

This is not about removing elements of the sim to make room for others, its about load balancing the system correctly, then making minor changes to dial it in.

Road traffic is always 10-15% in all my setups. (15 inthe one above) Removing polys removes the balance the sim needs. You will not have cars present in all the flights so by applying them and using KSEA and flying over the Seattle area to test what you are doing is making sure when other loads come into the equation and heavy automobile traffic may not be part of the scene, the sim has the reserves to render what is being thrown at it.

Most sliders will be set up as they are shown in page 4 of this thread with exception of air traffic, autogen den and the terrain mesh. Everything else is all in the FSX.cfg numbers.

That traffic slider you posted may throw all this off. I have to think about it. I may not be able to dial things in using the add-on traffic. We may need to reduce that to a 'neutral' value. Also, I have no way of knowing what the add-on planes may do no matter what the sliders are set to.

I will post back later today.

[justpassingthrough]

Will someone please pass the aspirin bottle?

You and me both.. here: