• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

FSX Users - need help with cpu decision!

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Anticus

Registered
Joined
Feb 7, 2001
Current machine:
929 a64 @ 2.3ghz
6800 128
1gig 333 ddr
sb audigy gamer
xp pro

FSX is a slideshow in anything but the alaskan tundra ;)

I understand from reading different forums that FSX is super CPU dependant, and that the l2 cache in particular is important.

Would upgrading to an opty 165 do the trick or should i fork out the cash for a whole new core 2 duo & mobo?

I found an opty 165 for $160 shipped. I'd pay more for a mobo/processor combo obviously, but i wouldn't want to pay much more than $100 over that.

Thanks
-Anti
 
Opteron 165 is the way to go if you're overclocking the 939. I'm assuming you're talking about the FX series. While they are good cpus, I wouldn't fork over the extra cash for one.

IMHO a Core2 setup would be better, but it's up to you as whether it's worth the extra money. Less you need the extra power you should be happy with the 165.

And why do you have DDR333 ram? You're machine would run much better with DDR400. Might be a good time to upgrade to better ram if you're overclocking.
 
Thanks...

Yeah, it's long past due to upgrade my ram...

Long and short though, for FSX, which is all i'm really concerned with for the time being, i've heard of people using old 5900 series video cards with uber new cpu's and getting 50fps... whereas people using cpu's similar to mine and 8800gt video cards getting 10-15 fps...

Not sure why this game is so cpu dependant, but from all reports it is...
 
With FSX u mean Flight Simulator from Microsoft.

Just look here how much performance u can expect with BEST cpu out there: http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_093d.html
That mean that fastest cpu CANT run this game fast enough on insane settings, let alone a slower one. Thanks Microsoft for optimizing it :rolleyes:

FSX is NOT optimized to dual-core/quad-core cpu, so if u wannt better performance, just set down settings in game, because game is totally dependant with Cpu and not Gpu. (All others game depend on GPu)
 
All other games being GPU dependent is a bit of an exageration..

the top averge overclock on air on the fastested CPU's platform (E6600) beats its clock by 700mhz, yes thats 3.6Ghz. So judge the review accordingly.
 
greenmaji said:
All other games being GPU dependent is a bit of an exageration..

the top averge overclock on air on the fastested CPU's platform (E6600) beats its clock by 700mhz, yes thats 3.6Ghz. So judge the review accordingly.

Most other games, or 90% of games depend of gpu and not cpu, only some simulation depend more on cpu.

Yes u can overclock ur cpu, but u will still gain 2-4fps on insane settings, and that will NOT make much diference while playing. That game is ahead of its time, and its not optimized to use dual-core cpu.

But still if he only set his settings to low-medium, he can play it easily with his rig.
 
Since FS-X is not multithreaded, dual core will not help one bit. You should get around 2.8GHz on the 165, so expect around a 20% framerate increase compared to your A64 @ 2.3GHz.

An overclocked Opty 165 can expect to get similar framerates to the FX-62 shown in this article:
http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_093b.html
technology_093a_001.jpg technology_093a_002.jpg
http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_093c.html
technology_093a_003.jpg technology_093a_004.jpg

According to these results, 'medium high' settings would be the ideal balance between framerate/image quality for an o/ced Opty 165. Then again, it'll be the same in the case of your A64 @ 2.3GHz. With a 2.8GHz FX-62 getting 50fps, at 2.3GHz you should still get around 40fps.

The next level 'High' settings has a significant performance hit and even an X6800 only gets 35fps! :eek:

You'll need a heavily overclocked C2D (around 3.5GHz) to maintain 40fps at this level. Even an Opty @ 3GHz would not break 30fps in this setting, and under 30fps is generally 'slideshow' esque for most people. ;)

You may be interested in the upcoming C2D E4300, which should be an excellent overclocker for only $163.

Xbitlabs got their sample to 3.42GHz ( http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e4300.html ), if you crave higher framerates for FS-X this may be the best option in your case.

Of course this would mean a new mobo and DDR2, but it would be the cheapest option where you'll notice a 'significant' performance increase over your A64 @ 2.3GHz.

A C2D @ 3.4GHz should almost double the framerate of an A64 @ 2.3GHz in FS-X.
 
Last edited:
greenmaji said:
Those scores are with the ATI Radeon X1950XTX :(

Yeah but FS-X isn't GPU limited, it's CPU limited.

Just look at how little the framerate drops from 1024 x 768 -> 1920 x 1200.

Unlike most games, in FS-X, CPU speed is more important than GPU speed.
 
Thanks epsilon! I think that's exactly what i'll do... I'll be breaking out in hives waiting for their release though ;)
 
Anticus said:
Thanks epsilon! I think that's exactly what i'll do... I'll be breaking out in hives waiting for their release though ;)

Just don't get caught up in the price gouging... they are already on pre-release sale but are charging $30 over the $163 pricetag. :bang head :mad:
 
I think the Xeon 3050 is actually worth the extra investment, stronger clocker.
 
Back