-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
txnetcop
Charter Member
I had to kick the Phenom II 940 up to 3.8 to get the performance I was getting. With the HD4870 it was just fine. I ran very high textures most settings full right.
I still believe the i7 Core is a better buy for the future of FSX flying. If the budget won't bear it the higher Penryns do just fine and the cost is almost comparable to the AMD Phenom now.
Ted
I still believe the i7 Core is a better buy for the future of FSX flying. If the budget won't bear it the higher Penryns do just fine and the cost is almost comparable to the AMD Phenom now.
Ted
H
harleyman
Guest
F
fcfcfc
Guest
Thanks everyone. Really useful info.
I have not been able to make up my mind between FSX and XP9. Is there an inevitable compromise to run both? Sorry to bring up XP in a FS area. Am I right to think that FSX is CPU bottlenecked and XP9 is GPU limited?
Would the PII or i7 do well for both?
I have not been able to make up my mind between FSX and XP9. Is there an inevitable compromise to run both? Sorry to bring up XP in a FS area. Am I right to think that FSX is CPU bottlenecked and XP9 is GPU limited?
Would the PII or i7 do well for both?
F
fcfcfc
Guest
I just noticed a new 3.2GHz black edition.
For MB, Asus has this OC tool that would allow tweaking without reboot. Is this helpful or should I stick to Gigabyte which everyone seems to favour?
What I have in mind is:
AMD 955, HIS 4870 1GB ICE, CoolerMaster RR UV8 fan, Zalman ZM750HP, Kingston HyperX 1066 8GB. The Gigabyte MA790GPDS4H is no long available here for some reason. So thinking about an Asus 790FX type instead. HD will probably be the Caviar Green.
For MB, Asus has this OC tool that would allow tweaking without reboot. Is this helpful or should I stick to Gigabyte which everyone seems to favour?
What I have in mind is:
AMD 955, HIS 4870 1GB ICE, CoolerMaster RR UV8 fan, Zalman ZM750HP, Kingston HyperX 1066 8GB. The Gigabyte MA790GPDS4H is no long available here for some reason. So thinking about an Asus 790FX type instead. HD will probably be the Caviar Green.
txnetcop
Charter Member
Asus 790FX is just fine...so is this MSI 790FX-very easy to OC to 4Ghz, but these dang Phenoms get hot quick so ya really need to kick that CoolMaster on full when gaming
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130223
Ted
F
fcfcfc
Guest
Thanks Ted. I just realised that MSI is an AM3 board. Would the ability to use DDR3 make a noticeable difference on the AM3 board? The vendor here would only sell DDR3 in triplets - can you put 3 on the board or do they have to be in pairs? (sorry, showing my tech ignorance again)
H
harleyman
Guest
F
fcfcfc
Guest
Sorry for the confusion; let me rephrase... The RAM comes in 3x2Gb triple channel kits, but there are four slots on the MSI board. Do I have to find dual channel kits or can I just install all three and leave one slot empty? Or am I only allowed have either two or four slots occupied?
F
fcfcfc
Guest
Ted, just reading your comments in another thread about the MSI x48 board, are there similarly complex issues to stumble a novice like me with the MSI 790FX AMD3 board and its DDR3 slots?
The MSI website also made it sound really easy with the automatic maximum overclocking tool - is it really that easy?
The MSI website also made it sound really easy with the automatic maximum overclocking tool - is it really that easy?
ryanbatc
Charter Member
The Phenom II is no match for a clocked 940/950 Core i7
People who say they are getting 35 fps smooth probably aren't flying NYC with max scenery and high AI traffic. A few guys with clocked i7's in the 4.0 - 4.5 GHz range are getting about 25-30 fps with very high settings but still non payware aircraft.
But if you're on a budget (which means dont expect fantastic fsx performance) you could go with the Phenom II
People who say they are getting 35 fps smooth probably aren't flying NYC with max scenery and high AI traffic. A few guys with clocked i7's in the 4.0 - 4.5 GHz range are getting about 25-30 fps with very high settings but still non payware aircraft.
But if you're on a budget (which means dont expect fantastic fsx performance) you could go with the Phenom II
txnetcop
Charter Member
OK I build computers for living as well as manage a physicians network. I will finalize with this. If all you want is FSX. I have run AMD Phenom 955 with an AM3 790X motherboard as fast as the fastest i7Core940 in FSX only. Both were clocked at 4.2Ghz. FSX is not too picky about whether you run AMD or Intel as far as speed is concerned. I have built over 50 systems for FSX and not one Intel has run away completely from AMD...that only applies to FSX. In other games I would rather have Intel chipset X48 or i7Core x58 motherboards and CPU!
Ted
Ted
idancesafetydance
Charter Member
Hmm... really? My phenom 940 Runs FSX on the highest settings, at 1920x1080, no CFG mods (exept the one that makes it use 4 cores) and I am at 35-40 FPS SMOOTH, and yes... around the Seattle area. around NYC it hovers at 20. I also have a fairly weak 9600GT OC. SO AMD isn't THAT far behind. A new Octa-core CPU is in developement by AMD. Montreal they call it. Also AMD is to release new 6, 8,12, and 16 core CPU in the near future. This info has come off of server PC news sites.
H
harleyman
Guest
In responce to the above post...
This is an old thread when the new phenoens just came out and were untested...(for FSX)
txnetcop
Charter Member
Much as I love AMD they will never catch up to Intel...they are nearing bankruptcy now as I write this. They do not have the deep pockets that Intel has. I work with the guys from Advanced Micro Devices in Austin as they are regular visitors to TechCorp...they are closing down the Austin location soon to reign in expenses. No AMD is currently as fast as the Intel Core i7 to date.
Ted
BTW the new 945, 955, and 965 run FSX extremely well but in 90% of all other games they lose to Core i7 and now even some core i5
Bjoern
worst developer ever
Maybe AMD shouldn't have gone shopping for a certain canadian video card manufacturer a few years ago...
kilo delta
Charter Member 2015
Maybe AMD shouldn't have gone shopping for a certain canadian video card manufacturer a few years ago...
I reckon that was a very good move on their behalf.
txnetcop
Charter Member
I reckon that was a very good move on their behalf.
I agree or they never would have gone on to create the Spider Board and Dragon Board. ATI would never have been able to create the HD4890 or HD5000 series GPUs. AMD will survive in bankruptcy but it will take a while to get back up to speed. They survived the big downsize in 2001-Austin lost two labs there. I don't remember how many employees were laid off but many came back to work just a few months later. The same will happen here.
Ted
idancesafetydance
Charter Member
oh really? I have been looking at the 965 myself. I have heard good and bad. I guess I'll have to look into it.
Really the only reason I don't use intel anymore was the old "pay vendors to not sell AMD" thing Intel pulled. But I'm building an Intel rig for my buddy and I must say I'm kindof impressed. But AMD is good for those like me who don't have a ton to spend on just on part. My whole entire PC costs less than an I7 LoL.