I just set up a little experiment on my own. I setup FSX on another computer I am building using the same equipment except the power supply on the build is an Antec Earthwatts 650 but everything else is the same as my unit. Gigabyte X-48 DQ6, Patriot Extreme DDR2 1200 memory, Nvidia Zotac 8800GT,
The new setup is using FSX with SP1 and of course mine uses Acceleration. All units OC'd at 4.2Ghz. This is set with Fraps so I can get an average fps. All sliders full right, except autogen very dense. Traffic Airline 50% GA 100%, no tweaks in the FSX.cfg. Default FSX no addons except Mills textures.
Three sceanarios-all with identical weather, time/season, aircraft:
One over water at Pago Pago
Two over New York
Three over British Columbia's forested land
Pago Pago New York City British Columbia
Mine(Accel) 35 30 35
Build(SP1) 36 24 38
I don't understand why New York was substantially lower in SP1. I am not even sure what it all proves, at least not yet. I may go and do a test with SP2 vs Accel and see what the differences are if any. Remember these are avgs. The one thing that was a constant was that FSX was very smooth no jerkiness or microstutters in either computer. Higher overclocks(done properly and stable) provide better game play, period....oooooohhhh, uh, I mean simulation.
Ted
It is strange how your fps meter says you are getting 40+ fps but your average is lower with fraps.
