ASUS ROG G752VY i7-6700HQ Performance

Hello fellow simmers, it's nice to be back,

A few members from late last year/early this year may remember me posting inquiring the performance of i5-3230M. After getting an overwhelming reply of having to get a new system, I did. Now, I have an ASUS G752VY, here's my specs:

i7-6700HQ (yes, it is 2.6Ghz same as my last one, but CPU-Z shows me that it consistently runs between 3.09 to 3.29 Ghz)

GTX 980M

32GB RAM

Windows 10 64-bit

(For other ASUS ROG laptop owners, I am running the optimized defaults in the BIOS)

 

Now here's what's curious. I would've thought 0.5 Ghz is a alright improvement. I mean, I'm not claiming that this is a top notch system, it's definitely not, I am aware of that, but with the same settings, I only got ~5 fps improvement. Details are here:

NO traffic whatsoever

LOD: Large (untweaked)

Mesh Complexity: 60 (tried 50/55, no difference)

Mesh Resolution: 2m (for 3D taxiways)

Texture Resolution: 15cm (for 3D taxiways)

Water Effects: High 1.x

Scenery/Autogen Complexity: Normal (didn't even try dense and above, no way this system can handle that)

Special Effects Detail: High (didn't notice any difference with low and medium)

Clouds Coverage: Maximum

Clouds Draw Distance: 60mi

 

With that in mind, here's my performance. With Orbx Global+Vector, PMDG 777 and FSDT Vancouver in Orbx weather 5 with REX 4 Texture Direct + Soft Clouds, I'm getting about 16 fps sitting still and 8 fps rotating. Is this normal, I would've thought a 3.2 Ghz CPU can do a bit more. If I recall correctly pvarn told me that "some are disappointed by their 3 Ghz CPUs", but I cannot remember clearly, apologies to him if I remember incorrectly. This is also what drove me to the forums.

This performance above is with the (I think) best combination of Kosta's tweaks here here. Great guide, very clear and profesionally done, but personally, I've not been getting anything other than 0-1 fps improvement.

 

Having tried AVSIM lately and not getting much, I thought I'd try my luck here and see the opinions of much more knowledgeable members.

Thanks in advance for your contributions.

A bit of an update to what I wrote above.

I failed to mention that the above performance are measured with DX10 and Steve's Scenery Fixer. I recall someone telling me that DX10 gives better fps and I switched to it on my old pc. When I got this PC, I went straight into DX10 without thinking.

After posting, I deleted my cfg and got a new one. Before starting my test, I forgot to set it to DX10. In a surprising but pleasant twist, FSX not only ran faster in DX9, but it ran SMOOTHER. The only tweak so far is HIGHMEMFIX, I will continue tweaking to see the results. Meanwhile, if anyone's got any opinions, suggestions and criticisms (I don't mind them because I am very un-knowledgeable in hardware), please post them. I intend to keep this going in case anyone else with low-end systems decide to take a look, it doesn't seem like there's many tweaking posts for low-end systems, they are all aimed at 4.0 Ghz CPU and can run vanilla FSX at half a billion frames per seconds.

^

Yes, that is a bit of an exaggeration, but you know what I mean.

It's normal for that laptop.

Reason: fsx fps depends purely on cpu ghz. Your cpu is 2.6

 

With those addons you need around 4ghz cpu. (or overclocked a bit higher.)

 

you also need something that does not run at low power settings to save batteries and prevent overheating. So no laptop with a battery and lacking ventilation, but a desktop with a normal PSU and a couple of decent fans.

Well, as for the CPU I understand, but it can and I can confirm it does run consistently at 3.2 max turbo frequency. That is still not 4 I know, but thanks for informing me about the general requirement of CPU speed. As for power setting, battery and cooling, all I can say is it's got enough to keep 3.2 Ghz going. If you look here http://www.asus.com/ca-en/site/g-series/. Granted, there are promotions involved, but I can testify that most of this is true. I never try to run things like FSX and X-Plane without power plugged in and everything set to "Prefer maximum performance".

I'm not denying everything you are saying, by the way. I'm just clarifying things I probably wasn't clear about. Thank you for your advice. If anybody knows about tweaks/settings to improve fps in anyway, please share it here. Again, I intend to keep this as a thread where people with low specs can find info on how to run their sim at an acceptable fps, because not everybody with a passion for flying owns a PC that can send astronauts to Mars.

OK, I just spent two days tweaking. I have put in Bufferpools, AffinityMask and HIGHMEMFIX. Running at about 23 fps mouse on with the same setting except the mesh complexity is now 100. Satisfied with it, but will keep tweaking to see if it gets any better. Hopefully someone else also finds some good ones to use.

This was how hardcore I took this. Same setting I mentioned in the previous posts, with mesh at 100. I took it to FlyTampa's Toronto in the same weather, sat at the RWY 05 end and looked at ALL the buildings in Toronto, and got 14 fps with the mouse on in the same weather. That is a bit unexpected with DX9. So I guess my current suggestion for people with a similar setup to try DX9 first. I'll see what I get rolling down the runway.

Here the interesting quirk about Toronto. No matter which runway you take, as you accelerate, there will always be a DECREASING amount of objects view from the VC, so it will stay smooth despite the lower frame rates. But 14 fps with ALL the objects there are, that's still pretty impressive for this system.