Bit of advice before buying this new rig

[mejjo1989]

Hi all,

 

I've had my current system for quite some time now. I want to push FSX just a bit further, And get better performance, I also want to have a rig that i can look at using for many years to come and have the easy option to upgrade parts. My current machine is limited to upgrades due to the PSU, Motherboard etc..

 

I currently have an i7 4790 @ 3.6 ghz turbo to 4.ghz. Nvidia GTX 960 2gb, 8gb ram. One of the things i was interesting in is having the option to overclock, my current CPU can't offer this.

 

The new rig i'm looking at getting is: i7 7700K @ 4.2ghz turbo to 4.5ghz, I have a question about the turbo, is that pretty much like overclocking it to 4.5? I assume you could overclock it a bit higher than that? The place i'm looking at buying from offer a 10% overclock increase on it, So is that 10% on top of the 4.20 or 4.5?

 

It comes with a MSI GTX 1070 8GB. 16gb DD4 ram.

 

I understand FSX is very dependant on CPU, Will i see a big improvement in smoothness and fps with the new machine?

 

I'll pop a link for the new machine too: https://www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk/system/VR-Ready-Deal-GTX-1070

 

I appreciate any advice given. Just want to gain as much help as possible before spending the money on it.

 

P.S Someone did say buy the parts and build it myself, But i have zero experience with that and when i calculated the price of the parts to do it myself it wasn't much less than the price offered on the website above. They also are giving a few freebies and i get cashback on the motherboard :D

[mejjo1989]

I was also told to spend loads on a SSD just for FSX. Am i right in thinking that there is zero improvement with fsx performance i.e stuttering, fps.. The only difference with a SSD is load times?

 

I can put up with fsx loading times on a HDD, but if there are performance increases with a SSD i might think about that.

[N99WB]

My 500 gig Samsung 850 EVO speeds up my FSX performance.

Your system should overclock to 5.0 ghz no problem.

The Kingston SSD appears to be the weakest part, but still 5X's faster

than the HDD. Filling the M2's with a pair of SSD's would be the optimum.

 

I don't overclock and would want some kind of assurance that it

wouldn't void my warranty because I notice "Overclocking Service" is

unavailable on this model.

 

N99WB

[lnuss]

Am i right in thinking that there is zero improvement with fsx performance i.e stuttering, fps.. The only difference with a SSD is load times?

 

No, FSX uses the hard disk a lot while running to load scenery and for some caching tasks, at the very least, so some stuttering might disappear, depending on the cause on your system. I'd not expect a higher fps, but improved smoothness is likely (perhaps not perfect, though).

[napamule2]

$1600 and no optical drive? Bogus. For that money you could build a much better rig, with sound card, optical drive, 800 watt PSU, etc.

 

Turbo boost is automatic, depending on load (ie: when scenery is loading). But at 4.2 mhz your boost is what you will notice and want. Not SSD. And DON'T overclock past your boost speed - you'll just mess things up AND the 'sweet spot' is around 4.2 anyway. Go past that and you WILL induce ALL KINDS OF PROBLEMS!!!!

Chuck B

Napamule

[loki]

Turbo Boost is automatic, but isn't quite the same as overclocking. As Turbo Boost increase the frequency it may disable cores or limit the speed increase to keep the overall CPU temperature within design limits. Typically at max boost it will be down to one core. When overclocking, which is perfectly safe if done correctly, all cores are pushed to the same speed. Do make sure to have a good cooling system and understand what you are doing first though.

 

You should see a decent increase in performance, especially if you can overclock it to 4.5 GHz or higher. Some have been able to push 7700K to 4.8 GHz or more, although it does depend a lot on luck and the specific CPU you get.

 

As noted above, SSD will improve load times and potentially reduce stuttering, but won't help frame rates.

[CRJ_simpilot]

Turbo boost kicks in when there is a huge demand on the CPU. I ofen see my CPU go to 3.9 GHz with its turbo boost when I play FSX. I use CPUz and Core Temp to look at these values.

 

I would get an SSD. Perhaps around 256 GB is all you need. Then get a regular HDD platter at 1 TB. I would use that for other program installs and things that don't need the speed of the SSD.

 

As to whether you will see a FPS improvement I don't know. Your current CPU is pretty decent. I can't find the i7 7700 at CPUBoss to compare single threaded performance so I could see what type of gain you may see. Ah, looking here I see a marginal single threaded gain. You could visit the overclock.net forum and get guidance on how to disable two cores and try to gain as much single threaded performance as possible. FS is a single threaded App unfortunately.

 

All in all, looking at the single threaded performance gain I don't think it's worth it in my opinion. You may get 3 more frames if that. There are things you can do in FS to increase performance. If using high res clouds, decrease the res. Turn off moving cars or cars at airports, decrease the AI A/C, Turn down some settings in the Sim.

 

We're pretty limited at the core speed of CPUs now. I doubt if we could ever get past 5 GHz. It would have to be made of something else other than silicon to get higher single threaded speeds. We are seeing more cores added though. I think now we have 8 cores? Or was it 12 or some crazy thing? Unfortunately, FS does not use multiple cores. if it did we'd really see a performance jump. I think P3D uses multiple cores though.

[loki]

FS does not use multiple cores. ... I think P3D uses multiple cores though.

 

With SP1 and later FSX does make limited use of multiple cores for loading terrain and scenery data, though most of the processing is limited to one core. Whether or not one sees a benefit does depend on the type of flying you do. Multiple cores can be useful for running other applications in the background though.

 

As for the number of cores available in one CPU, AMD currently has 16 core processors and Intel is rumored to have and 18 core model on the way.

[N99WB]

loki,

His system comes with water cooling, SSD and HDD.

The greater than 4.8 overclocks and stability issues I've read were on air cooling.

I agree that "luck" plays a huge part. Especially over 5Ghz.

 

I don't overclock.

 

N99WB

[TheFamilyMan]

First the bad news: don't expect a huge gain in FSX FPS with that new build. It will be better, but only somewhat.

 

The good news: If you like lots of cloud cover, a 1070 with that 7770k will really make a big difference. Also, higher levels of AA can be used without performance problems.

 

Their 10% OC is on the base clock, 4.2Ghz. Consider that with turbo enabled (no OC), all four cores will run at 4.4 in FSX. Paying for an extra .22 OC is not worth it IMO, and in FSX it will barely, if at all, be noticeable. Now if they'd get you a safe 4 core 4.8 OC, by all means go for it. Ignore the comment above about overclocking. Done correctly, it messes nothing up. But if done incorrectly there can be problems, up to the point of serious damage. BTW I've been running my 3.6ghz 4770k at 4.5ghz for 3 years now with zero problems.

 

Once you use a SSD with FSX, there is no going back. Waiting about 20-30 seconds to load is something you can't live without once you've tried it, IMO. Though getting an expensive highend M.2 SSD is super overkill for FSX, again IMO.

 

The overall FSX "bang for the buck" of that upgrade is small over what you current have. That's been the problem with FSX in the last 3 years. It's a hard call.

[Rupert]

That looks like a pretty solid unit to me. DDR4 RAM is much faster than almost any DDR3 regardless of quoted speed. The difference is the RAM gets and sends info much faster with the DDR4 format. (Think USB2 compared to USB 3.) And the 7700K is very tolerant of overclocking if it is properly cooled.

 

Having said that, I would go ahead and spend a few pounds for their coolant rather than using plain water. As in your auto radiator, raw water isn't nearly as good a heat conductor as chemically enhanced coolant water.

 

IMHO SSD is the only way to go for solid enjoyable FSX performance. It helps hugely during flight loading. And also does help with flickering or " pauses" in flight if you're running a lot of add-on scenery.

 

Yes, you could build that rig for about 25-35% less yourself. But they seem to be using standard high quality hardware which you can work with on the aftermarket. So you're not nearly as likely to locked in as when buying many "name brand" boxes.

 

Good Luck! And please advise as to how it works out.

 

Michael