Intel vs AMD for FSX

[BuzziBi]

I have pondered a lot why I did not get mutch better performance after I bought a new computer.
My old Acer T160 Specs:
AMD Athlon 64 / Athlon 64x2 / Sempron (939) with FSB up to 1.0 Ghz
Memory: 4GB
Video: An old nvidia 500 Mb with one VGA and one DVI, run with 2 monitors. (don't remember more about it :p )
With this, I was able to run FSX. Not quite top performance, but my requirements were not so high.

However, I have now started building my own cockpit and my requirements are higher.
So I bought a new computer. :p

New pc specs:
Motherboard: asus p8z68-v pro
CPU: Intel i5 2500
<tbody>
Clock Speed
3.3 GHz


Max Turbo Frequency
3.7 GHz

</tbody>
Grafic card: 2 x Geforce GTX550 Ti
Memory: Corsair DDR3 4x2 GB
750W Power supply

New PC running FSX with 4 monitors for outside view.
A keyboard controller from an old USB keyboard, for connecting buttons and switches.
And now I'm trying to implement the Arduino One to view and adjust the course and heading, among others :p

The old Acer is running 2 monitors with the radio stack one 1 monitor and instrument panel on 2. monitor. Software from Peix Software.
3. A old laptop running gps map software.
All connected with FSUIPS on FSX PC and Widefs on the others.

The problem is that I am not happy with the performance. I had a look at the Task Manager, and the CPU is working hard, with peaks. One tread is showing higher workload than the other tre.
Viewing sometimes does not work on the 4. monitor, showing only a black screen. Loocking at the aircraft from outside sometimes only shows the propellers!
FSX Display Settings redused to medium high. As turned higer, only results in lack of memory errors and chrashes :(

I had a look at the internett and found this:

AMD FX 8350 vs Intel 3570K vs 3770K vs 3820 - Gaming and XSplit Streaming Benchmarks | Tek Syndicate (http://teksyndicate.com/videos/amd-fx-8350-vs-intel-3570k-vs-3770k-vs-3820-gaming-and-xsplit-streaming-benchmarks)

I wonder is the intel prosessor just rubbish? (I'm thinking of processors for a similar price.)

[ColinBradbury]

Its a common issue that FSX just can't run well on 1 PC and more than a couple of monitors. You would do better to spread the load or reduce the number of outside views.

[jonesthesoftware]

Hi BuzziBi
I'm assuming you've connected all those monitors directly to your PC?
graphics is always the heaviest load on a PC and splitting screens over multi monitors connected to 1 PC is a killer.
I believe most guys do the same as I, and that is to use a Matrox TH2GO to drive 3 monitors for the outside view. Your PC will see this as 1 graphic output which considerably reduces the load.
regards
geoff

[BuildABoeing]

So 1 TrippleHead2Go will cause less impact on performance than connecting 3 monitors directly to the graphic card?
Even though they deliver the same output pixel-wise?

/Peter

[BuzziBi]

Well, the question really was, if there was anyone who had input on Intel vs AMD?
Not about what external equipment you could buy to compensate for the lack of hardware power. ;)
A little apropos in this context may well also be FSX itself.
I found a innteressang link here: Bojote's Tweaking and Tuning tool for FSX (http://www.venetubo.com/fsx.html)
Did a test just for fun, and the results were pretty amazing.
The workload on the CPU treads changed significantly.
With the old fsx.cfg the number one tread showd approximately 80% load, while the others varied from 20/30% to 100%.
With the new fsx.cfg, the number one tread at about 30/40% while the others range from about 30 to 90%.
At the same time the graphics were considerably better!
Now with all four monitors in use!

[jonesthesoftware]

hi Peter
yes 1 th2go is effectively only 1 hardware graphics circuit to be fed data from the cpu rather than the 3 or 4 circuits of the graphics card which all need feeding data over the bus for the onboard gpu to process to send out each graphics output.
regards
geoff