John Bosch Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 My pc is not quite top of the line but close. The important bits are a Q6600 overclocked to 3GHz, an 8800GT 5112Mb graphics card along with 4GB 800MHz memory (sitting on 835MHz because of the o/c of the FSB). I only have a single 320Gb 7200rpm drive though. I run at my monitor's native 1680x1050 with quite reasonable settings (basically as suggested in the AU XXXX user guides). In open country it sits pretty close to the 24fps I have it locked at. However, the moment I hit town things slow down. Even the Launy area has me down to 10 to 15fps, a bit city goes into single figures. What would be the most likely cause of that? My guess is it's the single unraided drive. It gets hit pretty hard over cities. Could the non-GTX card be causing some issues though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butch Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I have the pretty much the same system as yours, Q6600 @3.2 and a 8800GT. I have found that autogen is the culprit.... I have cut autogen trees to 1000 and buildings to 50 per cell. I know that's low but doing an app and getting low fps kills the whole flying bit for me more that the reduction in autogen. You can try this with Hobart as well, fly over the hill that separates Hobart proper and the airport and you will notice a distinct reduction in fps. The ultimate test is flying over a major city like Sydney. Slide show.... Two other areas I have found challenging even with my reduced settings is Cairns and Darwin. Butch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted October 21, 2008 Author Share Posted October 21, 2008 Agreed with Hobart. It was actually there this afternoon that I finally got jack of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryT22 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Hi Wirraway, I did the flight from Hobart airport over the city and back. My frame rates dropped from my preset 26 fps to about 21-23 and instantaneously to about 17 but recovered almost straight away to to 21-22 but usually 25-26. This is with Autogen set to dense and no ground shadows. Definitely not a slideshow really no perceptible jerks. Quite satisfying. Even over YMML it runs quite acceptably. The only thing I notice is the autogen trees and objects can noticeably take a little while to pop up but this is quite acceptable. I'm swivelling around with TrackerIR usually. I don't usually worry about FPS because jerks are usually not a problem. My system is a Core2Duo 8400@3.0Ghz (supposedly overclocked for performance using the ASUS utility), 8800GT 512Mb video, 4GB Kingston Hyperx DDR2 1066Mhz, ASUS P5KSE FSB 1333Mhz, XP SP3, single 500GB 7200 rpm Samsung HD. As you don't seem far off my specs I'm a bit surprised that you are having these problems. I might add that I run at my monitor's native resolution of 1280 x 1024 (maybe this or the faster memory is the difference). Hope this helps. PS: I'm heading off to the airshow at Nowra on Sunday. Can't get enough of these airshows. Gary T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John York Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 I know its against the grain but with some of these processor and memory intensive sceneries fram rates can be improved by using the 'Unlimited' setting. Additionally,If you have Vista 64x, you should get relatively smooth flight down to about 10 fps. Hope it helps. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted October 23, 2008 Author Share Posted October 23, 2008 Thanks gents. I don't think it's the resolution as dropping mine doesn't make a lot of difference (other than the usual non-native, not quite right look it gets). Memory could be the issue. Mine is only clocking at 835MHz rather than 1066, so maybe. It's about the only real difference given you don't have raided drives either. I also tried unlimited frame rates and found it did get a little jerky at times. Locked at 24fps seems smoother. Since I do run Vista 64bit I can go down to 10fps with not too much hassle but anything below that becomes challenging to control. Gary, I won't be going to Nowra since I inadvertantly booked a flying lesson for the 26th . I can't really move it either because of my on-call status and availability don't match up well with what's available at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted October 26, 2008 Author Share Posted October 26, 2008 Hmm ... set frames to unlimited and I now get maybe 20fps over Canberra. It reaches 50 or so in the country side but the whole thing is a little more suceptible to other processes. Like I can tell when Active Sky is doing its thing now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krono Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Hi Ive been writting a similar thread.. It was suggested to use a program called AlacrityPC...(alacritypc.kensalter.com) The program sped my system up by 15 to 20 fps you can only give it a go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted October 26, 2008 Author Share Posted October 26, 2008 Unfortunately, Alacrity does almost nothing for my PC frame rate wise. I have it running pretty lean as a matter of course. I even went so far as using Alacrity to shut absolutely every running app down that I could get away with. It didn't make much difference other than taking 3 times longer to start FSX (because of all the stuff that needed shutting down). I'm really thinking hardware is my bottleneck. I just need to work out which bit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMcIver Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 I had a very similar setup (Q6600@3.6, 4GB, 8800GT, Vista64). I upgraded the video card to a gtx260 and have seen a bit jump in framerates, though weirdly only when I run FSX under alacrity. Video card plays a big part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted November 5, 2008 Author Share Posted November 5, 2008 Thanks TM. I did some playing last night ... 1) Pushing the CPU further from 3GHz to 3.3GHz made almost no difference to frame rates (however, I did have to wind back my memory a step to do this). 2) Putting the CPU back to 3GHz and reducing memory clock speed from 835MHz to 800MHz (it's DDR400) made almost no change in frame rates. 3) Using nHancer I up'ed (and removed) anti-aliasing and ansiotropic a bit with no perceptible change in frame rates. 4) I reduced resolution from 1680x1050 to 1280*800 with no change in frame rates. Hmm ... what's left other than my single hard drive? One thing to note is that 2 cores (2 & 3) of my Q6600 run flat chat while FSX is running and the 3rd (core 4) runs at about 70 to 80%. The first core is not used by FSX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
}SkOrPn--7 Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 What process ave you got running in the back ground that maybe pinching some horse power because a system like yours should be just cruising along nicely without over stressing the settings. How is your OS for tweaks or is it stock with all the Microsoft's over the top bling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted November 8, 2008 Author Share Posted November 8, 2008 I don't think it's a process thing Scorpion. Using Alacrity I shut things down to the bare minimum I could get away with and things didn't improve. I renamed my FSX.cfg this , lmorning, let FSX rebuild it and re-did the Orbx recommended tweaks and things improved by about 5 fps. I now get about 20 to 22fps over Canberra at full settings so not too shabby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
}SkOrPn--7 Posted November 8, 2008 Share Posted November 8, 2008 Wirraway I understand could you just check/try launch FSX and click the settings tab on the left and down the bottom click the Customise button and do the following...... Take the tick out of "Lens Flare and Light Bloom" Target frame rate at 60 because anymore than that on a LCD screen doesn't do jack due to a LCD screen on most systems are 60 Hertz or if yours is 70 then the target is set too 70. Go too the Scenery tab and take the tick out of "Ground scenery Shadows" Go to the Weather tab and move the "cloud draw distance all the way too the left. Now read this and follow the settings to the letter with custom weather for better performance and realistic looks. http://forums.flightsim.com/vbfs/showpost.php?p=1174291&postcount=27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted November 13, 2008 Author Share Posted November 13, 2008 Thanks Scorps. I've been through most of that in the past. Maybe I'll have to give it another shot at some stage. Interestingly, last night I pushed my CPU to 3.4GHz and the framerate over Canberra moved from 14-18 to 20-24 (locked at 24). Not a bad improvement I think! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John York Posted November 15, 2008 Share Posted November 15, 2008 There is one other thing I picked up recently in another forum. I had been running Orbx on 'unlimited'. However, in view of what was said, I locked it down to 70 fps and I do think it has made for a little improvement because it seems to have smoothed the counter out somewhat. I mean, the highs are not so high and the lows are not so low, so generally, the flight is smoother and I think the lower end of the frame rates are higher simply because the processor is not struggling at top wack for most of the time trying to attain the unattainable. It might help a bit Wirraway. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted November 15, 2008 Author Share Posted November 15, 2008 Yeah, I keep it locked on 24. Unlimited it goes up into the 30's in open country but I feel every little stutter when things like Active Sky do their stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted November 25, 2008 Author Share Posted November 25, 2008 Hmm ... further playing! Autogen seems to be the biggest culprit. On dense over Canberra I'm down to 12-18 fps, on normal I'm 20-24 (locked at 24). So what mostly governs autogen processing - CPU, GPU or HD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John York Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Wirraway Running your Q6600 at 3.4Ghz might have improved your performance but I do hope you've enough cooling as over a period it could damage your CPU. I only run mine at 2.8Ghz and have upped the power to 860 (?) or thereabouts but have fitted a big heat sink in addition to the standard fans that come with everything. Earlier in the thread you said you had overclocked to 3.3. Can moving it to 3.4 make that much difference or did you do something else as well? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted November 25, 2008 Author Share Posted November 25, 2008 Heh, heh ... no it's back at 3GHz now. It does have a Scythe ninja 2 on top and the temp at 3.4GHz hit just over 50°C. The core voltage was a little too high for my liking though. The overclock did make a difference but I'm not going to leave it running there! I can run at 3GHz, not exceed the rated voltage of the 6600 and not have the temperature go over 40°C so that's as far as I'm going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krono Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Hi I dont know if its applicable with Intel but with AMD you can specify which cores to use for certain programs. I havnt neede to try it myself as it hasnt been needed but it may be worth looking into for yourself. The other thing is... you have mentioned Active Sky in your write ups, is this just the online updating of the weather or another program as I could not find any info when I tried to google it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted November 26, 2008 Author Share Posted November 26, 2008 My FSX runs on cores 2, 3, & 4. 1 is kept for everything else. You can see it in action two. Those 3 cores run pretty hard while FSX is running. Yes, the Active Sky I mentioned is the weather updating program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John York Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Those temperatures are quite good Wirraway, especially in a Country like Australia where the ambient is so much higher. There you are Mark if you're reading this. I told you it could be upped to 3Ghz with no repercussions but you chickened out from doing it for me with all the usual excuses as usual, cost me a lunch and went home after wasting your time messing up my FEX settings. Thanks friend! Anyway, Wirraway, at least you've got your machine working well by the sound of it. What I would like to know is if you're over a main town or city and even in one of the larger airports, do you get a bit of a stagger because the frame rate drops and hovers around 8 or 9 maybe? I ask because our systems are almost identical and while I'm satisfied most of the time, well, you can always try for better can't you? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piotrek_K Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Since your HDD is 320 gb 7200 rpm, I suppose it's seagate - first, check if SATA 300 operations are enabled (jumper settings on HDD), factory shipping is limited to 150 GB. Second, download latest drivers for MB and GPU, cost you nothing and do the trick. Try to overclock your CPU further - whats your stepping ? (Q6600 at 3,6 ghz on air is possible). Later you can think of further steps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted December 2, 2008 Author Share Posted December 2, 2008 Over Canberra I now get 20 to 24 fps. Autogen is the biggest killer. I run it at normal now. At dense the frame rate drops to 12-18 over any city of a decent size. Piotrek, it's either Seagate or Samsung. I bought two at almost the same time, one for this machine and one for my older machine. I'll have to have a look at whether SATA 300 is enabled! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piotrek_K Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Try also to download CPU Z (it's freeware) and take a look at revision, if it's G0 than further overclocking, with a decent cooler, will not be a big problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bosch Posted December 2, 2008 Author Share Posted December 2, 2008 It's G0. I pushed it to 3.4GHz but, to be honest, the improvement wasn't worth running the CPU up there and it wasn't totally stable. I'm happy where it is for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John York Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Ok - that's decided me. Thanks for being my Beta tester Wirraway. I'll keep mine at 2.8 Ghz and maybe in a year or two get a more up to date one. In the meantime, the Q6600 seems still to be as good as it gets even though others have superceded it. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piotrek_K Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Overclocking isn't easy, there is many aspects you should take care of - proper cooling, voltage etc. - but it's worth (at least in my case). If you have any questions, just e-mail me. greets, Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John York Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Thanks for the offer Peter but it's already overclocked from 2.4 to 2.8 and working well. But we always want more don't we? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.