Segar 9850 and FSX

Hi guys,
Im a FSX fan,not much into other games.Those that use this beast for fsx,how well does it go.Seen benchmarks,but playability is what i want to know about.No i dont expect Full slider settings,but hope for reasonable
eye candy.Im about to wire my money,get a bit scared at times when i read comments like,want to change my fans because they are to noisy and dealer had to swapp out both Vid cards.As i live in NZ warranty returns to the states will cost me US$500 each time.
Thanks and appreciate your comments.
Les

 

FSX favours higher clocked cpus. the faster cpu, the better. my qx9300 @ 2.73ghz gets an avg of 28-30 fps. with my t9800 @ 3.13ghz i get 35-40 fps.

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

Well would that mean that the 9250 (i.e. i7 CPU) would be better suited for FSX users or just a higher clocked CPU like a T9900? Of course with the QX9300 and an unlocked bios (which we hear is coming) could be a lot faster than 2.53.

 

fsx taxes only 2 cores. the sp1 that came out for it only uses the remaining cores to load textures, hence no major performance boost with cpu's with more than 2 cores. it's better to stick with a higher clocked dual core.

 

I also think fsx favours higher clocked Cores as well. In a comparison of a 2.0 Ghz Q9000 Core2Quad Vs a 2.85 Ghz Core2Duo, the higher clocked Core2Duo got better results. I will be running the benchmark again once I find my Fsx CD because I will be doing a reinstall and SP update again just to make sure of the results. Both of us were expecting the Quad to perform better after the patch but as mentioned, it only streams textures so that must be why lol.

The benchmark we used was indicative of real game performance because it used a flight route on autopilot that had a lot of stuff you would go through if playing the real game.

More details of the benchmark can be found here:

Q9000 Vs Core2Duo

 

Hi Laptop,
Ive read your very interesting threads and thanks for your all your efforts in benchmarking in games.Im wrestling over my purchase of a 9850 with regards to what cpu to buy.I looked at your benchmarks of Quad versus c2d and fps in FSX for quad seemed acceptable.i was favouring Quad(2.0ghz) in so much ,trying to build in some future proofing.I dont want to replace this computer for quite a while(would possibly upgrade the cpu though).im really buying this for FSX,dont play much else in the way of games.What are your thoughts on my choice based upon what ive just said.
Thanks again and would appreciate yours and anyone comments.
Les

 

Htwingnut, Mtness and myself all contributed to those benchmarks, indeed it was very interesting and I was actually very surprised how well the 2.0 Ghz Q9000 performed.

That Fsx benchmark we did was designed to be a worse case scenario by the person who created it.

When I play fsx I get frames of over 100 fps in actual game, at the moment it is getting 149 fps and I saw frames up to 175 fps all on Medium - High. At all high settings I still get excellent fps from 80 - 125 fps.

What makes a huge impact on the fps in Fsx is what type of plane you are flying with the more simple ones giving better performance. As mentioned in another thread, I will be running the Fsx benchmarks again from a fresh install just to make sure all is well.

Since you already have a good gaming laptop, your best bet will be to wait until the W860CU is out since the mobile i7 should perform better than all of the current Core2Quad as well as having a better hardware design internally, not to mention the intelligent Core usage.

 

Thanks Laptopnut,
I see you have the Q9000 2.oghz core.It seems to give you good results in FSX.No my current laptop is 7 years old witha intergrated card,so its utterly useless in FS9 or FSX.I like the big screen that the 9850 has so im down to choosing between The dual core or Quad.Which one would you choose if you
were buying a 9850 and useing it mainly for FSX.
How much of an advantage is it to have SLI?.
Thanks Gain
Les

 

A higher Clocked Coe2Duo seems to give the best performance in Fsx so if that was the only game you will be playing, it might be better to go with one of those. If I was only going to be playing fsx, that's what I would go for.

SLI is a big advantage (especially at higher res) and is one of the best ways of future proofing your gaming laptop. You can get a lot of extra performance from SLI, although it will vary from one game to another, you can get anything from 10-40% performance increases, sometimes a lot more and sometimes a lot less. Some one who has used SLI might be able to give you more info though.

As far as I know, SLI won't benefit Fsx though.

 

Thanks Laptop and others for your help.Ive decided to go with the dual core as fsx is main interest.Going for SLI does give me a bit of future proof and may even draw me into some of the Games that exist.Ive tried to build in some future features and i can upgrade to quad further down the track when
Quad optimised programs become more the norm.
Rgds
Les

 

I ran my fsx benchmarks again after a fresh install, before and after the patches too, all medium-High at 1680 x 1050:

Before SP1 patch:

Min: 7, Max: 32, AVG: 18


After SP1 patch (used a Core for texture streaming):

Min: 20, Max: 49, AVG: 38


After SP2 patch:

Min: 21 , Max: 55 , AVG: 36

Compare my results to Htwingnuts 2.85 Core2Duo CPU that got:

Min: 28, Max: 66, Avg: 45

It looks like you are much better of with a higher clocked Core2Duo. I guess the game was initially designed for 2 Cores and maybe no amount of patching will make that much difference.

The W860CU is shipping in October though and the price difference will be very similar to the current NP8662 so if that was me, I would wait for that model instead. The mobile i7 is likely to own both the Q9000 and the 2.85 Ghz Core2Duo as well as the fact it will be using the GTX280M instead of the GTX260M. Not to mention more upgradeable.

 

Completely agree there, I would wait as well - i7 will own the C2Q or C2D.
LED screen also.

 

Thanks again guys,
However as much as im tempted to wait,i did want,
18" screen, Raid or 3 hdd capabilities, SLI and last but most important to me was that i cant really afford to wait till late October or later as the Exchange rate for USD to NZD is geat at the moment USD.72=NZD1 usaually it hovers
around 55 cent mark.You see we have officially come out of our Recession.
So it looks like i may just go with the Dual Core 9850.Im sure ill be happy with it compared with the Dinasour i have now.(ECS IBuddie 2.8ghz P4)

Kagey:How long have you had your 9850,are you unhappy with it?.

Hi Laptopnut,
Ive been rethinking what you said about the new W860cu.How do you think
this would run FSX.I looked on one review site and it gave Crysis on High
setting and 1920x1080 fps of 25.But gave the 9850 SLI a rating of 41.
does it look like I7 mobile will make SLI history.
thanks and look forward to your comments
Rgds
Les

 

Considering that the architecture of the CPU has been improved as well as the dynamic and ''intelligent'' clock rate of the Cores, I would expect really excellent performance in Fsx with the i7.

As an example, if you were playing Fsx you would have 1.73 Ghz on each Core but the i7 would use the number of Cores necessary depending on load, so instead of being limited to the base frequency of 1.73 ghz, you could instead get a higher clocked Dual Core (Turbo Boost).


A single Core can be overclocked dynamically to 2.8 Ghz+ but I am not sure what 2 Cores would be clocked to, it could be anywhere from 2.26 Ghz - 2.8 Ghz, maybe some one else who knows for certain will post.

Consider that my Q9000 gets great performance in Fsx in both the benchmark and in game, I wouldn't worry at all about the mobile i7 since its 1.73 Ghz will outperform mine.

Also consider that the 15'' model now has the option of the GTX 280M which will improve gaming performance even more.

Regarding SLI, since the majority of games are heavily GPU dependent, SLI will usually give you more performance than a higher Clocked CPU with a single GPU. I see SLI being in the future for a very long time and improved upon. A lower clocked CPU with SLI will (potentially) outperform a higher clocked i7 / Core2Duo / Quad with only a single GPU in a GPU intensive game.

Just like how a 2.0 Ghz Core2Duo can perform just as well as a 2.85 Ghz Core2Duo in games with the same GPU.

 

I just enabled DX10 in Fsx and surprisingly the frame rates almost doubled in that Fsx benchmark although it seems fraps can't record Dx10.

 

Hi ,
Thanks for the update Laptopnut.Your inputs been valuable.ive done more reading and it looks like id be better off with the W870(17" version).However
i very confused.I was after a lappy with Raid 0.I dont know what your thoughts are on that.But i ve been told by Justin at Xoticpc that it not avaiable in either model.If you look on Eurcom and CIZMO site they list in there configeration page the option to Have raid 0 setup.
Guess i will have to wait a little longer till it sreleased to find out whos right.
Great news about a boost in fPS in fSX with Dx10.Hope it translates in the Game.Its a pity we cant have I7 mobile and SLI together,this would really sing.If i go with this as against the 9850 i think performance will be lower but as you say it will still perform pretty well and i will have some future proofing.
besides what i can work out ill save some dollars.Money not really a problem,as good performance in FSX is my goal.
Just to recap,whats your thoughts on Raid.Is it worth it.
Les

 

I have never used Raid and I am guessing that you want it for the potential speed boost as opposed to data redundancy. I have only ever used a single 500GB 7200 RPM compressed with NTFS native compression and never had any problems with speed. I am sure some one who has used Raid will give their opinion.

Regarding the DX10 fps boost, I have noticed this in other games too and since I get much better performance in game than the actual benchmark, I would expect to see this improvement in game too. Don't forget that the benchmark is just like in game but on autopilot flying through different and very detailed landscapes for 5 mins.

 

My guess on the raid option would be removing the CD/DVD bay and using that area as your 2nd drive in the Raid array. It's possible on some of the machines so if it's on the W8x0CU series then that's how you do raid (if there's only one real HDD slot) but at the expense of using an internal CD/DVD drive as you would never be able to remove without messing up your Raid array.

 

It looks like dual core Turbo Mode bin is only 1 less than the single core Turbo Mode bin(meaning if its a 2.8GHz 4 core, its a 2.66GHz dual core). But the quad core update patch in FSX along with SMT parking in Windows 7 might wreck havoc versus running 2 core and HT instead. But who knows how the actual performance differences are?