AMD CPU upgrade viability

[mav007]

Hi folks

First post, please be gentle.

Long time fan of FSX, and more recently XPX. However, with my AMD x4 965 BE and Radeon 6950 I'm suffering with FPS to the point where I don't enjoy flying without all the bling on screen. I have read numerous threads and reports stating that XPX now supports multi cores and HT, so I was wondering how much an upgrade to the FX-8350 will increase my FPS.

I am not prepared to shell out for a whole new Mobo/RAM/i7 and GPU just yet, so can any please advise if I will notice a significant improvement over my current h/w with the simple upgrade in CPU? If so, will my GPU pose the biggest bottleneck.

Thanks

[sqrt(-1)]

If you want to obtain more framerate from merely a CPU upgrade, be sure it has a worthwhile enough increase in single thread performance.

 

Otherwise, it may be best to save your money for the major system upgrade.  I'm in the same boat with an AMD X6 1090T BE.

 

 

EDIT:  X-Plane renders with a single-thread, so throwing more cores/threads only helps with the flight model, AI aircraft, etc.   This is why single-thread CPU performance, not overall CPU performance, will have the greatest material effect on framerate, assuming the GPU isn't the bottleneck.  When using the fps indicator in X-Plane, pay attention to the relationship between the fps and cpu indications.  As a general guideline, if the cpu indication is above .900 and your GPU is not anywhere near max utilization, you are CPU-bound.  Conversely, if your GPU is running near max output and the cpu indication is well below .900, then you are GPU-bound.

 

You can use either GPU-Z or your Catalyst Control Center to read your GPU load.  I prefer GPU-Z.

Edited October 14, 2013 by SqrtOfNegOne

[mav007]

Thanks √-1. I figured as much. The question is therefore, does an AMD FX-8350 have sufficient single thread performance for X-plane 10 to turn up the graphics to at least medium settings and maintain >35 fps at somewhere like KSEA?

 

FYR, I'm at ~97% CPU in game, and GPU-Z reports load of 30-35% at KSEA on my ATI 6950 with my current gfx settings (every thing turned down most of the way (if not entirely) except texture resolution at max since gfx card has 2GB on board). BTW, running at 2560x1440.

[sqrt(-1)]

You are most definitely CPU-bound.  I'm afraid that framerates > 35 at KSEA with medium or higher settings will be tough with any AMD CPU.

 

TBH, I would save my money for a new fast i5 (4670) or i7 (4770) build.

 

Sorry.

[mav007]

All good, thanks for the advice. Gives me an excuse to buy a new puta with SSD sometime in the future. BTW, Windows 7 or 8.1 for XPX?

[sqrt(-1)]

Both Windows 7 and 8.x are fine.  Should you decide to spring for a new GPU as well, nVidia has traditionally had better OpenGL driver performance for Windows than AMD.

 

However for the Mac crowd, AMD has been the better choice.

 

It's all about the drivers.

[Andreas]

The AMD FX line (latest iterations anyway) have a very good price/performance ratio for regular gaming performance, especially since they are so overclockable (is that a real word?). A lot of new games, like Battlefield, takes advantage on multi--core CPU's but unfortunately and surprisingly, the flightsim development is still heavily reliant on single-core performance. I have an AMD FX-6300 @ 4,1GHz, mostly because I was on a strict budget building my latest PC, if I could afford it I would go with Intel but let's face it, my FX-6300 cost 109€ when I bought it compared to an 200€+ i5 4670k, spent the money on all-round better components instead. But you know, spook that 8350 with some overclocking and it will compensate some of it's single-threaded "handicap".

 

BTW My setup FX-6300, Sapphire HD 7790 dual-x o/c, 8GB RAM runs X-plane quite nicely allthough big airports like truscenery Tampere-Pirkkala does slow it down a bit. I DO have HDR turned on though and that's what eats a lot of FPS even on high end rigs.

[mav007]

I'm now in two minds. Spend $225 AUD on the AMD FX-8350 for a temporary FPS hit of 20-40% (?) that will satisfy my eye candy requirements for 6-12 months and then go buy a brand spanker sooper-dooper puta fully spec'd to god mode status. Or, hold off on the risk that the new CPU won't give me than 20% FPS increase and wait a little while longer and splurge then.

Truly a first world problem...

[sqrt(-1)]

AMD does indeed offer a bargain when building a machine.  But the single-threaded handicap is more than I care to tolerate anymore.  Also. bear in mind the memory controller on the Intel CPU offers much better bandwidth as well.  I've been using AMDs for some time now, both stock clocked and radically overclocked (liquid-cooled).  Henceforth, for my next machine built to primarily run X-Plane, I will only use an Intel.

 

Personally, I would save the $225 to get an SSD for your new machine's system drive.

 

Good luck.

[jimmy325]

Buy a cpu with bigger core size. 

[PhM]

Buy a cpu with bigger core size. 

What is this supposed to mean   ?

 

PhM

[Orcair]

What is this supposed to mean   ?

 

PhM

I think he means higher core speed - which is more useful to X-Plane than # of cores (I believe).