CPU for FS9 & FSX - Q. for CompuTronix (and others!)

martinlest

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2009
137
0
18,680
"Besides being the Intel Thermal Specialist here at Tom's, I'm also the FSX Xpert. :D "

So I read in a recent post of yours! Being an FS nut myself for over 12 years, I hope you can advise.

I am getting a new mini-PC to run FS9 & FSX. Mini, because I work abroad a lot of the year and want to be able to take it as hand-luggage. The specs are pretty good, but could I ask you (or of course anyone else who can help!) about the CPU and GPU?

I decided on an i7-4790K @ 4GHz, but have been persuaded that a cheaper i5-4690K would run FS as well. But then I saw your reply here and now I am not so sure:

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2459111/4690k-4790k-run-flight-simulator-games.html

Is the i7 worth the extra outlay in performance? I fly FS9 mostly, but want the PC to be able to handel FSX with ease too. You say "FSX is also one of the very few titles that takes full advantage of the i7's Hyperthreading feature": but I have always read that FSX can't use hyperthreading??

I want to keep to out-of-the-box clock speeds I think, as the PC will be used in Sri Lanka, where, in the tropical heat maybe overclocking is not such a good idea? Or would the CPU/GPU/RAM o/c with no issues? I am always nervous of overclocking, to be frank...

As for the GPU, I was going with a 4GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 970, but I know, as you say, FS is not so GPU dependent. Would a far cheaper 2GB GTX 960 do almost as well? Can't see much advantage to paying for 4GBs of GPU memory (or is there?).

I'll get 8 or 16GBs of 1600MHz Kingston RAM (16 is overkill I think?). But the supplier only does single sticks of RAM: I either get 1x8GB, or 2x8GB; there's no 2x4GB option.

Two 480GB SSDs & win7 x64...

OK, many thanks for comments.

Martin
 
It your software needs more than 4 threads, and can take advantage of hyperthreading, yes, get the I7.
If your software does not need more than 4 threads, or cannot take advantage of hyperthreading, no, so get the I5.

On the memory, get the 16GB. You will never have to worry about what is using your memory again. There will always be some memory that is available. Running out of memory means that Windows has to stop, write out stuff from memory to the pagefile on the slowest device on your system (Hard drive or SSD), and then reuse the memory that it just wrote out, and at some point, it is then going to need to read that stuff it wrote into the pagefile back into memory from the slowest device in your system... See where I am going here... Just get the 16GB. It is worth it just to not have to worry about it.

Overclocking is optional anymore. The CPU's are so darned fast now, that being able to take a CPU that already runs at or very close to 4Ghz, and over clock it to 4.5Ghz is not much of an increase, especially when you consider the extra power it will use to maintain that speed.

And just in case you were not aware, there is an entirely new set of Intel CPU's being released on Wednesday. Code named Skylake. The I7-6700K will be the new I7, and the I5-6600K will be the new I5. Both will use DDR4 too. Intel will make the announcement and tell us all the juicy details on Wednesday. Those two CPU's will go on sale Wednesday as well, and the rest of the Skylake CPU's will follow in September.
 

martinlest

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2009
137
0
18,680
Yes, thanks, that's pretty much what I thought but I have to check on the hyperthreading, as lots of threads categorically state FSX cannot make use of this technology. For instance, from Flightsim.com:

"FSX doesn't support Hyperthreading at all and users have found that HT should be turned Off"

And FS9???

Running FSX never uses more than 6GBs RAM, together with O/S but I was worried about something I read about losing performance if you don't use dual sticks of RAM..

Still leaves the GPU :) .....

M.
 

martinlest

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2009
137
0
18,680
Ok, at the risk of boring everyone silly (I myself am a bit obsessed with making the right choice of course!), the difference between this:

Processor (CPU)
Intel® Corei5 Quad Core Processor i5-4690K (3.5GHz)
Motherboard
ASUS® H97I-PLUS: Mini-ITX, LG1150, USB 3.0, SATA 6GBs
RAM
8GB KINGSTON DUAL-DDR3 1600MHz (1 x 8GB) - am trying to get 2 x 4GBs!!!
Graphics Card
2GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 960 - 1 DVI, HDMI, 3 DP
1st Hard Disk
240GB KINGSTON HYPERX SAVAGE SSD, SATA 6 Gb/s
2nd Hard Disk
240GB KINGSTON HYPERX SAVAGE SSD, SATA 6 Gb/s

which is my minimum spec, and this, which is my maximum (differences in bold):

Processor (CPU)
Intel® Corei7 Quad Core Processor i7-4790k (4.0GHz) 8MB Cache

Motherboard
ASUS® H97I-PLUS: Mini-ITX, LG1150, USB 3.0, SATA 6GBs
Memory (RAM)
16GB KINGSTON HYPER-X FURY DUAL-DDR3 1600MHz (2 x 8GB)

Graphics Card
2GB NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 960 - 1 DVI, HDMI, 3 DP
1st Hard Disk
480GB KINGSTON HYPERX SAVAGE SSD, SATA 6 Gb/

2nd Hard Disk
240GB KINGSTON HYPERX SAVAGE SSD, SATA 6 Gb/s

is about £200 sterling. I wonder how FSX would run in the cheaper option. Since I hardly ever fly it however, I might be tempted to get that cheaper system and just enjoy FS9 on it (which I assume would run just great with those specs). On the other hand, £200 isn't a huge sum of money to get the better spec. That said, even the better spec will be yesterday's news within 6 months, so...!

And even the cheaper spec is far better than my 'main FS PC' back in the UK (with its i7-950 CPU)!

Thanks again for any input!