

Although I’ve lamented the gradual downfall of the flight simulator with a number of readers via email, culminating earlier this year with the news that Microsoft laid off the entire Flight Simulator team, I continue to receive requests for the three-year old Flight Simulator X.
With Service Packs 1 and 2 installed (and DirectX 10 enabled), we set out to give the notoriously CPU-hungry test one more showing. Alas, with the frame rate cap disabled, the FRAPS results from a straight flight at the same time/date kept coming back with inconsistent scores. Therefore, we set the game to run at its Ultra High Quality pre-configured settings, which include a frame rate target bump from 15 to 20 fps. This is the way the game would be played, and it’s going to illustrate a very important point that we’ll circle back to in the conclusion.
For the most part, all of these configurations deliver excellent baseline performance in FS X. When a platform falls short, the addition CrossFire or SLI easily brings it back up to 20 frames. The GeForce GTX 285 is the only exception on the Phenom II platform, as it doesn’t support SLI. This is a flight simulator, though. For most of its pre-defined configurations, Microsoft specifies a cap of 15 fps. The fact that we’re able to achieve the Ultra High cap across this wide range of configurations should help assure the sim fans out there that any of these modern setups are ample for the aging title.
- Introduction
- Bringing Out The Big Guns
- Test Hardware And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky
- Benchmark Results: Resident Evil 5
- Benchmark Results: Far Cry 2
- Benchmark Results: Left 4 Dead
- Benchmark Results: Grand Theft Auto 4
- Benchmark Results: Crysis
- Benchmark Results: Flight Simulator X
- Conclusion
PS: If you want a 3rd and 4th player, you should go discuss x86 licensing with your beloved Intel...
I'd rather have seen 4890 and then 4890CF. That way you see single card performance compared to crossfire instead of dual corssfire compared to quad crossfire.
I do understand why the card is compared to the GTX 285 based on price though.
But excellent review, overall, I'm actually surprised at how the 965BE did, I thought it'd be behind, where it was actually right in the pack.
Great review.
I like vista, rock solid and stable since I got it years ago. Don't listen to the bashers who never have tried the product.
I get a good performance boost from my second gtx280 with my q9650 @ 4 gz
As mentioned in the story, these were tested on 790GX and X48 platforms, which don't do SLI. While there are Nvidia-based SLI platforms available for both configurations, I felt that they were quite a bit more rare and applicable to a much smaller contingent of readers than the CrossFire-capable platforms. The beauty of X58 and P55 is that they'll do both!
Regards,
Chris
I'd rather have seen 4890 and then 4890CF. That way you see single card performance compared to crossfire instead of dual corssfire compared to quad crossfire.
I do understand why the card is compared to the GTX 285 based on price though.
I wish there is a third and fourth player in the market so AMD won't sit on its butt and do nothing. AMD has this idea that “we don’t have to compete on performance, just make our product cheap enough and people will buy it”. That’s what doomed GM and Chrysler.
I wish Nvidia and NEC join/rejoin the CPU market.
I thought people should have learned by now that GPU~intensive tests say little about CPUs, except whether they're 'Good Enough', or not.
PS: If you want a 3rd and 4th player, you should go discuss x86 licensing with your beloved Intel...
Then, I can see x8 PCIe2.0 links hurting the P55 chipset and the X58 showing its true potential.
This will definitely affect SLI/Crossfire setups but I am not sure how it will affect single card solutions.
Agreed. Vista was pretty good after all the manufactures released the drivers. I still think Win 7 is better than XP and Vista.