Best offers
|
GeForce GTX 295 Video Card (1.75GB,... | $549.99 Dell Home More info |
|
GeForce GTX 260 Video Card (896MB,... | $214.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
GeForce 9800 GTX Video Card (512MB,... | $219.85 PC Connection More info |
|
Radeon HD 5770 Video Card (1GB,... | $179.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Radeon HD 4890 Cyclone OC Video Card... | $216.70 PC Connection More info |
- ssd for gaming
- flight simulator x benchmark
- flight simulator x benchmarks
- ssd gaming performance
- cpu most important flight simulator
- core i5 gaming benchmarks
- flight simulator x benchmarks 2009
- ssd gaming benchmarks
- i5 gaming benchmarks
- flight simulator frame rate
- core i5 gaming performance
- ssd game load
- ssd game performance
- core i5 vs. i7 and flight simulator x
- flight simulator x i7
Partners
The Games selection
crazy :
Interactive Boogy
Pick one of the 3 songs, hit on the correct keys matching this boy's dance moves.
|
crazy :
Xiao Xiao 7
A great fight scene from the animation movies Xiao Xiao.
|
Sponsored links
- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (79) |
- Share


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.
- Core i5 Gaming Desktop [Homebuilt Systems]
- Core i5 Gaming system for under $1500 CDN - Suggestions? [Homebuilt Systems]
- Core i5 -- Gaming -- $1,000 [Homebuilt Systems]
- My New $1200 Intel Core i5 750 Build (with questions) [Homebuilt Systems]
- Cheapest i5 gaming build...how low can ya go? [Homebuilt Systems]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
- 1 / 4
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- Intel Pentium Dual Core E5400 VS. AMD Athlon II X2 250 BE
- Core i7 running on only 4 threads?
- Should I lose the AMD system and go intel, or just Upgrade my mobo?
- Phenom II X4 920 and Gigabyte GA-M57SLI-S4 REV 2
- I5 vs i7 Feeling ripped off?
- Should I overclock?
- Need Advice on a wolfdale E6300 Pentium 1066fsb
- Prime95 how to get it to run 24 hrs?
- Watecooling Loop. Need Recommendations
- Overclocking without voltage increase
- Suggestions needed for "assembling" a desktop on a tight budget.
- Question about HP pavilion Elite e9180t motherboard.
- RAM Question
- Solution to 790i Freezes
Related articles
-
Best gaming CPU for $170: Phenom II X4 945 Phenom II X4 945 Codename: Deneb Process: 45nm CPU Cores: 4 Clock Speed: 3 GHz Socket: AM3 L1 Cache: 4 x 128KB L2 Cache: 4 x 512KB L3 Cache: 6MB HyperTransport: 4,000 MHzThermal Envelope: 125W...
-
Best Gaming CPUs For The Money: August '09
If you don’t have the time to research the benchmarks, or if you don’t feel confident enough in your ability to pick the right processor for your next gaming machine, fear not. We at Tom’s Hardware have come to your aid with a simple list of the best...
-
Synthetic benchmarks are often forward-looking measures of performance that predict the direction of things as the software community gets better at taking advantage of today's hardware features. PCMark Vantage centers entirely on Windows...







so we can assume for gaming the 965BE (or 955 oc) and ATi cards are just as fast as Core i7 and i5 but at a fraction of the price
The 955 does cost less. The 965 is more expensive than Core i5.
Only thing I don't like is how you knock Crossfire with 2 HD 4870X2's, since when is it even feasible that 4-way CF would scale as well as 2-way SLI?
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.
I would have liked to see a 780a or a 980a SLI motherboard used to check the SLI numbers on the P2 965BE. I'm also surprised there's no overclocking numbers in the comparison, is that article still to come out?
It's upcoming dirt; Patrick is the one working on it (and our Italian team sent word of its i5 and i7s in excess of 4.2 GHz)
Nice game collection you got there.......
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.
You giotta remember vista is design for spoecific hardware and powerfull hardware that can run it, so people with P4 3GHz and vista complain about its speed, vista is OK, i dont like it cause my computer doesm't like it thats fine i get over it and chnage my OS
Thanks for weighing in, guys!
So there's no benafit from adding a second 285 to a q9550s or an x4 965 be ??
I get a good performance boost from my second gtx280 with my q9650 @ 4 gz
crash--
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
Kudos for adding the Flight Simulator X as a benchmark.
Why so many tests today with 2 4870x2s?
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.
Let's be glad AMD is still around to provide competition to Intel. Gaming is obviously fine on either CPU, but some people say: "OMG, I must have the Core i7 because it can do the Monte Carlo simulation faster!!!". The performance difference between Core i7/Phenom II is marginal right now, but if AMD were to exit stage left, then these round ups would be VIA vs. Intel, and I don't know about you, but VIA's offerings really AREN'T fast enough for me... Consider a Phenom II, I love mine...
Let's be glad AMD is still around to provide competition to Intel. Gaming is obviously fine on either CPU, but some people say: "OMG, I must have the Core i7 because it can do the Monte Carlo simulation faster!!!". The performance difference between Core i7/Phenom II is marginal right now, but if AMD were to exit stage left, then these round ups would be VIA vs. Intel, and I don't know about you, but VIA's offerings really AREN'T fast enough for me... Consider a Phenom II, I love mine...
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.
Thank you, Toms, for the detailed Graphics comparison. Yet regarding the comments section, I have to shake my head that we're again continuing the AMD versus Intel wars.
I thought people should have learned by now that GPU~intensive tests say little about CPUs, except whether they're 'Good Enough', or not.
I wonder if u will ever include WOW in ur benchmark suite. Its just a MMORPG but it happens to be the most played game on the planet, thus making it interesting for a lot of us out there who are looking on information when deciding to buy one video card vs another or one processor vs another. Thnkz.
Pei-Chen: This article shobuld make it painfully obvious that AMD can and DOES compete on performance in games. AMD has brought plenty of innovation, even if they don't always finish first, but only for the CPU-based video rendering enthusiast does it make no sense to purchase AMD, the other 99.9% of us couldn't tell the difference in a taste test.
PS: If you want a 3rd and 4th player, you should go discuss x86 licensing with your beloved Intel...
The only question that remains for me is how things will turn once the DirectX 11 cards are announced.
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.
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.
Agreed. Vista was pretty good after all the manufactures released the drivers. I still think Win 7 is better than XP and Vista.