384 replies to this topic

[David Roch]

Hi guys,Thanks to Corey Meeks' hard work we now have a smart method to compare how well any given hardware can perform with a vanilla FSX installation.This final project is the result of a great discussion between few enthousiast guys here in the hardware forum.A warm thanks to you guys.  <_< .If someone plans to use this tool on other forums, please be kind enough to give this bunch of nice guys the credit they deserve and provide a direct link to this thread.Kind regards,David ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Here is Corey's presentation of his work:And here it is - the new FSXMark11 with updated guide! Download it from here: FSXMark11 Benchmark.Results can be seen here. Once again, you will want to replace all existing FSXMark11 files. Your reports should be a simple image like below. Attach it, host it from Picasaweb, whatever you want - but this is all it needs to be:Finally, some sort of promo video showing the benchmark in action. I thought about using elevator music...  but then chose something with a little more taste.

[simon747]

Downloaded.  Looks good, but do I really need to re-load and re-install FSX?  That would take 24 hurs for me and I just did it 3 weeks ago?Simon

[SpiritFlyer]

norhcentral00, on 04 March 2011 - 05:31 AM, said:

Downloaded.  Looks good, but do I really need to re-load and re-install FSX?  That would take 24 hurs for me and I just did it 3 weeks ago?Simon

Hi Simon,All tests must be conducted after completely new FSX installs, exactly 100% as laid out in the official test parameters, without any type of variation whatsoever. Please do not post any test results that are not acquired accordingly. Hopefully all other test results that are posted using variations of any kind will be deleted from this thread by the moderators in order to avoid confusion. We don't want to appear harsh, but all of us must preserve the integrity of the test at all costs in order for it to remain meaningful.Kind regards,

[Kosta]

Together with Corey, I also compiled this spreadsheet, which me and Corey will manage, and update with hardware and results to have a comprehensive datebase.Please add it to the upper post, if possible.https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AuiXjW8fJyDrdC1KZm5fSlJYdnJBaXRRclFuU0U3WUE&hl=en&authkey=CMSSocoI#gid=0Oh, and David, one can't post to the other topic, it's locked?

[Kosta]

norhcentral00, on 04 March 2011 - 05:31 AM, said:

Downloaded.  Looks good, but do I really need to re-load and re-install FSX?  That would take 24 hurs for me and I just did it 3 weeks ago?Simon

There IS a way to do this, without losing everything and getting it back.This method follows the rule of the guide, but also gives you the opportunity to save everything and get it back in the old manner.BUT, you have to own some kind of imaging software. I have Acronis True Image, and I can use it to that purpose.I imaged both Windows and FSX partition onto 3rd partition.Then I start uninstalling, removing whatever I wish.Install and configure for test.Run tests.And then image back everything as it was.No fuss, no trouble, and no compromise.There is a testversion of True Image Home, but I have no idea what it really does - maybe even serves a purpose for this one-time-test. Doesn't hurt to try.

[dazz]

OT, ok, but that band sounds really good Corey :biggrin:. I googled it . Loch Lomond right? I'm listening to some of their stuff now in MySpaceAs for the benchmark, I will try to run it again this weekend on a new vanilla FSX install

[cmeeks]

Yeah, Loch Lomond. I found out about them via this video - it's great stuff.Kosta and I have been talking about doing something similar to what he's talking about above so you don't have to ditch your tweaked FSX install. I think it's perfectly fine so long as you can be sure NOTHING is left behind that might skew your results. I'm not going to put it in the guide, as I'm afraid the guide is already plenty long-winded as it is, but this is my endorsement here so long as you know what you are doing. I would still recommend a fresh install, however, unless you really do have a ton of tweaks, addons, and other stuff. I don't have too much, so it doesn't really take me long to get back up and running.

[David Roch]

Kosta, on 04 March 2011 - 03:09 PM, said:

Oh, and David, one can't post to the other topic, it's locked?

Hi Kosta,Yes, to avoid confusion and continue the discussion here but if you want the old thread to stay alive please tell me.

[whitav8]

Got a chance to run these on a flight sim company's Jetline 980X yesterday:Hardware Configuration:CPU: Intel i7-980X@3.99 Ghz HT OffRAM: 3x2GB 1600 (CL7)GPU: EVGA 470 StandardHDD: SDDFSXMark11 Results:Test Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg 2  11581,    300000,  23,  54, 38.603 3  11598,    300000,  24,  55, 39.452 4  11576,    300000,  21,  52,  37.285

[HLJames]

Hardware Configuration:CPU: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 5.2 GHz HT-OffRAM: 2x2GB 2133 MHz (9-10-9-24-2T)GPU: EVGA GTX 580 1536 MBHDD: WD Velociraptor x2 - RAID 0 (128KB) 1.09TB, Fast Trak TX 2300FSXMark11 Results:Test            Frames           Time(ms)            Min            Max             Avg2                  15101              300000               29.0           66.0           50.33                  14906              300000               30.0           65.0           49.74                  14846              300000               31.0           67.0           49.5AVG             14951              300000               30.0           67.0           49.8

[Kosta]

David Roch, on 05 March 2011 - 02:35 AM, said:

Hi Kosta,Yes, to avoid confusion and continue the discussion here but if you want the old thread to stay alive please tell me.

David, that won't be necessary. Please add this link as a result datebase to the main post: https://spreadsheets...SocoI#gid=0Also, here's an explanation which I would like you to add to the first post, for users who would like to keep their FSX.ALTERNATIVE way to a complete reinstall of the whole FSX+Addons scenario:1) Enable in Folder Options "Show hidden files and folders"2) Locate 3 FSX folders: 1. main FSX folder, 2. where fsx.cfg is located (usually C:\Users\{your username}\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\FSX) and 3. C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\FSX3) Rename all 3 folders to anything you like (I usually take FSX2)4) Rename your "Flight Simulator X Files" folder in My Documents5) Insert your FSX DVD and let it repair the installation6) RUN FSX, then close it and reboot (it will complain about the missing Addon Scenery folder, doesn't matter though, just click OK...)7) Install SP1, reboot, RUN FSX8) Run SP2 installation - it will complain to remove the SP2 - do it, then run SP1 again, and then re-run SP2 install and install it!9) On with FSXMark11 installation and tests...Now that you've reported your results in the thread:1) Delete ALL newly installed folders (all 4, FSX 3x and the one in My Documents)2) Rename old folders back to their original namesReboot, have fun with your old FSX. I hope this helps at least some users!DISCLAIMER: I don't take any reponsibility for any damaged installations, I've done this procedure numerous times and nothing got damaged. Everything was always working. If anything goes wrong, you can still completely uninstall everything.

[SpiritFlyer]

Kosta, on 05 March 2011 - 03:05 PM, said:

David, that won't be necessary. Please add this link as a result datebase to the main post: https://spreadsheets...SocoI#gid=0Also, here's an explanation which I would like you to add to the first post, for users who would like to keep their FSX.ALTERNATIVE way to a complete reinstall of the whole FSX+Addons scenario:1) Enable in Folder Options "Show hidden files and folders"2) Locate 3 FSX folders: 1. main FSX folder, 2. where fsx.cfg is located (usually C:\Users\{your username}\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\FSX) and 3. C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\FSX3) Rename all 3 folders to anything you like (I usually take FSX2)4) Rename your "Flight Simulator X Files" folder in My Documents5) Insert your FSX DVD and let it repair the installation6) RUN FSX, then close it and reboot (it will complain about the missing Addon Scenery folder, doesn't matter though, just click OK...)7) Install SP1, reboot, RUN FSX8) Run SP2 installation - it will complain to remove the SP2 - do it, then run SP1 again, and then re-run SP2 install and install it!9) On with FSXMark11 installation and tests...Now that you've reported your results in the thread:1) Delete ALL newly installed folders (all 4, FSX 3x and the one in My Documents)2) Rename old folders back to their original namesReboot, have fun with your old FSX. I hope this helps at least some users!DISCLAIMER: I don't take any reponsibility for any damaged installations, I've done this procedure numerous times and nothing got damaged. Everything was always working. If anything goes wrong, you can still completely uninstall everything.

Hi Kosta, thanks for showing the way to do that. However, I am not so sure this information should be included in any instructions or top post in the thread. As good as it might be for some of us geeks, except for the absence of information as regards to Acceleration installation, it makes what should be a simple thing overwhelmingly complicated, detailed and a hassle to most users. It is already complicated enough with contradictory posting instructions (pointing to last thread etc.). KISS is better.Corey, shouldn't the use of FSX Acceleration or FSX Gold edition in lieu of sp1 and sp2 be mentioned in the opening instructions? Their use is at least as broad as the earlier versions. That is all I ever use in my reloads and will do so again when I retest in the fresh FSX build this week. It will yield the same results either way. I remember reading that an installation should include either the service packs, or Acceleration, but not both. Perhaps we need to make a few final adjustments in our presentation before it gets too much farther along.Kind regards,

[cmeeks]

Stephen, I'll integrate Acceleration into the guide this afternoon

[SpiritFlyer]

cmeeks, on 06 March 2011 - 10:53 AM, said:

Stephen, I'll integrate Acceleration into the guide this afternoon

Thank you most kindly sir!  :Nerd:

[Kosta]

SpiritFlyer, on 06 March 2011 - 10:44 AM, said:

Hi Kosta, thanks for showing the way to do that. However, I am not so sure this information should be included in any instructions or top post in the thread. As good as it might be for some of us geeks, except for the absence of information as regards to Acceleration installation, it makes what should be a simple thing overwhelmingly complicated, detailed and a hassle to most users. It is already complicated enough with contradictory posting instructions (pointing to last thread etc.). KISS is better.Corey, shouldn't the use of FSX Acceleration or FSX Gold edition in lieu of sp1 and sp2 be mentioned in the opening instructions? Their use is at least as broad as the earlier versions. That is all I ever use in my reloads and will do so again when I retest in the fresh FSX build this week. It will yield the same results either way. I remember reading that an installation should include either the service packs, or Acceleration, but not both. Perhaps we need to make a few final adjustments in our presentation before it gets too much farther along.Kind regards,

Alright, I hope you are right.I've given the option. If anyone wants to do it, they now have a way. It works 100% and its WAY less fuss than uninstalling everything... but, to each his own.Apparently, no need for spreadsheet also - since nobody said anything about that. I am guessing you are better off without it...

[SpiritFlyer]

Kosta, on 06 March 2011 - 03:48 PM, said:

Alright, I hope you are right.I've given the option. If anyone wants to do it, they now have a way. It works 100% and its WAY less fuss than uninstalling everything... but, to each his own.Apparently, no need for spreadsheet also - since nobody said anything about that. I am guessing you are better off without it...

Hi Kosta,Thanks for that and doing the spreadsheet too. It is a great idea to compare the results the way you have and kind of you to keep updating it. Much appreciated!Kind regards,

[werver]

Hi David,What's the difference between the FSMark07 and the FSMark11 test?Best RegardsWerner

[Kosta]

Fsmark07 is older and not so taxiing on the system. 11 was made in mind with today's hardware, and to hit the system more.

[whitav8]

Just so we'll have data for the older q6600 type systems:CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.7 GHz HT-OffRAM: 2x1GB DDR2-400(800)Mhz, Dual channel(4-4-4-12-2T)GPU: PALIT GTX 8800 1000 MBHDD: WD 500 GBFSXMark11 Results:Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg4156 300000 8 18 13.8534210 300000 9 19 13.9574141 300000 8 17 13.789

[cmeeks]

HLJames, on 05 March 2011 - 01:48 PM, said:

Hardware Configuration:CPU: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 5.2 GHz HT-OffRAM: 2x2GB 2133 MHz (9-10-9-24-2T)GPU: EVGA GTX 580 1536 MBHDD: WD Velociraptor x2 - RAID 0 (128KB) 1.09TB, Fast Trak TX 2300FSXMark11 Results:Test            Frames   Time(ms)            Min            Max     Avg2                  15101              300000       29.0   66.0   50.33                  14906              300000       30.0   65.0   49.74                  14846              300000       31.0   67.0   49.5AVG     14951              300000       30.0   67.0   49.8

Excellent results!

whitav8, on 07 March 2011 - 01:21 PM, said:

Just so we'll have data for the older q6600 type systems:CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.7 GHz HT-OffRAM: 2x1GB DDR2-400(800)Mhz, Dual channel(4-4-4-12-2T)GPU: PALIT GTX 8800 1000 MBHDD: WD 500 GBFSXMark11 Results:Frames Time (ms) Min Max Avg4156 300000 8 18 13.8534210 300000 9 19 13.9574141 300000 8 17 13.789

I feels as if this is what so many of us have been waiting to see. Thanks!

[ryanbatcund]

Guys getting 30-50 fps, is the scenery loading as well (nice and crisp) or is it blurry?  I'm not even going to add my results (I'm willing to bet they'd be below 10 fps) but my scenery is blurry anyway, even with the older FSMark 07 lol!

[David Roch]

Kosta, on 05 March 2011 - 03:05 PM, said:

David, that won't be necessary. Please add this link as a result datebase to the main post: https://spreadsheets...=CMSSocoI#gid=0

Done!

[whitav8]

It would be great if Alain (alainneedle1) would contribute his results when he gets a chance because I think his 980X system is tuned to perfection as opposed to the Jetline 980X system that I submitted the results for. Secondly, I would appreciate HLJames commenting on how he tuned his 2600K to such heights (50 fps) as well. It helps those of us who are looking to build a new system soon (especially since the new B3 mobos for 2600K are showing up) to know just what mobo and memory to buy before we start overclocking our way to FSX heaven. If any of the top end folks have either actual FSXMark11 data or just estimates of how important the newest GPUs (580s or ATI) are to their performance - I've read that a little GPU overclocking can help as well. Obviously, some of the readers don't care about a few percent here and there but some of us want the most so the experience is as fluid and immersive as possible or that we will spend that performance on complex scenery/aircraft/weather or triple monitors!

[Kosta]

David Roch, on 08 March 2011 - 12:39 PM, said:

Done!

David, a bit wrong: Users can't post results there. It's a sheet that Corey and me can administrate. Others are view only. Please edit text to reflect that. Thanks  :Applause:

[David Roch]

Kosta, on 08 March 2011 - 02:53 PM, said:

David, a bit wrong: Users can't post results there. It's a sheet that Corey and me can administrate. Others are view only. Please edit text to reflect that. Thanks  :Applause:

OK now  <_< (Don't forget to delete the second sentence in the spreadsheet: "Post your results into the thread below, including your detailed info marked in orange by the spreadsheet"!)