Simviation Forum - What CPU?

Feb 16^th, 2005 at 3:09am

FridayChild Offline
Colonel
Well on the way, head
in the clouds
Italia

Gender:
Posts: 1573

As a follow-up to my thread about graphic chipsets, here's one about CPUs.
What is in your opinion:
1) the absolute best CPU for FS2004
2) the "best-buy" (good price but still great performance) CPU for FS2004.
Intel or AMD? The eternal question.

Founder of A.A.A.A.A.A.A. (Aircraft Amateurs' Association Against Absurd Aviation Acronyms) My system specifications: FLIGHT SIMULATOR 2004 - AMD Athlon 64 3200+ CPU - 3 GB PC-3200 DDR400 dual channel RAM - 500 GB Seagate Barracuda 7200 rpm SATA-II hard disk - Sapphire Radeon HD 5750 1 GB PCI-E graphic card - Logitech Wingman Force 3D joystick + Logitech Formula Force pedals My FS whereabouts: low and slow, small single engine prop GA, Italy airfields.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Feb 16^th, 2005 at 3:37am

bm Offline
Colonel
UK

Gender:
Posts: 1177

1) AMD FX-55 SKT939

2) For me - Intel stability with a good Asus motherboard. If you go for intel you must wait until EM64 comes out mind you if you want to be future proofed. Overclockers have a 3.4Ghz LGA775 64bit P4F on pre-order for £223 so it can't be long. If you look at it in terms of price/performance stakes your never going to get Intel

Whats your price range of the whole system?

Birdy.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Feb 16^th, 2005 at 5:02am

Delta_ Offline
Colonel
Woah!
London, UK

Gender:
Posts: 2032

I would recommend getting the AMD if you are intending your system for gaming, and Intel for desktop stuff. That's simply because the the work done per cycle of the AMD is 3 time greater than the Intel hence the reason that the AMD cpus are lower clock but still perform as good or better in some types of programs including games. The FX-55 will set you back about £500, so if you have the cash get it. The FX-55 is in a league of its own, so the new P4 will not do anything to it, although a P5 would be a better name for a CPU to compete against the FX range. The new P4 competes with the 64 range. The 64 range are also very good. I would recommend 64-bit so that you are ready for 64-bit apps coming out in the near future.

Useful links:
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-15.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-15.html#directx_9

My system:Intel Q6600@3.6GHz, Corsair XMS2 4GB DDR2-6400 (4-4-4-12-1T) , Sapphire 7850 OC 2BG 920/5000, X-Fi Fatality, Corsair AX 750, 7 Pro x64

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Feb 16^th, 2005 at 1:40pm

Dan Offline
Colonel
Meet Bogart! Thanks CRAIG!
Carmarthenshire, Wales, Uk!

Gender:
Posts: 2053

AMD 64 3000+ seems to be very god. As for stability then that CPU, with the LanParty seems completely unstoppable, even with what I can throw at it! A question for you Andy (I think thats you name Hi-D... correct me if im wrong please!)

Which CPU would be the best:

AMD Athlon 64 3400 Newcastle 130nm (Socket 754) (£152.69)

AMD Opteron 144 1.8GHz 1MB Cache (£168.61)

Thanks man... dan

&&3DMark01 || OCUK - The best UK shop

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Feb 16^th, 2005 at 2:37pm

Delta_ Offline
Colonel
Woah!
London, UK

Gender:
Posts: 2032

My name sure is Andy...

Opteron is an excellent processor however it is intended for a dual CPU machine. You will find the 64 3400 performs better as a single CPU machine.

Hope that helps! Wink

My system:Intel Q6600@3.6GHz, Corsair XMS2 4GB DDR2-6400 (4-4-4-12-1T) , Sapphire 7850 OC 2BG 920/5000, X-Fi Fatality, Corsair AX 750, 7 Pro x64

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Feb 16^th, 2005 at 2:44pm

Dan Offline
Colonel
Meet Bogart! Thanks CRAIG!
Carmarthenshire, Wales, Uk!

Gender:
Posts: 2053

Ah Thanks Andy... So would two lower speed CPU's be better than one fast one? But I expect the extra cost of the mobo would outlay all gains? For those of us that ahve a budget anyway! I think technology is in need of something completely new - even SLI is just re-hashed GPU's connected together with some fancy bits of wire! Any idea whats coming out?
Dan

&&3DMark01 || OCUK - The best UK shop

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Feb 16^th, 2005 at 3:48pm

bm Offline
Colonel
UK

Gender:
Posts: 1177

As to your question Dan regarding new technology. The new "cell" type processor being developed for the graphics port of the Playstation3 which is (apparently) 20x more powerful than a P4...

Sounds like it'll beat any current dual opteron/AMD64/P4 when it comes next year Shocked

Anyway - I read that in the sunday telegraph. I don't know whether that means its right or wrong Roll Eyes

Birdy.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Feb 16^th, 2005 at 4:43pm

Delta_ Offline
Colonel
Woah!
London, UK

Gender:
Posts: 2032

Two CPUs would be better than one only if the application used dual CPUs which most don't.

However dual core CPUs which are effectively two CPUs in one CPU will cause a large increase in dual CPU programs on the market including games.

It would be better to wait for dual CPU core technology if you were willing to wait that long. Then you would get the benefits of a very fast single dual core CPU system, with lots of programs on the market utilising it.

My system:Intel Q6600@3.6GHz, Corsair XMS2 4GB DDR2-6400 (4-4-4-12-1T) , Sapphire 7850 OC 2BG 920/5000, X-Fi Fatality, Corsair AX 750, 7 Pro x64

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Feb 17^th, 2005 at 2:26am

the_autopilot Offline
Colonel

Gender:
Posts: 1359

Quote:

As a follow-up to my thread about graphic chipsets, here's one about CPUs.
What is in your opinion:
1) the absolute best CPU for FS2004
2) the "best-buy" (good price but still great performance) CPU for FS2004.
Intel or AMD? The eternal question.

1) FX-55 by AMD, no comparsion best for any game

2)The best price for performence, actually goes to intel. Their 3.2E processor is great for its price.

Link to sig:&&Click here&&(Cannot post signature here due to current forum restrications on linked images).

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: