The discussions reference the above posting were helpful at finding out whether it would be better for me to upgrade my CPU and/or GPU or both for improving overall FSX performance. Much of the discussions centered around bottle-necking and multi-core and multi-thread processing. Since then, I have reviewed the replies to my original posting and numerous other forum postings on the subject, some being factual and many just personal opinions. Based on what I learned I have reached the following conclusions.

My first conclusion is that hyper-threading does not provide any benefit to FSX especially if you are over clocking as it leads to significant CPU voltage and temp issue. For example, I have been running my i7 920 over clocked to 4 GHz with my CPU voltage set at 1.48 with temps periodically exceeding the 80c barrier. I just recently turned off HT and was able to reduce my CPU voltage to 1.37, and my CPU temp now does not exceed 70c - mostly stays in the 60s. In addition I gave my CPU a slight boost from 4GHz to 4.05 GHz. Here is a quote from NickN, a well recognized forum member, "I have now confirmed that although FSX IS multithread aware, it is NOT hyperthread aware and HT will have absolutely no effect on performance with FSX".

My second conclusion is that FSX performance will be improved by going from a four core to a six core or more processor. Not so much in FPS but in terrain enhancement and smoother flying. Phil Taylor has been quoted as saying that "FSX will scale up to 256 cores". I also have read many good reports about the i7 970 six core chip and how well it compliments FSX. This is the chip I would buy if I were to upgrade my CPU using my current Motherboard.

My third conclusion is that my CPU was not bottlenecking my FSX performance as I previously thought. It was processing everything that my GTX 285 was handing to it but not efficiently. I believe that there were periods when my CPU temps were way up because of my higher than normal CPU voltage required for hyper threading and my over clock.

Having reached these conclusions, I have upgraded my GPU from a GTX 285 to a GTX super clocked 580 boosting the graphics display in my opinion from outstanding to exceptional. I also made some changes to my fsxCFG as follows.

[JOBSCHEDULER]
AffinityMask=14

[BufferPools]
PoolSize=100000000

TEXTURE_BANDWIDTH_MULT=90

Here are several screenshots made after my upgrade..

This first screenshot is inside an F14 Tomcat flying over Los Angeles. Notice the graphics extend nicely to the horizon in all directions. CPU usage is at 66% and temps never exceed 71c - all are in the 60s when the screen was captured. FPS is at 44.6.



This second screenshot is a Twin Beech flying over SanDiego. Again, notice the graphics extend nicely to the horizon in all directions. CPU usage is at 61%, CPU temps never get out of the 60s, and the FPS is at 64.3.



This third screenshot is a B25 flying East of the Siattle International Airport. CPU usage is at 63%, Cpu temps stay in the 60s, and the FPS is 43.2 FPS.



I am now good for the long run waiting for the new Microsoft FS to be released. Anyone know when that might be?

Quote:


I will not be upgrading my CPU. For a while I thought it was a bottleneck even though frame rates were always good. Turned out it was my graphics card (GTX-285)that prevented what I call from having the ultimate FSX game machine. After upgrading to a SC GTX-580, I now (in my opinion) have one. I run maxed out for FSX with lots of add-on software and enjoy 20 to 100+ FPS, depending where flying, with realistic smooth flight and exceptional scenery. As for switching to a 6 core processor, this would have been my choice if I had elected to upgrade my CPU.

As for the HEX core, I have read a number of positive feedbacks. Here is a quote from a happy forum member who upgraded to a i7-980.

"This is the sixth i7-based system I have built. The first i7 920 built 2 and a half years ago achieved stunning performance. When Intel came out with these new 6-core 32 nm processors I was curious about their over clocking potential considering it is an older architecture that has been moved to a smaller manufacturing process. My curiosity was rewarded with this purchase. I am currently running this processor at 4.6 GHz, temps are peaking at 60c and it is a couple hours prime stable so far. This is by far the easiest processor I have ever over clocked. I am using liquid cooling which allows for these low temps but I replaced an i7 960 with this cpu and over clocking is tremendously better. With no voltage changes I achieved a 4.2 GHz over clock. If you have been running an older i7 and have been considering an upgrade, this processor is worth it if you can stomach the price."

There are many software applications that will take advantage from upgrading from 4 to 5GHz, however, will it make a difference in what you see at 30fps compared to 50fps with FSX?