So, Nehalem is OK?

[Flyby]

hmmmm I posted that link to the DCS Black Shark forum. Don;t know how I forgot to post it here. Good looking out, gprr. I came away from the article with the impression that the i7 processors well, this is a quote from the article, and I share this viewpoint.: "Despite the platform costs of upgrading to Core i7, Intel has engineered a CPU design with such massive parallelism that the PC community could be waiting years before a game developer truly takes advantage of its potential. In the immortal words of Ferris Bueller, “It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up.” I interpret this as saying the i7 is not a best bang-for-buck system just yet, performance-wise. Check out this report from HardOCP: http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?...hlbnRodXNpYXN0
In some of the tested games (though not in all the tested ones) even the E8500 is competitive at the 1900x resolution. In Lost Planet the E8500 draws even with the fastest i7 processor at 2560x1600 resolution.
Of course my only concern is how well a processor performs in combat flight sims. IL2 seemed to do better with the i7-920 than the with the older qx9770 but the lower resolution, 1280x1040 seems like a crt monitor rather than even a 19 inch lcd monitor. I assume most fliers are using lcd monitors nowadays so SimHq's test is not so relevant in that manner, imho. I'd like to see a true combat flight sim test on the i7 at lcd resolutions, and using the i7-940 that more people can afford rather than the i7-965 at $1000.00 USD. The X58 motherboard prices will drop only when the manufacturers release mid-level boards. We'll see what happens. eh?
Flyby out

[IceFire]

The thing is that the IL-2 series and undoubtedly the Storm of War series will be heavily CPU reliant as well as memory and graphics. Most games are heavy on the graphics or graphics and memory but generally less so with the CPU. So it sounds like the i7's raw power, quad core, and high speed triple channel memory, seem like a good match. But only if Oleg can successfully build some parallelism into the Storm of War engine.

[SPUDLEY1977]

FLYBY,
Was reading some other analysis earlier, sorry don't recall the link. They took an i7 920 2.66 Ghzee ($300 US) and compared in effect single, dual, triple, quad core processors impact on FPS. They disabled enough cores with each benchmark run in order to be using four, three, two, one cores. Kinda simple and sweet analysis.

Seemingly across the board they saw significant gains from single to dual. From dual to triple, they observed insignificant gains. From three to four cores there was no incremental increase in output.

Interestingly you can purchase a E8200 for $150 US. I don't recall the diff in FSB or onboard cache betweeen the two chipsets. Let's assume that the E8200 is equilavent to running the i7 on two cores. Consider that the i7 costs 2x that of the E8200. Now add to this premium the fact that i7 compatible mobos will run approx $100 premium. Let's leave ram out of the picture for the moment.

So what do you get for that additional $250? Right now from the third party analysis I have read....no "significant " performance differences that you can touch/feel. You are on the next generation of chipset pin configuration which may or may not have any real value. You are buying the current cutting edge of CPU configuration which always costs a hefty premium for those who value the bragging rights. These rights are of value to some so this is not meant as a pejorative. Might this be why AMD came out with their triple cores instead of four?

The choice one might take would depend on the specs of current system: is it inadequate?, is it just time for something new?, do I need to burn some cash?, can I wait six months to see what my options are to upgrade?, if I choose to wait a bit will I be happy to buy the i7 920 (currently $300) or Q9400 (currently $290) for half it's current premium price - equivalent to what a E8200 costs now (currently $160)?

Consider waiting another few months, and whilst you wait read all the comparisons that more informed brains write up. And member to throw the costs into the mix as well as the other variables that you feel of value. The longer you wait the more you will save on the specific components and the more comfortable you will be with your decision. << Good sleep insurance<< Once you buy, do it, build it up, post up pics of the creation, and don't look at the prices till the next time the upgrade bug bites.

Oh but by all means give us an objective in-depth write up whatever choice you make.

PEACE

[Flyby]

Hi Spudley,
Good points you make. I'm actually going to wait another few months (since I've been waiting for quite some time for my $$ to get right anyway). I'm looking to finance a new build, not an upgrade, so waiting is in my interest. By the time I'm ready to spend I'm hopeful that prices will drop, Win7 will be out, and mainstream motherboards X58 mobos will be out, not to mention new GPUs like the RV870. So, I'm not looking to build a monster, but surely a capable system that might be closer to Oleg's dream system rather than further away from it.
Flyby out

[alert]

I afraid that prices of I7 setups wont drop so quickly as we assume and what more, dont forget that flight sims are real time simulations and it's very hard to implement parallel processing, maybe if OLeg will use Falcon4 like "bubble" concept for massive campaigns, but still I dont believe that more then 2 cores gonna be use at full steam.
And in Q3 09 Itel plan to introduce LGA1166 paltform (Lynnfield) base on I7 architecture but only with 2 cores but with lock clock, so it wont be easy to OC!
Also, AMD is puttin all its strategy to PhenomII four cores CPU, two cores new Athlons will be for value market only.
Maybe we are facing bleak times for PC gamers, multicores are not for games (and wont be ever) and two cores wont be maybe less powerfull then todays E8xxx...
So my bet in on highly OC E8400 (8600), but maybe Oleg surprise us all....

[Flyby]

It would be nice to know more from Oleg on this subject. I wonder if he realizes the dilemma?
Flyby out

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by 99th_Flyby

It would be nice to know more from Oleg on this subject. I wonder if he realizes the dilemma?
Flyby out

I doubt that anyone involved in the IT industry would not have a fairly good grasp of the situation, and due to that it would be irresponsible for Oleg to give out any more advice than he's done already.

Every one knows that over time hardware will become cheaper and more powerful. (Current economic meltdown permitting!) If you want the best experience playing a sim that won't be released for another year and you can afford to wait, then wait!

Three or so months ago I HAD to upgrade my computer, So I worked out a budget and fitted into that. Trying to plan ahead for future upgrades. If I went through the process today the PC I'ld have built would be nothing like the one I made.

In those 3 months, we've had a whole range of new technology introduced. New graphics sets, Solid state drives, a new family of CPU's and Motherboards, Tripple channel DDR3 memory.

In a years time who knows what our PC's will be like? If you NEED to buy a computer now, try to make choices that will allow you an upgrade path. Just think, by the time SOW is released, you may not even be interested in Flight Sims! Who Knows?

[Flyby]

hi Skosh,
I don't think it would be irresponsible for Oleg to give a bit more guidance on system requirements at all. What's wrong with saying a Conroe series CPU would be more than sufficent? Or a Penryn? Or a Nehalem? I'm waiting a bit longer before building a system, but I had not planned to wait until next May when requirements are supposed to come out. So how to plan for an upgrade path when there is no target? Even Rise of Flight has posted system requirements. Surely Oleg has an idea. I know he won't recommend a Cray, but...
Flyby out