What Physics FPS do you get with your system?

[wab223]

Originally Posted by OnTheSnap

Win 7

I'm getting 750 to 800 PFPS. Vsync off, 120 fps. 1080P.

I wonder why you get half the performance? The i5 has 4 cores, but supports hyper threading. So it takes 8 threads. I wonder if that's the reason?
.

I'm still wondering about this. I upgraded to an AMD 8 core, Fx 8320. The intel chips from what I understand wipe the floor with these AMDs in single core performance. But this is not supposedly the case in multi core tests. I just got my system partially together last night, but tests show that Accurc may only be loading 6 of my cores and my PFPS when flying is in the 490s. Still nothing like the performance you are getting.

general note:
I am a believer that the accurc physics engine is real and does work better the higher the PFPS attained by ones PC. This sim is not just about graphics but more about simulation.

[ahummingbird]

Computer:
AMD X6 1100T
Asus Sabertooth 990FX
20Gb Ram
Nvidia GTX 660Ti (had 2 in SLI till one fried)
2 x Samsung 23" LED Monitor

SIM:
Resolution: 1920X1080 Full Screen
Antialiasing Level: AA8
Smoke Quality: High
Shadow Quality: High
Frame Skipping: No
Texture Quality: High
Target Framerate: 120fps
VSync: Off
Physics FPS: 460
Graphics FPS: 120
Enable Multi-threading-Yes

[tj69]

Computer
Win 7 64bit
i5 3570 @ 3.4
16 gig ram
120 gig SSD
GTX 660Ti 2gig

Res: 1920x1080 FS
AA8
High Qual Smoke: Yes
High Qual Shadow: Yes
Frame skipping: No
Texture Qual: High
Frame rate: 120
Vsync: Off
Physics FPS: 750-840
Graffics FPS: 122
Multi Theading: Yes

[wab223]

hummingbird,
I'm using the sabertooth also. Our GPUs and CPUs are reasonably comparable in performance so it looks like I'm in the right ball park with 490 pfps on this chip. It seems even if you have the recommended AMD system your only likely to just break 500 pfps while the intel guys are running at 800. The Fx 8320 has better multi core benchmarks than some of these intels.

There was a definite improvement in feel of the physics engine going from the pfps 380s to 490s. Big improvement. My GPU was achieving fps in the 120s in each case. I wonder what it feels like on a system thats in the 800s.

How do you like the board and have you tried OCing with it?

tj69, thanks for posting your info.

[ArchmageAU]

My laptop is an older W510
- i7 Q720,
-12Gb ram,
- Windows 7 64-bit SP1
- NVidia Quadro FX 880M

When running an external TV (1920x1080 full screen), it only gets about 240 PFPS. Really cooks the quad core CPU (75%).

Somehow I feel from the specs others have posted I should be getting more.

[velocity90]

Originally Posted by ArchmageAU

My laptop is an older W510
- i7 Q720,
-12Gb ram,
- Windows 7 64-bit SP1
- NVidia Quadro FX 880M

When running an external TV (1920x1080 full screen), it only gets about 240 PFPS. Really cooks the quad core CPU (75%).

Somehow I feel from the specs others have posted I should be getting more.

i5 scores higher than i7. Quite logical. Has to do with hyper threading.

[wab223]

Arch, that was fast you have a copy already?

I know I seem a bit preoccupied with the PFPs scores. I am not normally this fixated.

But after doing a few incremental upgrades I think people need to be aware that they need a reasonable pfps score if they are to have a chance of liking this sim. I do want this sim to succeed. Arch if you are only getting scores in the 240s then I personally think you may be missing some of the potential of Accurc.

BTW, I get no drop in pfps when jumping onto the big screen tv but then again my tv is only 720p.

[ArchmageAU]

Originally Posted by wab223

Arch, that was fast you have a copy already?

I know I seem a bit preoccupied with the PFPs scores. I am not normally this fixated.

But after doing a few incremental upgrades I think people need to be aware that they need a reasonable pfps score if they are to have a chance of liking this sim. I do want this sim to succeed. Arch if you are only getting scores in the 240s then I personally think you may be missing some of the potential of Accurc.

BTW, I get no drop in pfps when jumping onto the big screen tv but then again my tv is only 720p.

In the UK on business. Ordered Wed, shipped Thu, arrived Fri.

Multi-threaded graphics has poorer performance on this laptop (so working on single threaded).

I did have CPU performance on lowest, when bumped to highest, it got to 300 pFPS. The 240 is consistent (stays white), and no jitters. I'm no Nick Maxwell, my style is focused on precision mild 3D, so difference between 240 and 900 will not night/day. In playing with settings really noticed when it dropped below 240 though.

I think I have a mid to high processor (i7 1.6Ghz quad core) with low end graphics card (worst combination). Also cooling is not that good and it starts to flag when it burns too hot (can't get into it to give the fan a good clean. I've tried).

[wab223]

Where are you in the UK. I miss home. But I doubt your in Sunderland.

Theres always too many Aussies in London. (joke).


I'm pretty sure when you get back to Oz and try Accurc on a higher end system you will see what Im talking about.

[ArchmageAU]

Originally Posted by wab223

Where are you in the UK. I miss home. But I doubt your in Sunderland.

Theres always too many Aussies in London. (joke).


I'm pretty sure when you get back to Oz and try Accurc on a higher end system you will see what Im talking about.

This time in UK staying in Milton Keynes. I miss home too (Oz is a little further from UK than Canada ).

Not sure if I have a higher end system at home.

[AcidDrink]

Originally Posted by ArchmageAU

This time in UK staying in Milton Keynes. I miss home too (Oz is a little further from UK than Canada ).

Not sure if I have a higher end system at home.

Off topic.
You know there is one of the best heli clubs in the UK in Milton Keynes?

[Jurica]

Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit
AMD Athlon (tm) X4 740 Quad Core Processor (4CPUs), ~3.2GHz
NVIDIA GeForce GT 630 Graphics card
4GB RAM

PFPS = 250-300 (mostly around 250)
FPS = 60

1920x1080, AA0
Fullscreen
Smoke - low
Shadow - low
Frame Skipping - no
Texture quality - high
Target FPS - 60
V-Sync - On

Shouldn't I be getting higher PFPS? Do I need more RAM?

[wab223]

Originally Posted by Jurica

PFPS = 250-300 (mostly around 250)
Shouldn't I be getting higher PFPS? Do I need more RAM?

Jurica,
with an AMD 4100 @ 3.6 Ghz, 12GB ram and a GTX 550 Ti, I was only averaging about 380 pfps when flying.

[Kaolith]

Do desktops and laptops with and i7 and discrete gpu get the higher pfps and video fps?

[Go for it]

I'm getting a bit confuse here. My old clunker(3.5 years old) seems to be giving me pretty good result compare to more recent and more powerful machines.

My only problem is overheating and I found out that making it rest on the back of the screen with the keyboard vertical solve the problem. I can sim for half an hour and never go on red anymore. I may get a laptop cooler later.

02DropTopM3 I hope you don't mind me copying your form and filling it up with my data. I think we should have a standard form for easy comparison and yours seems very complete

Laptop:

Acer 3820TG-7945 4Gig ram (14 inch screen)
Through HDMI on a 9 years old 25 inch Samsung SyncMaster 244T monitor
Windows 7 Premium Family edition
Intel Core i5-M 460 @ 2.53GHz (CPU Mark = 2371)
4GB RAM
ATI MOBILITY RADEON HD 5470 512MB (G3D 226)

SIM:
Resolution: [email protected] Full Screen
Anti-aliasing Level: AA2 (I only have AA0 & AA2 to choose from)
Smoke Quality: None
Shadow Quality: low
Frame Skipping: No
Texture Quality: High
Target Frame rate: 120fps
VSync: Off

Control System FPS: 800
Physic: Auto
Enable Graphics Multi threading: Yes

Results:
Graphics FPS: 99 - 107 (generally stable at 107)
Physics: 369 - 442 ( generally stable at 442)

[DaveHolland]

i7 4700mq

~750 physics

GTX 765m set to 720p will run at 60fps w/ Vsync. Without it will run up to 95 fps. 1080p is sub 60 fps.

Computer is an MSI GE20, which I researched and purchased specifically for this sim.

[Go for it]

Originally Posted by DaveHolland

i7 4700mq

~750 physics

GTX 765m set to 720p will run at 60fps w/ Vsync. Without it will run up to 95 fps. 1080p is sub 60 fps.

Computer is an MSI GE20, which I researched and purchased specifically for this sim.

See, that's exactly what I'm talking about.

My i5 has a CPU Mark of 2571
Yours has a CPU Mark of 7907 3 time faster.

My video card has a G3D rate of merely 226
Yours has a rating of 2114, almost 10 fold faster.

I run a 1920X1200 screen at 107/442 and you cannot even get 60 at 1080p. Something is not right.

I'm so amazed by that sim, that I'm ready to shed some money for a decent machine. I've been researching the laptop market specifically for it. I'm really taking a back with the results I find here.

Even with a state of the art Asus Rog G750JZ at $2700.00 I'm not sure I'll get the results I'm looking for.

Hopefully I'm missing something that someone more knowledgeable could point out to me.

Like 02DropTopM3 mentioned ,their is so many variables to take into account that I would be very grateful if you could find the time to fill up his form like I did so we can see the differences in configuration.

I know that even if I was told not to, going from 60 to 120fps in the sim has made a big difference. Maybe the AA2 is relevant too. I'm very curious for you to experiment with all these settings

[highlightshadow]

I have a 2nd data point now too (i posted my iMac's specs and figures earlier in the thread).

Last night i tested AccuRC 1.1 on the following:
Lenovo W540 (laptop) w/
Intel Core i7-4800MQ @ 2.70Ghz w/ Turbo
32GB DDR3 RAM
nVidia Quado K2100M

At 1080p screen resolution and with most things set at 'medium' i was only getting ~250pfps and 65fps

This is significantly less performance than my iMac .... to be honest, i was expecting a little more ... i know Quadro isn't a gaming GPU but didn't think it was a slouch as it does have a dedicated PhysX processor.
Plus with a newer Haswell Core i7 i thought i'd get decent figures.... i am surprised at this low figure

[Go for it]

Originally Posted by highlightshadow

Intel Core i7-4800MQ @ 2.70Ghz w/ Turbo
32GB DDR3 RAM
nVidia Quado K2100M

At 1080p screen resolution and with most things set at 'medium' i was only getting ~250pfps and 65fps

Again,
Your specs are: CPU Mark: 8620 and Graphic card G3D: 1384
My specs are: CPU Mark: 2371 and Graphic card G3D: 226

Your results: pfps250 fps65
My results: pfps442 fps107

Something is not right with the laptops. Even though you all have much better hardware and more recent CPU and GPU you have lower results.

I hope someone can come up with an explanation for this. I'll postpone buying an new laptop until I see more logical results.

[highlightshadow]

I can't test until much later today but there is a note on AccuRC support site about 'optimus' laptops requiring a specific tweak to be done to 'enable maximum performance'

I have found and changed the setting in my laptop now so will retest tonight and report back.
I probably need to run 3dmark on both my rigs for reference too
If i get some evidence i'll raise a support ticket for this myself too