Jump to content
chiliwili69

Measuring rig performance: Common Baseline (for IL-2 v3.010)

Recommended Posts

 

 

I believe is a good set of settings, i.e., not pushing it too hard with the i7+1080ti, e.g., High general, SS 1.4, not too much on the other parameters

 

When you said 1.4, do mean Oculus Tray Tool or SteamVR?

If you refer to SteamVR, then with a 1080Ti you can easily go to 2.5 or even 2.8 without affecting too much your fps


 

 

Frames: 5359 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 89.317 - Min: 87 - Max: 90

 

This shows that your CPU is limiting your experience at High settings.

 

Stalingrad with fire and smoke is a demanding scenario for CPU. There is nothing you can lose by trying a moderate OC (let´s say 4.5).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Last month (without dynamic resolution on, i.e., at 1.0):  Frames: 3922 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 65.367 - Min: 44 - Max: 91   Today (with dynamic resolution on at .8):  Frames: 4796 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 79.933 - Min: 48 - Max: 91

 

This is a quite interesting test with the Dynamic Resolution Factor (DRF), which devs said "On a regular monitor, quality degradation is more apparent than in VR HMD, so this feature is especially useful for VR"

 

So, it helps for the test when the avg is far from 90.

I don´t know how this DRF is implemented but I suppose it will work as an automatic controller (PID type) trying to keep the measured value (actual fps) at the desired value (fix at 90 in VR) by manipulating two things: scene resolution and particles in special effects. So, it will need to measure a significant and maintained drop in fps to start acting in the resolution/particles.

 

In any case, I neglected this DRF from the beginning (thinking that I always wanted full resolution), but it could solve many fps problems for critic moments. I will need to give it a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I ran my tests again, and I'm still seeing a really nice FPS bump on the benchmark track at my mostly-maxed out settings with dynamic resolution turned on at .8, as appeared to be the case with my first test of those settings earlier tonight.  But I'm also still seeing no bump at all (even a minor decrease) when I'm running my usual settings with OVRdrop/map on, even with dynamic resolution turned on at .8. 

 

 

 

Just out of curiosity for myself, what does the OVRdrop map give you over what the in game HUD mini map or the large map gives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity for myself, what does the OVRdrop map give you over what the in game HUD mini map or the large map gives?

 

Well, for one thing, the FPS drop from OVRdrop seemed to be less than the FPS drop from having the HUD on.  For another, it lets me use the map from PWCG (and/or from IL-2Planner) that has the flight plan and target marked on it, which the in-game mini map does not.  And it lets me put the map exactly where I want it, down inside my cockpit, as if it were down on my knee - IIRC the game's mini map stays in the same place (i.e., bottom corner of the screen) regardless of where you're looking in VR.

 

I didn't mind so much the slight loss of FPS compared to what I was getting with my mostly-maxed settings with dynamic resolution turned off, but it's quite a higher FPS penalty compared to the recent test results with dynamic resolution turned on, so it would be nice to figure out how to replicate the OVRdrop capability in the new Oculus Core 2/Dash environment (assuming that's not going to have a similar FPS penalty with it).

Edited by TG-55Panthercules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got around to running this test, using the settings from post 1

 

My Specs

 

MSI GAMING5 Z97

I5 4690k 3.5ghz stock - overclocked to 4.5ghz

Corsair vengeance ram 2x8gb 2400mhz stock over clocked to 2800mhz

Gigabyte GTX 1070ti running at stock clocks

 

My rest results

 

frames 3602 min 44 max 91 avg 60.033

 

EDIT: heres my pass mark and cpu mark

 

10375

2704

Edited by SYN_Repent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, for one thing, the FPS drop from OVRdrop seemed to be less than the FPS drop from having the HUD on.  For another, it lets me use the map from PWCG (and/or from IL-2Planner) that has the flight plan and target marked on it, which the in-game mini map does not.

 

:good: 

 

Gotcha,  having the PWCG Map available is a nice plus, I may have to give a try.

 

Have you installed Rift Core /Dash yet? My performance whilst HUD active seemed to increase some after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you installed Rift Core /Dash yet? My performance whilst HUD active seemed to increase some after that.

 

I've installed it, but am not yet using it.  I wanted to get some new benchmark results first, plus I wanted to figure out how to display the map image edge-to-edge.  I'll probably try to run some tests regarding the effect on the HUD, but I don't need/want to use the HUD for anything but the map so I was trying to just address that issue directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

My rest results   frames 3602 min 44 max 91 avg 60.033

 

Thanks for reporting your test. First 1070Ti test.

Could you also provide the CPU Passmark and Single Thread Passmark as explained in first post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

My rest results   frames 3602 min 44 max 91 avg 60.033   EDIT: heres my pass mark and cpu mark   10375 2704

 

Thanks for posting your Passmark.

 

The i5-4690K is showing a particular performance. While it delivers a good Single-Thread Passmark (STMark) number, it does not deliver the expected performance in Il-2 VR that other intel CPUs (mostly i7) are delivering.

 

It is the same for the three reported cases of the i5-4690K (doog442, Mick_00, SYN_Repent), they about 15fps below than expected.

 

The expected fps is based in the linear correlation (STMark vs. Avg fps) of all the tests.

 

I don´t know what particular features are in an i7-4790K which are not in i5-4690K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what are the differences between the I5 and the I7? hyper threading?

 

Historically it has been hyper threading - I-7 has 4 cores and 4 virtual cores - and L2 cache, I-7 has little more.

 

I myself disable hyper threading on my I-7 as it has no real benefit for gaming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the game, using 8 threads is getting to be the norm. I expect games using less than 8 threads to be a rarity in a year or two given the quad core officially died on October 5th, 2017 after 6 months of life support.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the top of the line hardware players, I do recommend the following. Fly an hour with max settings (ultra), shadows high, oculus Pixel density to 2 or SS-SteamVR to 4, and when starting in game, press and hold ctrl+numpad2 for a second. 45fps locked, no ASW, sharpen off, AA off. Butter smooth movements of camera, no artifacts. Markers and HUD off.

 

I thought a bit out of the book. It works for me, now I have beautiful graphics and a very high supersampling - I got quality, no pixelation, I can spot well, and, low and behold, ID much better.

 

Please give his a try for an hour and report back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fenris, i tried the ctrl+2 a few days ago, and it worked really well, was very smooth, stuck at 45fps and the horrible prop and gunsight wobbling is gone, try it guys!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting your Passmark.

 

The i5-4690K is showing a particular performance. While it delivers a good Single-Thread Passmark (STMark) number, it does not deliver the expected performance in Il-2 VR that other intel CPUs (mostly i7) are delivering.

 

It is the same for the three reported cases of the i5-4690K (doog442, Mick_00, SYN_Repent), they about 15fps below than expected.

 

The expected fps is based in the linear correlation (STMark vs. Avg fps) of all the tests.

 

I don´t know what particular features are in an i7-4790K which are not in i5-4690K

 

 

Its plain odd. I have the same processor OC to 4.3 and yet there appears to be a massive difference between my results CPU mark 8659 single thread 2482 and SYN_Repent  @ 10375 and 2704 in the post below. 

 

I overclocked to 4.4 and the difference was minimal. Also Mick_00 is OC to 4.5 yet his scores are 8572 / 2630.

 

I can accept the 10FPS more based on the faster card and overclocked memory but I'm still scratching my head at my rigs awful performance.  

 

I got around to running this test, using the settings from post 1

 

My Specs

 

MSI GAMING5 Z97

I5 4690k 3.5ghz stock - overclocked to 4.5ghz

Corsair vengeance ram 2x8gb 2400mhz stock over clocked to 2800mhz

Gigabyte GTX 1070ti running at stock clocks

 

My rest results

 

frames 3602 min 44 max 91 avg 60.033

 

EDIT: heres my pass mark and cpu mark

 

10375

2704

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its plain odd. I have the same processor OC to 4.3 and yet there appears to be a massive difference between my results CPU mark 8659 single thread 2482 and SYN_Repent  @ 10375 and 2704 in the post below. 

 

I overclocked to 4.4 and the difference was minimal. Also Mick_00 is OC to 4.5 yet his scores are 8572 / 2630.

 

I can accept the 10FPS more based on the faster card and overclocked memory but I'm still scratching my head at my rigs awful performance.  

 

Yes but more importantly how does it perform in the actual game for you?

 

My results were not good at all when I tried this some time ago, and in no way compare to the very good performance I get flying my missions. In the test track, my video card actually down-clocking. Flying in missons, some very complex ( PWCG ), it runs full boost speed. Big difference.

Edited by dburne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Its plain odd. I have the same processor OC to 4.3 and yet there appears to be a massive difference between my results CPU mark 8659 single thread 2482 and SYN_Repent  @ 10375 and 2704 in the post below.    I overclocked to 4.4 and the difference was minimal. Also Mick_00 is OC to 4.5 yet his scores are 8572 / 2630.   I can accept the 10FPS more based on the faster card and overclocked memory but I'm still scratching my head at my rigs awful performance. 
 

 

Doog442,

 

Your CPU at 4.3 deliver a right STMark(2482).

 

Based in other CPUs test, every 0.1 GHz of CPU overclock is equivalent to a +60 in the STMark.

 

If you overclock your CPU to 4.5 you should have an STMArk of 2482+60+60=2602, which is more aligned with the Mick_00.

 

Now then another questions is about why having a good STMark, the fps performance is low than expected.

 

The hyperthreading is not delivering any extra fps, we have done test with it. So, perhaps the L3 cache or the number of threads is the reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here are my benchmark results with the following specs:
 
i7 4790k @4.5 ghz
EVGA GTX 1080 TI SC, slight OC with +60 clock, +150 mem
16 GB DDR3 1333 MHz
 

CPU Mark: 11073

Single Threaded: 2650

 
Frames: 2995 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 49.917 - Min: 43 - Max: 78
 
I need me some faster ram I think. Looks like some of you are able to get +10 more fps with faster ram
EDIT: On second thought these results seem kind of low compared to some of the 1070s in this thread. Ideas?
 
EDIT: Here are my results with the same settings but dynamic resolution factor at 0.7 (I notice a very slight degradation in quality)
Frames: 3443 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 57.383 - Min: 43 - Max: 86
 
EDIT 2: Same as above, but with AA turned off
Frames: 3531 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 58.850 - Min: 43 - Max: 90
 
It seems there may be little to gain with AA off?
Edited by Vukos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

i7 4790k @4.4 ghz EVGA GTX 1080 TI SC, slight OC with +60 clock, +150 mem 16 GB DDR3 16 GB   Frames: 2995 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 49.917 - Min: 43 - Max: 78   I need me some faster ram I think. Looks like some of you are able to get +10 more fps with faster ram EDIT: On second thought these results seem kind of low compared to some of the 1070s in this thread. Ideas?

 

That´s strange. With such a CPU+GPU you should achieve around 70avg.

 

Please, report what is your CPU Passmark and also your Single-Thread Passmark as indicated in the first post.

Also, what is your RAM speed?

 

Have you thought to OC your CPU more? 4.6 for example? (with a decent cooler is pretty easy, look at this thread https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29881-overclocking-4790k-better-bos-performance/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It seems there may be little to gain with AA off?

 

 

That's because your CPU can't keep up with the graphics card and AA is done entirely on the graphics card. Thus altering resolution, AA or pixel density will have no impact on your frame rate unless you bump it up high enough that the graphics card becomes the choke point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here are my benchmark results with the following specs:
 
i7 4790k @4.4 ghz

EVGA GTX 1080 TI SC, slight OC with +60 clock, +150 mem

16 GB DDR3 16 GB

 
Frames: 2995 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 49.917 - Min: 43 - Max: 78
 
I need me some faster ram I think. Looks like some of you are able to get +10 more fps with faster ram
EDIT: On second thought these results seem kind of low compared to some of the 1070s in this thread. Ideas?
 
EDIT: Here are my results with the same settings but dynamic resolution factor at 0.7 (I notice a very slight degradation in quality)
Frames: 3443 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 57.383 - Min: 43 - Max: 86
 
EDIT 2: Same as above, but with AA turned off
Frames: 3531 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 58.850 - Min: 43 - Max: 90
 
It seems there may be little to gain with AA off?

 

 

I assume you are using either Precision XOC, or MSI Afterburner for your video card overclocking.

Take a peek at the monitoring whilst running this track file for the test, see if your video card is achieving max boost speed for the temp it is running.

You may find it is doing like mine did, and not boosting at all and perhaps even down-clocking a little. 

 

Also how does it perform in game, versus running that test? Mine achieves max boost clock on my EVGA 1080 Ti throughout each mission and performs very well.  Running this test with the trk file, not so good.

We have very similar hardware specs.

Edited by dburne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That´s strange. With such a CPU+GPU you should achieve around 70avg.

 

Please, report what is your CPU Passmark and also your Single-Thread Passmark as indicated in the first post.

Also, what is your RAM speed?

 

Have you thought to OC your CPU more? 4.6 for example? (with a decent cooler is pretty easy, look at this thread https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29881-overclocking-4790k-better-bos-performance/

 

RAM speed is 1333 so I think I have a lot to gain by upgrading it. 

 

I mistyped my cpu speed, it is atually at 4.5. I have extensively OCd my 4790k and I think I lost the silicon lottery because mine will not go past 4.5 stable without significant overheating. This is with a 212 Evo in a Corsair Carbide 540 high airflow case. 

 

I'll run the passmark benchmarks when I get home tonight

 

EDIT: I was able to do the test right now:

 

CPU Mark: 11073

Single Threaded: 2650

Edited by Vukos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

EDIT: I was able to do the test right now:   CPU Mark: 11073 Single Threaded: 2650

 

I have put you in the results table and based in your STMArk, you should have 21.7 fps more.

The clear guilty is the RAM speed. If you decide to upgrade it try to go to 2600 or above.

You said 4.5 is your max stable overcloking, what voltage (Vcore) do you use for 4.5 GHz?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAM speed is 1333 so I think I have a lot to gain by upgrading it. 

 

I mistyped my cpu speed, it is atually at 4.5. I have extensively OCd my 4790k and I think I lost the silicon lottery because mine will not go past 4.5 stable without significant overheating. This is with a 212 Evo in a Corsair Carbide 540 high airflow case. 

 

 

 

Actually 4.5 is not bad, that is what I have had my 4820k running at for the last 4 years.  You might could get a little more but would likely have to really pump some voltage into it, personally I don't think the minimum gains would be worth the risk to the system.

 

Please take a look at what your GPU is doing as I mentioned earlier, whether it is boosting properly to full speed, during running that trk file for the test. 

 

Also turn on the fps display in game , just flying a mission in game, and see what your fps are looking like ( if you have not already). And also how smooth it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ive been looking at cpu upgrades, and if cpu core speed is the key factor here, then the I3 8350k can reach 5.0ghz easily, what do you guys think? does I7 make that much of a difference? or is it purely core speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For BoS and DCS, single thread performance is the biggest aspect. I suspect there is little difference between the i3-8350k and i7-8700k at 5.0 GHz under ideal conditions in BoS and DCS. That ideal conditions part is a hell of a disclaimer though. If absolutely anything else is running in the background, including windows downloading an update, you will see significant performance loss. The reason is there just isn't much left over for background tasks after accounting for BoS or DCS. I cannot recommend a quad core cpu without HT/SMT for anyone for any purpose. I suggest looking into the i5-8600k or older i7-7700k instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

then the I3 8350k can reach 5.0ghz easily, what do you guys think? does I7 make that much of a difference? or is it purely core speed?

 

That´s a difficult question. Based in the recent tests with your current CPU (4690K) we have seen that Single-Thread Passmark performance doesn´t imply necessarily good performance in BoS.  There are other factor in place like caches or number of threads that we don´t know how they influence. The real thing is that we don´t know what is the real performance until we try it.

 

It would be certainly good that someone with an i3-8350K or i5-8600K (or with access to them) can run the performance test just to know how well it perform. You can ask in the general forum if someone has an i3-8350K or have access to it (some IL-2 players could work in PC shops), and ask them to run the VR test...

 

I have been taking a closer look at the VR tests table and there are some tests of the i5-6600K which have just 4cores/4threads (like the i3-8350K) and it is following well the STMark correlation. So, based on that, the i3-8350K should also be a good candidate.

 

In fact, the more cores your CPU have the more difficult will be to overclock. Some test of ZachariasX with the 7900X (10 cores) shows that it is an absolute beast for multithread applications, but in singlethread is not particularly great since it is difficult to go beyond 4.5 GHz.

 

Sooner or later someone has to try the i3-8350K with a good cooler and good OC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally got my PC back up running with new MB

 

monitor test @ 1080p as per required settings

 

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
  7116,     60000,      94,  159,  118.600
 
pass mark performance test 9.0
 
CPU Mark                    8862
 
CPU single threaded   2291
 
Still life in the old 3570k for a bit yet (non VR anyway) GTX1080 is coping very well with 4K @ Ultra all max SSAO and HDR off
 
all in all I am very happy with my salvage and upgrade job, maybe these tests will help with data even if not VR, specs as per sig
 
 
Cheers, Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 
Still life in the old 3570k for a bit yet (non VR anyway) GTX1080 is coping very well with 4K @ Ultra all max SSAO and HDR off
 
all in all I am very happy with my salvage and upgrade job, maybe these tests will help with data even if not VR, specs as per sig
 
 
Cheers, Dakpilot

 

 

:good: 

 

Glad you are back up and running!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

all in all I am very happy with my salvage and upgrade job, maybe these tests will help with data even if not VR, specs as per sig

Thanks for posting your results. People with only monitor tests is welcome, the results are reported in a separated tab.

If one day you decide to go to VR,  you will not regret it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more interesting tests:

 

With a new Corsair h100i v2,  I tried going for 4.8Ghz but was very unstable and I suspected droop. So I attempted some LLC and acheived somewhat stable results if I only stayed in game.  The results were pretty cool @4.8Ghz when wildly unstable:

 

2017-12-18 20:00:20 - Il-2
Frames: 5167 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 86.117 - Min: 60 - Max: 91

2017-12-18 20:02:32 - Il-2
Frames: 5270 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 87.833 - Min: 67 - Max: 91

 

( this was completely unstable with BSOD's.) soo..

 

When i did get as stable as possible, the results were not worth the effort it seems:

 

2017-12-18 21:24:41 - Il-2
Frames: 5098 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 84.967 - Min: 56 - Max: 91

2017-12-18 22:35:21 - Il-2
Frames: 5080 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 84.667 - Min: 56 - Max: 91

 

...and even then, while seemingly stable in the sim,  any stress test would continue to BSOD in minutes.  I am new to LLC so I assume I was overdoing it one way or the other (too high voltage I suspect)

 

soooo..I overclocked the 1080GTX FE 10%power, +200 Mhz Gpu and +215 Mem Clock and got:

 

2017-12-19 15:12:11 - Il-2
Frames: 5133 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 85.550 - Min: 61 - Max: 91

2017-12-19 15:31:38 - Il-2
Frames: 5133 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 85.550 - Min: 61 - Max: 91

 

Perhaps more could be squeezed as I learn more abt llc levels, etc. newbie. If I could lock my Vcore at 1.380 I think Id be stable.

 

Also the 1080  GTX has another 10% perhaps

 

EDIT:chili, dont add to the chart yet though, for some strange reason I cannot replicate min 61/ 85 after going back and checking. not sure what happened 

Edited by katdog5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VR Test

 

2017-12-20 22:35:01 - Il-2
Frames: 5354 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 89.233 - Min: 86 - Max: 90

 

 

CPU Mark - 18972

CPU Single Threaded - 3043

 

2.012d

i7 8700K @ 5.0GHZ

Motherboard - MSI Z370 Gaming M5

RAM - DDR4 32GB 3000 MHZ

GPU-1080Ti

HMD - Vive

 

 

Also does Control+NumPad 1 do anything on the Vive or is that an Oculus only setting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been benchmarking my new CPU and let's just say I don't feel like I won the Silicon lottery. Granted, I haven't delidded yet.

 

I'm curious though. What kind of loads are on the CPU while playing in VR? What percentages are we talking about? I guess I'm wondering mostly how close these CPU loads in the stress testing softwares, compare to the CPU loads while playing BoX in VR?

 

Upgrades:

-MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon

-i7 8700K

-Coolermaster MasterAirmaker 8

-Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) 3600MHz

-Samsung 960 EVO boot drive

Edited by Warpig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my i7-8700k, total system CPU usage while playing BoS in VR tends to be around 20% with 1 of 12 threads heavily stressed while the others have a light load or are idle.

 

As for how close BoS is to cpu stress tests, the answer is not at all. AIDA64 and CPU-Z stress all CPU threads fully. This results in maximum power draw (and also maximum Voltage droop at default settings). BoS/DCS only stress 1 thread, and so the voltage droop tends to be much more benign as is the heat generation. This is why it is possible to have a high overclock be stable in both games and yet instantly BSOD in a stress test.

 

For an explanation as to how all this works, here's a good youtube video from a well known overclocker:

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

soooo..I overclocked the 1080GTX FE 10%power, +200 Mhz Gpu and +215 Mem Clock and got:   2017-12-19 15:12:11 - Il-2 Frames: 5133 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 85.550 - Min: 61 - Max: 91 2017-12-19 15:31:38 - Il-2 Frames: 5133 - Time: 60000ms - Avg: 85.550 - Min: 61 - Max: 91

 

Frequently I run 3 tests for every change I do just to verify the measurement is consistent. Frequently I have +-1fps for exactly the same test and settings.

 

But When I tried to push the GPU a bit with some OC in power, clock and memory the VR test results were exactly identical. I see the same happen to you.

 

But with the GPU OC I also had another side effect during game playing: Frozen view. (https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/32155-frozen-crashedview-vr/)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Also does Control+NumPad 1 do anything on the Vive or is that an Oculus only setting?

 

Thanks for reporting your test. Enjoy your rig with IL-2!

 

Regarding your question, ASW is a technology developed by Oculus, so it only works for the Rift. I think Valve is working in something equivalent for the Vive, but really no idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I've been benchmarking my new CPU and let's just say I don't feel like I won the Silicon lottery. Granted, I haven't delidded yet.   I'm curious though. What kind of loads are on the CPU while playing in VR? What percentages are we talking about? I guess I'm wondering mostly how close these CPU loads in the stress testing softwares, compare to the CPU loads while playing BoX in VR?

 

What CPU did you buy?

 

In this same thread, I put a post comparing IL-2 VR with Prime95:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/29322-measuring-rig-performance-common-baseline/?p=514455

 

I don´t trust the %CPU or %core load measurements reported by some tools, including Windows performance monitor. Since threads jump from core to core.

At the end of the day, the real effect is in the temperature (more load-->more power-->more temp). And the temp is the real limitation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...