64Gb of RAM has been shipped. Test results coming soon. Interesting though that Process Lasso also shows my RAM around 75%. So maybe ram isn't my issue. Based on Process Lasso shown @22:25, I still don't think the 7800x3d or 9900x3d would be the best processor for all these background tasks running. Look at how high the load is on threads 6-11. If I were to shift those loads onto threads 0-5 (or I guess it would be 0-8 on a 7800x3d), I think the cou would be maxed out at 100% utilization. Since the 7900x3d has 6 v-cache cores instead of 8 (like the 7800 and 7950), and since the clock freq is dialed down compared to those other two, I'm starting to feel like my system could really benefit from the 7950x3d. Or preferably the 9950x3d. Of course as soon as I do that, my 4070ti is immediately going to become my bottleneck. ... decision decisions 🤔
For the comparison of 1 versus 3 monitors, you only enabled (power on) the 2nd and 3rd monitor. That gave virtually no FPS loss. In my opinion this is because the 2nd and 3rd screens were already rendered by MSFS, but were not visible because they were “behind” the main screen. After turning on the extra monitors, you just dragged them to those monitors. For a correct comparison, I think you should first remove the 2nd and 3rd monitor in “advanced settings”. Or am I wrong? For me this resulted in: 1 monitor 75 FPS, 2 monitors 59 FPS and 3 monitors 38 FPS. So for each additional monitor 18/19 FPS less (I have 7800X3D and 4090
@@albertprinsen8134 You are correct in your thinking. I had also thought of this after I had finished testing. I need to get back on the system and re-test it to confirm.
At first glance it seems when the GPU RAM pegged out it killed your FPS. I'm going to play around with my rig to compare. You running a GPU software clocker like X1?
How did you separate the views to L&R monitors on MSFS2024? In the MSFS settings, I found the multi monitor option and added my 2nd monitor, but it just mirroring the main monitor.😢
64Gb of RAM has been shipped. Test results coming soon. Interesting though that Process Lasso also shows my RAM around 75%. So maybe ram isn't my issue.
Based on Process Lasso shown @22:25, I still don't think the 7800x3d or 9900x3d would be the best processor for all these background tasks running. Look at how high the load is on threads 6-11. If I were to shift those loads onto threads 0-5 (or I guess it would be 0-8 on a 7800x3d), I think the cou would be maxed out at 100% utilization.
Since the 7900x3d has 6 v-cache cores instead of 8 (like the 7800 and 7950), and since the clock freq is dialed down compared to those other two, I'm starting to feel like my system could really benefit from the 7950x3d. Or preferably the 9950x3d.
Of course as soon as I do that, my 4070ti is immediately going to become my bottleneck.
... decision decisions 🤔
well done, thanks
For the comparison of 1 versus 3 monitors, you only enabled (power on) the 2nd and 3rd monitor. That gave virtually no FPS loss. In my opinion this is because the 2nd and 3rd screens were already rendered by MSFS, but were not visible because they were “behind” the main screen. After turning on the extra monitors, you just dragged them to those monitors. For a correct comparison, I think you should first remove the 2nd and 3rd monitor in “advanced settings”. Or am I wrong?
For me this resulted in: 1 monitor 75 FPS, 2 monitors 59 FPS and 3 monitors 38 FPS. So for each additional monitor 18/19 FPS less (I have 7800X3D and 4090
@@albertprinsen8134 You are correct in your thinking. I had also thought of this after I had finished testing. I need to get back on the system and re-test it to confirm.
At first glance it seems when the GPU RAM pegged out it killed your FPS. I'm going to play around with my rig to compare. You running a GPU software clocker like X1?
How did you separate the views to L&R monitors on MSFS2024? In the MSFS settings, I found the multi monitor option and added my 2nd monitor, but it just mirroring the main monitor.😢