OpenRails performance on mid range system

[conrail1]

Here is an example a of how OpenRails performs on a mid range system compared to a highest end configuration.

The specs on the mid range system -

ASUS Rampage Extreme (BIOS 1201)
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 w/Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme
Mushkin XP3-12800 Ascent 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3 1600
EVGA GTX 285 “FTW” (258.96)
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
WD VelociRaptor 150GB – Windows XP/SP2 64-bit Edition
WD VelociRaptor 300GB – Games/Programs
PC Power and Cooling 1000Watt
LIAN LI PC-A70B



The specs on the high end system -


ASUS Rampage III Extreme (802 BIOS)
Intel Core i7-980X Extreme Edition w/Corsair H50
CORSAIR DOMINATOR-GT 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) (7-7-7-20)
EVGA GeForce GTX 480 SuperClocked (258.69)
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
WD VelociRaptor 150GB – Windows 7 Ultimate 64
WD VelociRaptor 300GB – Games/Programs
PC Power & Cooling 910Watt Silencer
Corsair Obsidian Series 800D


As expected the i7 980X/GTX 480 out performs the Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 most the time significantly but I was still impressed at how smooth the scenery/object loading was even with the 3GHz Core 2. Image quality was also very impressive with the GTX 285 and the 258.96 drivers.

All of the screens were taken at 1920x1080 resolution, 8xQ SuperSample AA/16xAF.




Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 114 FPS




Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 -167 FPS




Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 97 FPS



Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 -171 FPS





Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 149 FPS



Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 -315 FPS






Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 91 FPS



Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 -173 FPS






Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 40 FPS




Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 -75 FPS

[conrail1]

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 88 FPS




Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 - 150 FPS






Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 84 FPS




Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 - 157 FPS





Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 79 FPS



Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 - 158 FPS





Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 94 FPS




Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 - 164 FPS





Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 126 FPS



Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 - 260 FPS

[conrail1]

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 - 109 FPS





Intel i7 980X/GTX 480 -165 FPS

[wacampbell]

Your analysis has been helpful to the OR development team.

Thanks.

[conrail1]

Your analysis has been helpful to the OR development team.

Thanks.

If there’s anything in particular that needs to be tested let me know. Any of the three machines I have been testing OpenRails on, i7 975X (Quad core)/ATI 5870, i7 980X (Hex core)/GTX 480 and the Core 2 Q9650 (Quad core)/GTX 485 based machines can be reformatted with Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7, 32 and 64 bit at any time.

I might give Windows 7 a try next on the Core 2 Q9650/GTX 285 based machine to see what impact the OS has on performance.

It’s probably too early in OpenRails development to expect multiple GPU’s to help with performance but I also have an ATI 4870x2 (dual GPU’s) sitting here so that’s something else to test with when I get around to it.

[conrail1]

Something I forgot to mention about the first screen shots taken with full “F-5” info shown in the upper right hand corner of the screen.

The screen shot taken using the i7 980X (Hex core) only shows “Processors = 6”. As many know the i7 has Intel’s Hyper-Threading Technology which would show the i7 980X as having 12 cores. Since the majority of the applications I run barely use 2 cores let alone 12 I have Hyper-Threading disabled on both my i7 setups in BIOS (HT is a known to generate extra heat).

I will be testing OpenRails with HT enabled in the future.

[longiron]

The screen shot taken using the i7 980X (Hex core) only shows “Processors = 6”. I have Hyper-Threading disabled on both my i7 setups in BIOS (HT is a known to generate extra heat).

I will be testing OpenRails with HT enabled in the future.

Open Rails gets its information about the # of cores from the System. Since you have HT "turned off" at the BIOS level, OR sees exactly what Windows sees = 6 cores.

Please note that Open Rails will not use more than 4 cores no matter how many you have. Please consult the documentation for more information.

I am curious to see the impact of HT on performance.

[conrail1]

Please note that Open Rails will not use more than 4 cores no matter how many you have. Please consult the documentation for more information.

I did see that mentioned in the documentation. I’m taking a look at whether the extra 2 cores on the 980X can make any difference with OpenRails since 4 cores can be devoted to OR and the 2 left over can go to the operating system.

I am curious to see the impact of HT on performance.

I’ll be testing that soon, I just got done installing Windows 7 64 on the Q9650/GTX285 “mid range” machine to see what improvements over XP/SP2 64-bit there are with this setup.

[conrail1]

It’s not exactly the results I expected but here is the performance difference between Windows XP/SP2 64-bit and Windows 7 64-bit with the Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285 setup.

I wasn’t expecting a big performance increase but with Windows 7’s better multi-core support I thought it might do better than it did.

What’s interesting is the fact that this same setup and RailWorks will consistently show a 15-20 FPS increase with Vista 64 or Windows 64 compared to running RW on XP/SP2 64-bit.




Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650/GTX 285, Windows 7 64 – 1920x1080 resolution, 8xQ SuperSample AA/16xAF -


107 FPS





101 FPS





134 FPS





109 FPS





42 FPS





69 FPS





88 FPS





89 FPS

[conrail1]

More detailed specs on the Q9650/GTX 285 “mid range” setup used -

[muskokaandtahoe]

Here is an example a of how OpenRails performs on a mid range system compared to a highest end configuration.

The specs on the mid range system -

ASUS Rampage Extreme (BIOS 1201)
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 w/Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme
Mushkin XP3-12800 Ascent 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR3 1600
EVGA GTX 285 “FTW” (258.96)
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
WD VelociRaptor 150GB – Windows XP/SP2 64-bit Edition
WD VelociRaptor 300GB – Games/Programs
PC Power and Cooling 1000Watt
LIAN LI PC-A70B

What's "mid range" is a highly subjective determination. Fer instance, I'd not label the the above machine as "mid-range" simply because it has a 1000 Watt PSU -- not that the PSU has anything to do w/ performance but that it clearly indicates this PC is custom built for gaming performance. A pair of VelociRaptor disks, standalone sound card, and fairly recent GPU confirm the judgment.

What did that hardware cost you $1,750? $2,000? And what OS? That's not what most folks would call a mid-range price.

To me, mid-range is off the shelf units, pre-built -- and not the highest priced but middle of the pack priced, which probably means no more than 60% of what this rig cost -- and a year, perhaps two, old.

[conrail1]

What's "mid range" is a highly subjective determination. Fer instance, I'd not label the the above machine as "mid-range" simply because it has a 1000 Watt PSU -- not that the PSU has anything to do w/ performance but that it clearly indicates this PC is custom built for gaming performance. A pair of VelociRaptor disks, standalone sound card, and fairly recent GPU confirm the judgment.

What did that hardware cost you $1,750? $2,000? And what OS? That's not what most folks would call a mid-range price.

To me, mid-range is off the shelf units, pre-built -- and not the highest priced but middle of the pack priced, which probably means no more than 60% of what this rig cost -- and a year, perhaps two, old.

Actually a quick look around in any hardware forum will show that this setup would be considered “mid-range”. We’re talking two year+ old tech here.
The socket 1366 Intel i7 dethroned the Core 2 for the high end CPU spot almost two years ago.

As far as the video card goes the GTX 285 was just a re-spin/die shrink on the GTX 280 which was released in the spring of 2008, another two year old component that is considered mid range now.

As an example to get you up to speed the following specs are what my other two setups are using and would be considered the “high end” of the scale -




ASUS Rampage III Extreme (802 BIOS)
Intel Core i7-980X Extreme Edition w/Noctua NH-D14
Mushkin Enhanced Ridgeback 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) (6-8-6-24-1N)
EVGA GeForce GTX 480 SuperClocked (258.96)
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
WD VelociRaptor 150GB – Windows 7 Ultimate 64
WD VelociRaptor 300GB – Games/Programs
PC Power & Cooling T1KWSR 1000W
LIAN LI PC-A70B


ASUS Rampage II Extreme (1802 BIOS)
Intel Core i7-975 Extreme Edition w/Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme 1366 RT
Mushkin Redline Ascent 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) (6-7-6-18-1N)
Asus/ATI 5870 (Catalyst 10.7)
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
WD VelociRaptor 150GB – Windows XP/SP2 64-bit Edition
WD VelociRaptor 300GB – Games/Programs
SILVERSTONE 1500Watt SST
SILVERSTONE TJ09-B

[muskokaandtahoe]

Actually a quick look around in any hardware forum will show that this setup would be considered “mid-range”. We’re talking two year+ old tech here.

Two years ago this rig was a bleeding edge, custom build for gaming. Today it would still cost ~$2,000 to build (adding in the OS).

Sorry pal, but $2,000 for 2 year old hardware isn't mid range.

Most people buy the best they can afford from pre-built, major vender product lists, which, IMO, makes the range of prices the determining factor, not range of hardware performance... so if you want to see what real-world mid range is try what Dell or HP desktops offer today and pick one that's priced in the middle of the range of offered PC's. Whatever that rig is what most people consider mid-range.

For myself, I can afford to own a custom built, high end, machine -- I have a Intel 930 sitting in a box waiting for two more components to arrive so I can build a new rig -- so I do understand what the hardware forum people think and say. But those opinions, while useful to you and me, are hardly mainstream.

[conrail1]

Sorry pal, but $2,000 for 2 year old hardware isn't mid range.

Two year old high end components/tech equals mid range performance regardless of how much you spent on the components 2 years ago. What I paid for it two years ago has nothing to do with how it’s performance compares to the latest high end hardware today.

Today it would still cost ~$2,000 to build (adding in the OS).

It would? Not with what I came up with.


I found the CPU for $329.00 -

http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=10009078&prodlist=froogle

4GB of low latency RAM for $129.00 -

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226120

The 2 year old GTX 285 is now hard to find but something similar can be had for between $140.00-$214.99 -

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130442

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...20200%20series


The Rampage Extreme is also over 2 years old and is also hard to find but this would provide the same performance for $124.99 -

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131377

A quality power supply of your choice (Corsair comes to mind) for around $150.00 with a case. Then there are the many choices for storage depending on your budget and an OS of your choice -

http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCateg...rating-Systems


I come up with a figure around a grand probably less if you shopped around but as I said earlier it would be money better spent on a socket 1156 i7 setup if you don’t have the budget for a higher end socket 1366 i7/triple channel memory/X58 setup.

Most people buy the best they can afford from pre-built, major vender product lists, which, IMO, makes the range of prices the determining factor, not range of hardware performance... so if you want to see what real-world mid range is try what Dell or HP desktops offer today and pick one that's priced in the middle of the range of offered PC's. Whatever that rig is what most people consider mid-range.

Correction, those of us who are serious about running simulation games on a PC don’t buy pre-built. “Real-world” mid range from Dell or HP would be good for office chores but not for gaming.

For myself, I can afford to own a custom built, high end, machine -- I have a Intel 930 sitting in a box waiting for two more components to arrive so I can build a new rig -- so I do understand what the hardware forum people think and say. But those opinions, while useful to you and me, are hardly mainstream.

Again we’re not talking “mainstream”, gaming on the PC is not a mainstream activity.

[muskokaandtahoe]

Correction, those of us who are serious about running simulation games on a PC don’t buy pre-built.

Exactly. Which is also exactly why I think your opinion about what is mid range is completely wrong.

I believe that only a small percentage of the people who run train sims do so on custom built, bleeding edge PC's and therefore to categorize a identical PC that happens to be 2 years old as mid range is, IMO, to completely misrepresent the environment that is use. The vast majority of players don't have -- and never will -- such a machine. As both a route designer and a software developer I think it's pretty important to understand what people actually have... you know... reality.

FWIW, your price quotes include substitutions... the Rampage is available so instead of the $129 you suggested for the other product, it would cost you between $300-$400 for that MB and the EVGA graphics card is available and it'll cost between $400-$700. It's at least $1500... then add the OS. So I'll stick w/ my own estimate, thank you very much.

I've said what I wanted to say.