>Oh it's been tested and the above was online with plenty of>traffic about. Not seen it below 30FPS yet :) Then nothing remains but to congratulate you!Michael J.http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9320/apollo17vf7.jpg

The system I am using runs FSX OK. The system is probably way over the top for FSX as it was built for primarily working with HD TV video editing/production and very large image editing. Yes a Mac would have done the job, but it won't run FSX as nicely.......even dual boot.System Spec:EVGA 790i Ultimate MoboIntel QX9770 Quad Core CPU @ stock 3.4GHz - no overclocking as the 790 mobo is very twitchy about oc!!Tagan 1100 Watt PSU4GB (2x2GB) Corsair 1600MHz RAMCreative X-Fi Titanium Sound CardDual XFX 1GB 9800GX2 Graphics cards running in Quad SLiVista Ultimate SP1 32-bit (may go to 64-bit later)Twin Samsung 750GB RAID1 System array1TB Samsung Data drive2x Blu-Ray DrivesDell 3008WFP DisplayThis runs FSX just fine (and FS9.1 even better)at 1920 x 1200 but the image is not so good at the full 2560 x 1600 resolution the Dell is capable of, but I guess the game (and the add-ons) isn't really set up to go that high.Richard

>Oh it's been tested and the above was online with plenty of>traffic about. Not seen it below 30FPS yet :) Bill,Just curious, what kind of frame rates do you get at a gate at a very busy airport add-on like Heathrow or Chicago with bad weather and heavy traffic? And what do you have your sliders at in FSX?I'm assuming that you have some of the new FSX airports that are out now. I have a new E8600 with almost every add-on available and only manage to get 10-12 fps at Chicago with the PMDG 747X. This is with FS DREAMTEAMS Chicago airport, ASX(running off a laptop),UTX,etc.The same can be said for Aerosofts Mega airport Heathrow.That being said, the sim runs pretty smooth even at these low frame rates which leads me to believe that it's very hard to judge performance on frame rates alone.

There is a lot of information floating around about PC specs and running FSX.. there are a few points I would like to make..1 - There is NO.. PC spec currently that will run FSX with very high frames with addons like scenery and complicated aircraft out the box.. It just isn't here yet.2 - There is NO point.. at all.. in spending massive amounts of money of graphics cards if you want to use the machine for FSX, it makes no difference, the bottle neck is the CPU you are wasting your money.. honestly.. and 8800GT is more than capable..3 - There is virtually no advantage in DDR3 ram that you're likely to be able to capitalise on in FSX.4 - Current AMD CPUs are not even close to delivering what Intel current CPUs can at this time, they are not competition.5 - There is virtually no advantage to SLI or Xfire in FSX, in fact it's most likely to cause a reduction in overall performance, this has been seen in a lot of reviews I have read and confirmed by friends when they removed the second card..6 - Whatever you spend your money on now, REMEMBER.. it's already not good enough so don't spend a tonne..These are not just my opinions, but pretty much provable and demonstrated in many reviews and benchmarks on the web.. I did a lot of research when I built my system and looked into Extreme Intel chips, water cooling, Quad SLI etc.. These are my views and I am sure they probably won't be shared by all others, but my conclusions from months of selection were as follows:1 - Get a quad or dual core intel chip that won't break the bank and provides scope for over clocking, like the Q6600, or E8500.. These are plenty good enough... I went for the Q6600.. it's overclocking ability is high (3.6Ghz on air with a tuniq 120 tower), it's very cheap, and the FSB1333 disadvantage of the higher chips isn't going to reduce anything much at all.. (o/c will cancel out any advantage anyway)2 - Get a motherboard that supports overclocking that chip.. I chose an ASUS P35.. a tried and tested chipset with plenty of OC ability and DD2, which is very cheap RAM.3 - Get 4GB of ram.. DDR2 is fine.. I got some DDR2 1066Mhz.. but even that is overkill.. it's not actually clocked at that speed even after the CPU overclock.. but since it's the same price as the lower speed just get this..4 - Get a sensibly priced, reasonably powerful GFX card.. I went for the 9800 GTX+ it's got plenty of pump for buck (I got a deal

>That being said, the sim runs pretty smooth even at these low>frame rates which leads me to believe that it's very hard to>judge performance on frame rates alone.You're absolutely right, FSX runs smoother with lower FPS than previous versions did. Slider-wise most are high or max but water is on low, no ground scenery shadows etc and at a UK2000 airport, with traffic, online, usually about 30FPS now (with ASX/UTX/GenX etc running). Having said that it is quite possible, I've tested it, to get the 747X running at 2FPS depending on sliders, PC setup, other progs running etc etc. Performance is as much about PC setup and FSX tuning as it is about the horsepower thrown at it.