Hi community, nice to be on board.Shortly, I will be building a new PC for flight simulator ONLY.I've been trying desperately to get some comparisons of how my frame rates might go, and processor comparison, but as yet, I've been unable to finad anything, so I decided to post here.My Current system:AMD AthlonXP 2500 Barton core1Gb PC333 DDR3x60Gb IDE Drives (No RAID)On-board AC97 SoundGeForce FX6200 AGP with 256Mb VRAMWindows XP SP2.I fly at 1024x768, most details maxed. 2xAA, getting between 12-35fps (locked). And I want to know how my new system below may compare in frame rates but at 1280x1024 res please:AMD Athlon64 (San Diego core) 32002Gb DDR4001x200Gb SATA driveDVD-ROM driveOn board soundGeforce FX6600GT with 128MbWindows XP SP2I'm hoping that I will be able to retain consistent frame rates of about 30fps. Will this be possible with the new rig?Thanks

Hi Andrew, welcome onboard. I think the 6600GT/128MB (128-bit) will not be good enough to obtain decent framerates @1280x. For 1280x I'ld recommend a card with 256-bit and 256MB of memory. For 1024x the 6600GT is fine. You'll only 'need' 2GBs of RAM if you run FS with RAM-intensive add-ons. Otherwise, a total of 1GB should be more than enough. AFAIK, there is no San Diego 3200 CPU, do you mean the 3700? Hope this adds to thoughts, good luck and kind regards Jaap

Jaap,Thanks for the advice, I do indeed stand corrected; I meant a 3200 processor. I wrote this topic whilst at work...lol.I have taken your advice, I intend to go for the 6600GT with 256Mbof memory, and in PCiE format. I was going to do this so that at a later date I could SLI another card, but I've heard many rumours that FS9 will not address the second card.Even if this is the case, and the sim will not see the second video card, I will still go with this configuration, because I'm sure that the next revision of Flight Simulator will.Many thanks :)Andrew.

Hi Andrew, you're welcome. Your initial post was great as it included one of the most important details (IMO); the resolution you're aiming at. AIM, if you want to use the resolution you indicated with high AA/AF settings, the display adapter would ideally have 'a bit' of juice. Hence, the 256-bit/256MB recommendation. The 6600(GT) series are 'only' 128-bit cards and will likely do less well than 6800 Geforces or X800 Radeons which both are 256-bitters. Specially when facing a lot of clouds. Here's a link to a Rojak Pot's site for GPU specs: http://www.rojakpot.com/default.aspx?locat...1=88&var2=1On a general note; system details I wouldn't try to save money on are mainboards and the chassis aka case/PSU. Mainboards and PSUs are crucial components. And considering an app like FS stresses your system 100%, the case would ideally have provisions for at least 1-2 extra fans (I like cases with fan provisions in the drive bay to keep the HD(s) nice and cool). >>I was going to do this so that at a later date I could SLI another card, but I've heard many rumours that FS9 will not address the second card. Even if this is the case, and the sim will not see the second video card, I will still go with this configuration, because I'm sure that the next revision of Flight Simulator will.<