>>>But DX10 does not mean just put in a new graphics card. We>also need PCI express mb and Vista OS and maybe a new PSU>(from what I have heard)That is all true. So, I gather then, that you are not interested in upgrading to DX10 right away. That's fine. That will allow you to keep your fine A8V platform for a while yet.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

>>Your 6600 could be improved by a 7600 card with 512mb>memory>>which would help with FSX.>>>The prices of those make them out of question. But what about>a 6800 with DDR3 and 512M?>Are you sure about that? Is $139 for an AGP 512meg card too high??? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16814133176I would probably get the 7600GS at that price, over a 6800. Add to that, the fact that the 6800's are about $20-$30 more expensive. A 6800 series is a very nice vid card, in its day it was top line. Whereas the 7600 never has been a top line card. But...video card speed is NOT what we need for FS. We need vid memory and lots of it.It would be a tough call between the two, and I would want 2nd and 3rd opinions from other people on that tough choice.>>But it's all academic...if you plan to maybe make the switch>>to FSX in a years time, once add-ons and hardware catch up,>>No I intend to use FSX now (parallell to FS9) at least for>some flying. I have bought it and also the first addon for it>(the FSgenesis).Ok, if I had an A8V and 3200+ and was going to use FSX some now, I would first determine if I was happy with my fps in FSX...are you happy with your fps, after doing all the tweaks? If answer is yes then I would sit still, and not change anything for about a year, then all of this Vista/DX10 stuff will be clearer.If answer is no, then a vid card isn't going to help you as much as a cpu upgrade. As I said in the other thread, get the best bang-for-buck cpu you can with your A8V. That means 3700+ like me ($90), or 4000+ ($140, fading from market), or FX55 ($$ more). Or if you want dual core, the 4200+ and 4400+ are good buys.I would not get a 3800+ as you can get a fast single core that will outperform the dual-core 3800+ in FS.Then I'd look at the 7600GS or 6800 with 512 ram.I don't know what your budget is...Hope my rambling info helps you, and of course, always get 2nd opinions, I don't always have the best ideas... :)RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

You only live once.There will ALWAYS be something faster and better being developed and RIGHT AROUND the corner.Whatever you buy today WILL be 1/2 price in 6 months.My GUTT feeling is dx10 is overhyped and even if not, will be alot longer to be of any real advantage to us. There will be the first hardware releases, overpriced and untried.Then software developers will neeed to actually write programs that take advantage of it. ####, they are yet to take advantage of whats been available.If you are not happy with your current system, beg,borrow and steal to get the latest and enjoy it. but thats just my warped opinion on trying to out smart tech and life in general.:7

Upgrading from a 6600GT to 6800 Ultra or 7600GS is sketchy IMO. If you genuinely want to extend the life of an AGP system go for one of the 3 cards I mentioned.

>That is all true. So, I gather then, that you are not>interested in upgrading to DX10 right away. That's fine. Oh yes I'm interested but the problem is I will have to pay for it and I have the impression that the most sensible thing to do is not to upgrade but to get a whole new computer. I mean a powerful PCIe DX10 graphics card + mb + propably you wan't a new CPU and also memory + Vista + new PSU will cost so much that you might as well get a whole new system.>That will allow you to keep your fine A8V platform for a while>yet.>Yes there is still some potential in it.

>>>Your 6600 could be improved by a 7600 card with 512mb>>memory>>>which would help with FSX.>>>>>The prices of those make them out of question. But what>about>>a 6800 with DDR3 and 512M?>>>>Are you sure about that? Is $139 for an AGP 512meg card too>high??? >No such prices for a 512M DDR3 card here in Sweden and the guy at FS-Gsstrongly emphasised the importance of having DDR3.>http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16814133176>>I would probably get the 7600GS at that price, over a 6800. >Add to that, the fact that the 6800's are about $20-$30 more>expensive. A 6800 series is a very nice vid card, in its dayThe 6800 with DDR3 I have seen here cost about $290 and the 7600 about $420.>need vid memory and lots of it.Yes but I also think we need DDR3 memory.>Ok, if I had an A8V and 3200+ and was going to use FSX some>now, I would first determine if I was happy with my fps in>FSX...are you happy with your fps, after doing all the tweaks?>The fps is not really that big issue. I have about 5-15 fps but still it's usable in FSX. It seems to be designed to function with low fps. It's the stutter and microstutters that annoys me. But of course I also wan't to use addons and I can't accept anything but minimal fps het when the numbers already are that low.I think that since I intend to use FSX now I will upgrade to 2 Gb very soon and wait for falling prices on AGP cards and CPU. Maybe try to overclock my CPU.

You did not tell me you were in Sweden. That naturally affects availability and pricing of these components...I have not heard anything about DDR3 being that big of an advantage, until your statement just now.If you decide to get a whole new system pretty soon, then there's no point in spending money on your existing rig. By 'pretty soon' I mean the next 3-4 months.On the other hand, if you want to squeeze another year out of your system, you can, and moving to 2 gb memory will help with FSX. I figured you were already overclocking. That will help too, and you should be able to do a decent overclock with the Venice cpu and an A8V motherboard.Personally, with your system, if I wanted to squeeze an extra year out of it, I would be more inclined to 1) buy the fastest cpu for the A8V board, and 2) move to 2 gb ram. If you do that you'll be in the same FSX performance ballpark as me, and that will be pretty good.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

>You did not tell me you were in Sweden. That naturally>affects availability and pricing of these components...>>I have not heard anything about DDR3 being that big of an>advantage, until your statement just now.>>If you decide to get a whole new system pretty soon, then>there's no point in spending money on your existing rig. By>'pretty soon' I mean the next 3-4 months.>No that's hardly an option. Actually my current situation must change before I can get anew system. And that could mean I must stick to my current system more than a year.>On the other hand, if you want to squeeze another year out of>your system, you can, and moving to 2 gb memory will help with>FSX. I figured you were already overclocking. That will help>too, and you should be able to do a decent overclock with the>Venice cpu and an A8V motherboard.>Problem is I have two 512M modules at 400 MHz. The Asussupport has told me that adding another two 512M modules will set them to 333 MHz and in addition to that the mb needsto do some more counting.So they strongly recommend getting two 1 Gb modules instead which is twice as expensive as I first thought.>Personally, with your system, if I wanted to squeeze an extra>year out of it, I would be more inclined to 1) buy the fastest>cpu for the A8V board, and 2) move to 2 gb ram. If you do>that you'll be in the same FSX performance ballpark as me, and>that will be pretty good.>But not getting a new graphics card?

>Problem is I have two 512M modules at 400 MHz. The Asussupport>has told me that adding another two 512M modules will set them>to 333 MHz and in addition to that the mb needsto do some more>counting.>So they strongly recommend getting two 1 Gb modules instead>which is twice as expensive as I first thought.>I installed an extra gig in my son's computer, an A64, which slowed the memory down from 400MHz to 333MHz. There was neglible performance loss in FS9 and everything is now so much smoother, so I would recommend going ahead with the RAM upgrade in your existing system.Gary

>>>Problem is I have two 512M modules at 400 MHz. The Asussupport>has told me that adding another two 512M modules will set them>to 333 MHz and in addition to that the mb needsto do some more>counting.>So they strongly recommend getting two 1 Gb modules instead>which is twice as expensive as I first thought.>As Gary said there isn't much difference between 400 and 333 ram.For FSX I'd rather have 2 gb at 333, than 1 GB at 400.I think that's correct what ASUS told you, if I am remembering correctly...filling all 4 slots will do that. I can't quite remember, but I think my board (A8N-E) doesn't do that...?? can't remember.>>But not getting a new graphics card?If I had your setup, I would not get a new gfx card unless I was having problems with the 6600 in FSX. Save that money, and put it towards the memory or cpu if you go that route.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

I have a similar system, and had the same questions as you have. Here's what I found out.My system:Asus A8V DeluxeA64 3000+ (Winchester)2 GB (2x1GB PQI Turbo DDR400 Ram)originally had an FX5500 256MB video cardI ended up getting a BFG 7600GS 512MB AGP card. Huge improvement over the FX5500. You probably won't see that much over a 6600GT. Using Memstat, the most video RAM that has been used so far is about 300MB. This is with the 2nd demo, not the full program. I'm using all of the stock files (not the resized lower resolution ones). My CPU was hitting 100% usage, and was holding back the GPU. So I did some research on overclocking, and luckily the A8V Deluxe is a great board for O/C. I have mine up to 2.367GHZ (equal to a 3800+) up from 1.8GHZ stock), with the stock heatsink and cooler, and a Vcore voltage of only 1.425 (stock is 1.4v). It's very stable and idles at 30C and is 49C under Prime95 testing. Under a normal load it's usually around 40C. My RAM is at 440MHZ (Dual channel), and the system is much faster now, and a better match for the GPU. I have the 7600GS overclocked as well, to 440 clock and 330 memory. It's stable, but I had to put in an Antec 550 watt True Power PSU I had laying around. I have 5 hard drives in this computer and the old 380 watt Antec True Power was showing signs of strain with the new video card. You might not need that much power if you don't have lots of drives.Personally, I think 2 GB RAM (total) and O/C the CPU would help you more than anything else.Anyway, the system is vastly improved, but I still have to limit my FPS to 15 if I want lots of autogen and weather, and smooth operation. It's capable of FPS in the 30s if you get away from lots of building, trees and clouds. I like to fly float planes low and slow, so I like the autogen. Total cost was $150.

>As Gary said there isn't much difference between 400 and 333>ram.>>For FSX I'd rather have 2 gb at 333, than 1 GB at 400.>For FSX I think 2 Gb 333 MHz is better than 1 Gb 400 MHz. But from what I understand FS9 don't use > 1 Gb. Does this not mean that from the point of view for FS9 it only see the 333 MHz change? But is difference that still neglibable.And is it also so between 2 Gb 333 MHz and 2 Gb 400 MHz, i.e no good idea spending extra money on 1 Gb modules?

>>For FSX I think 2 Gb 333 MHz is better than 1 Gb 400 MHz. But>from what I understand FS9 don't use > 1 Gb. Does this not>mean that from the point of view for FS9 it only see the 333>MHz change? But is difference that still neglibable.And is it>also so between 2 Gb 333 MHz and 2 Gb 400 MHz, i.e no good>idea spending extra money on 1 Gb modules? Huh???? I don't really understand your question...2 gb for FSX. 1gb is fine for FS9.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2.5 ghz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (94.47), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

refrased questions1) What would be the difference in performence between 2 Gb 333 MHz and 2 Gb 400 MHz for FSX. 2) What would be the difference in performence between 2 Gb 333 MHz and 1 Gb 400 MHz for FS9? Since FS9 don't use the extra Gb I wonder if 2 Gb 333 MHz could slow down FS9 due to the lower freq?3) Is it worth the money to buy two 1 Gb modules (2*1=2 Gb)(to keep 400 MHz) instead of two 512 modules (4*512=2Gb)?

Did you look into other video cards when making your choice? I have a similar system save for the incumbant radion 9800 pro. My fs9 and fsx experiences are both on the tame side I think, restricted by the video card. Using memstat, I have seen my fsx utilisation of video ram hang around 300MB with lots of sliders (and slow fps).I've looked at 7600GS 512MB, 7600GT 256MB and 7900GTO 512MB. I like the former for it's memory, but concerned about its GPU and memory clock speed. The GT seems like a better step up but has less memory. The GTO is the best of both worlds but is the extra