Ok, I know people are posting info about this in other threads, but I was unable to find info specific to my system. In advanced, I appreciate everyones patience in answering similiar questions.I would like build a new Core 2 system in about 6 months or so when the typical FSX tips/tweaks are worked out and hardware prices are lower. In the meantime, will upgrading my CPU and/or Video give me a significant improvement in FS9 and allow me to use with FSX a little bit. What are the best AGP video cards now?I have FS9 working w/many add-ons (Dreamfleet 727/PMDG stuff/etc.) and I am happy, but I would like some more speed in FS9 until the add ons and hardware catch up with FSX.Thanks again.ASUS P4P800P4 2.66 ghz 1 gig ramATI Radeon 9800 pro w/128 mb AGP

Perhaps a marginal improvement in FS9, but FSX will appreciate a beefier graphics card much more. I'd wait the six months myself.Gary

I also have a P4P800 SE AGP System- 3.00 Ghz Hyperthreading Processor- now clocking at 3.3 Ghz2 Gigs of RAMNVIDA 6200 256mb/AGP 8x video...I always got exceptional performance with FS9 and I am getting SOLID 20+ with FSX,Graphics: High, Aircraft: Medium High, Scenery: Ultra High (with water effects turnned down two notches)Weather: Medium HighTraffic: Medium HighI would recommend disabling the onboard audio in BIOS and Putting in a PCI audio card. the onboard uses up CPU Cycles.After I bought FSX, I added a gig (I had 1), ALTHOUGH, I believe that 1.5 Gb RAM is more than enough based on testing (http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=121&topic_id=361453&mesg_id=361453&page=). The NVIDA card upgrade ($75) was the big one for me... I am also running with reduced size terrain textures (http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=121&topic_id=357587&mesg_id=357587&page=2)Attached is the config file with settings to get the performance... can also provide screen shots showing the FPS if you like...

It's an industry-driven fallacy that PCI-X is better than AGP. Before FSX there wasn't a single game that made full use of the AGP bus speed, let alone PCI-X greater bandwidth and I/O capacity.I haven't tested with FSX but things might have changed with this game, given the massive texture demands placed on the computer, but at the end of the day you are limited in upgrade capability to a 7600GS with 512meg RAM or a very pricey 7800GS with 512meg RAM. I wouldn't trust an ATI card at this level as their performance will lag behind the Nvidia equivalents. In terms of bang for the buck you could go for the 7600GS, in terms of best achievable performance on the rig you have now the 7800GS is the best - the only - choice. But going for the pricey option doens't mean the performance will be much better, you might just expose the next weakness in the system. :)But if the extra 2-3 fps is vital then that's what I'd go for.Hope this helps.Allcott

Look out for the Radeon 1950pro AGP which is coming in November.

>Look out for the Radeon 1950pro AGP which is coming in>November. Yes, there's still life in the old AGP dog yet, now that even the card makers realise that Vista and DX10 is not going to take-off the way MS might have liked it to. Unlike XP, I predict very short queues at computer stores at nmidnight this time round. ;)Anyone know a price point for the 1950Pro AGP?Allcott

If 6 months is all you are going to wait, then I would tough it out with what I had, put the upgrade money in a 6-month CD at a bank, take it out after 6 months and put the $30 towards the vid card :) Enjoy FS9 and the PMDG stuff.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

>It's an industry-driven fallacy that PCI-X is better than>AGP. Before FSX there wasn't a single game that made full use>of the AGP bus speed, let alone PCI-X greater bandwidth and>I/O capacity.>>I haven't tested with FSX but things might have changed>with this game, given the massive texture demands placed on>the computer, but at the end of the day you are limited in>upgrade capability to a 7600GS with 512meg RAM or a very>pricey 7800GS with 512meg RAM. I wouldn't trust an ATI card at>this level as their performance will lag behind the Nvidia>equivalents. >>In terms of bang for the buck you could go for the 7600GS, in>terms of best achievable performance on the rig you have now>the 7800GS is the best - the only - choice. But going for the>pricey option doens't mean the performance will be much>better, you might just expose the next weakness in the system.>:)>>But if the extra 2-3 fps is vital then that's what I'd go>for.>>Hope this helps.>>>AllcottThanks everyone for all of the replies. How much improvement will I get with the 7600GS card? 10% -- 20% or better???Thanks.

>It's an industry-driven fallacy that PCI-X is better than>AGP. Before FSX there wasn't a single game that made full use>of the AGP bus speed, let alone PCI-X greater bandwidth and>I/O capacity.Taking this one step further, I reckon that if graphics cards were still available in PCI (not PCI-E, I mean the AGP predecessor) flavour they would be nearly as fast as their PCI-E counterparts. Some of these so-called advances in interface have been nothing more than an excuse to make us upgrade to the latest and supposedly-greatest.Gary

There is a setting in BIOS "Maximum AGP Aperture" or similarin case you havent already looked at that....Mine was on 64MB till I changed it to 256MB - the highest choice.I have P4P800 motherboard.Didnt do before and after frame rate count - sorry.After switching fm 9800 pro to 7600 GS I seem (only put it in yesterday!) to get 2-3 fps more, doesnt sound much but Im glad of it... - it does 'feel' better.The reduction in blurred ground textures toward the horizon is considerable though. Things are much more detailed now.I think it was worth