June 27, 200718 yr if this is solely for FSX, I believe the E6700 would be a better choice - you'll get better performance as its two cores are faster and, with the quad, the additional two cores will only really get use during loading, not scenery rendering etc. which is probably what you will be most concerned about.Andrew
June 27, 200718 yr I don't know, I'd go quad core, especially if planning for the future... | My Liveries | FAA ZMP | PPL ASEL | | Windows 11 | MSI Z690 Tomahawk | 12700K 4.7GHz | MSI RTX 4080 | 64GB 6000 MHz DDR5 | 500GB Samsung 860 Evo SSD | 2x 2TB Samsung 970 Evo M.2 | EVGA 850W Gold | Corsair 5000X | HP G2 (VR) / LG 27" 1440p |
June 27, 200718 yr I think the E6700 would give you more raw framerate in FS right now.But I would still probably get the Quad Q6600. The fps difference wouldn't be THAT much, and the quad is more future-proof. And yes, future proof with FSX. I expect as we go forward, multiple core usage of the sim will only increase, thus the benefits of the quad will become more apparent.Certainly it's a tough choice right now. No question about that.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian Rhett 7800X3D ♣ 96 GB G.Skill Flare ♣ Gigabyte 4090 ♣ Crucial P5 Plus 2TB
June 28, 200718 yr Author thanks guys for the advice,It certainly is a though choice right now,Thanks again,G Best regards , Gérard van Veldhoven
June 28, 200718 yr I'd go with the quad, especially as more and more multi-threaded applications roll out, then your quad will shine in all it's glory. ;)
Create an account or sign in to comment