Didn't that cpu come out about 4 or 5 years ago? In gaming terms I guess that means it's ancient.

I spent almost 2 grand 3 years ago this December building it. To be more percise, about 1600 or 1700. But it was a slick running core then, and it still can be now. In Call Of Duty, CSS, BF2, it runs as smooth as silk. In FS9, it has the drops to the high teens when on the ground in the PMDG or LDS, but in the sky, I can easily get 30-40 with most sliders close to the right. I have tried a lot of tweaks, but FSX just wasnt working. At this point, i feel like I have waaay to much invested into FS9 to dump it all now, especially for something I can only get 10 or 12 frames per second in. FS9 still looks beautiful on my rig and it still runs great. IMHO, FSX is the way to go if your system can handle it. But here's how I have been thinking about it: In a year, the C2D E6400's are going to be obsolete. So instead of busting my balls now to get one of those, Im going to save a bit and be able to go all out in a year with something that will wipe the E6400 or similar processors all over the floor. Also, Im waiting to see what happens with AMD. Their Barcelona Quad Core sounds like a bad dude. I really have enjoyed my AMD, and I still do. The only bottleneck is my Mobo. Pretty hard to OC my chip through BIOS. My board has some limits on it. But for now, I'm sticking with FS9. I really hope AMD makes it out of this hole that there in. Maybe they'll be my next processor?Guess I'll have to wait and see.

Judging by your hopes for FSX and AMD, I'd have to guess that you're also a Cubs fan. http://www.thisboardrocks.com/forum/images...es/handbang.gifCheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile

>In FS9, it has the drops to the high teens when on the ground in >the PMDG or LDS, but in the sky, I can easily get 30-40 with most ??>sliders close to the right. >Yes, but FS9 came out 4 years ago.However, if it doesn't run ok on your system then there's no rule that says you've got to have FSX.

Unfortunately that new system you're getting in 6 months.......is already obsolete. Gotta love 'em or hate 'em, these computers.John M

Me and FSX gave it one last shot, but it just didnt work out. After I get a new system in about 6 months, if I can run FSX at around 25-30FPS with the drops into the high teens only at high density area, then I'll give it another shot. My AMD just can't handle it... FSX really does seem to have alot of potential for future growth and expansions.

I feel your pain.I bit the bullet and recently bought a new, powerhouse PC and it drastically changed my FSX experience for the better. When you have the right hardware, FSX is absolutely amazing.

>Didn't that cpu come out about 4 or 5 years ago? In gaming>terms I guess that means it's ancient.Depends which 3200+ he has. The Clawhammer (130nm) is the earliest 3200+ and it came out September 23, 2003. Makes it about 4 years old.The Venice (90nm) version of the 3200+ came out April 24, 2005 so that makes it just over 2 years old.:)If you are wondering how I know all of that, I am not that much of a nerd, I got it from wikipedia's list of amd processors. ;)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

>I spent almost 2 grand 3 years ago this December building it.>To be more percise, about 1600 or 1700. But it was a slick>running core then, and it still can be now. In Call Of Duty,>CSS, BF2, it runs as smooth as silk. In FS9, it has the drops>to the high teens when on the ground in the PMDG or LDS, but>in the sky, I can easily get 30-40 with most sliders close to>the right. >>I have tried a lot of tweaks, but FSX just wasnt working. At>this point, i feel like I have waaay to much invested into FS9>to dump it all now, especially for something I can only get 10>or 12 frames per second in. FS9 still looks beautiful on my>rig and it still runs great. >>IMHO, FSX is the way to go if your system can handle it. But>here's how I have been thinking about it: In a year, the C2D>E6400's are going to be obsolete. So instead of busting my>balls now to get one of those, Im going to save a bit and be>able to go all out in a year with something that will wipe the>E6400 or similar processors all over the floor. Also, Im>waiting to see what happens with AMD. Their Barcelona Quad>Core sounds like a bad dude. I really have enjoyed my AMD, and>I still do. The only bottleneck is my Mobo. Pretty hard to OC>my chip through BIOS. My board has some limits on it. But for>now, I'm sticking with FS9. >>I really hope AMD makes it out of this hole that there in.>Maybe they'll be my next processor?>>Guess I'll have to wait and see. I understand the frustration so I am in the process of purchasing parts for my next system which hopefully will be up and running in the next 2 months. However my next system will be Intel and NOT AMD as I felt I really got burnt by them when I built the present system. The reason I say that is that it seems without any notice shortly after the build that AMD in their infinite wisdom decided to go with the AM2 series leaving those of us who had recently built systems around their 939 pin processor were left stuck with a board with limited possibilties for upgrade as their AM2 only ran on a 940 pin board. That pretty much did it for me on making the decision to go back to Intel as it appears that their socket 775 will be around for a while. The supply of compatible 939 processors also dried up pretty quick and it seemed to me that the AM2 were vastly overpriced. So Intel here I come.CraigASUS A8N- nForce SLI Chipset SATA RAID Dual PCIe MOBOAMD ATHLON64 3500+ CPU w/ HT Tech (Venice)LG GWA-4161 DVD/CDSeagate ST3160811AS 160GB Barracuda 9 7200RPM 8MB SATA II 3Gb/s NCQSeagate ST3160811AS 250GB Barracuda 9 7200RPM 8MB SATA II 3Gb/s NCQEVGA 7950 GT KO PCIe 512mb nvodngov19147-[Guru3D.com] drivers SB Audigy 22G Corsair PC 3200 400MHZ Dual Channel DDR Aspire 500W P/SWinXP Pro 32bit SP2Track IR3 w/vectorCH Yolk & RuddersFS Genesis Terrain MeshFS Genesis Land ClassActive SkyRC4

I'm going to try and hold of as long as I can for FSX... Tooooo much put into FS9, price wise with addons and such. I'd like to get FSX locked at 30-40 with sliders mid to right with the drops to high teens only around the big airports. So to get what I want, I'm going to need to wait it out a while.Oh well, everyone enjoy FSX. I'll be hanging back for about 8 months or so with FS9.

I spent $6000 on a new Dell XPS 720 H2C with dual 8800 GTX cards, a quad core OC to 3.47 Ghz, 2 meg of 1066 OC ram, Blue Ray drive and a 24" monitor. It has been such a nightmare toget everything to work. FS9 worked perfectly on my 3.0 GHz Dell with dual monitors. I had LD767 working fine with dozens of liveries, VATSIM, Sqwakbox, Ultimate traffic, Game Commander voice recognition etc.With the new computer.FSX took 10 tries to install - finally got it 30 fps - OKGot the rudder pedals, throttles and PFC yoke working - OKGame Commander worksWhat I can't get is dual monitors - it works with any application but not FSX (I already posted a help question on this today)I can't get Sqwakbox or FSini to work, thuis I can't fly on line.I can't get and LD767 installed because I can't find the download folder with this stupid Vista.My rudder pedals fall asleep (which I thought was an XP problem) Even though I changed the power settings to the USB ports, they still fall asleep and I get full left rudder and crash.If anyone has any solutions to these nightmares please email me at [email protected] want to give up and hook up the old computer. I paid $6000 for FSX and got more headaches than I can imagine.