I am currently holding onto FS2004 using Windows XP until hardware is available that will allow me to run FSX/Vista with all sliders to the max with add-ons such as the LDS 767-300ER. That is going to be a ways off, I know, because I can

I also have an ASRock 939 Dual-SATA2 board and went to an AMD AM2 4600+ using the required addin board to make the AM2 upgrade. The AM2 4600+ replaced an AMD 4000+. I also upgraded the memory to 2 Gigs, and use a Nvidia 7900GS.Have not overclocked the cpu at all and find FS9 is very fluid (I do not run AI and fly online at all times). I've set ASv6 to run on core 2 with core 1 taking care of everthing else. That made quite a difference as I no longer get stutters when the WX updates.I'm uncertain if any bios available from ASRock will support newer AM2's You might want to check their website before spending the money for the cpu. Also, a look at the Tom's Hardware review of the AMD2 5000+ Black edition could be interesing for you.Jim Harnes

I will definitely check out the ASRock website to make sure the AM2 6400+ I want to squeeze all the performance I can out of FS9 experience. I'll check out the 5000 Black box edition. However, hopefully, it is a good overclocker. I'll check out some reviews.I wonder how many of the programs I mentioned can be moved to the second core. Thanks,RH

RH I would go for a video card upgrade. Best performance increase for the buck in FS9 considering your cpu is at 3.0ghz. Dual core will not do much for FS9. A few suggestions: 512 meg for the video card or more like the 8800gts, 8800gt, or ATI 38xx. Pierre

I thought with FS2004, the 7900 GS was about as good as you are going to get. RH

In keeping with the AMD platform, your system is pretty close to its peak already. Yes, having dual core will allow FS9 to have it's own CPU playpen separate from the addons, which will not so much increase performance but rather stop addons from detracting from performance. Changing from DDR1 to DDR2 will make a little difference, but probably less than 5% overall.Re the well-meaning suggestion to upgrade video card, I would definitely NOT do this for FS9 as a 7900 256M card is plenty enough power, even at high res and moderately high AA/AF settings.Gary

Sorry Gary, I disagree. I think FS9 does benefit from a 64GB/sec memory bw card. And I'm not the only one to think that:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho..._id=15683&page=My honest opinion only. 'EveningPierre

Unfortunately, I did not benchmark FS9 before I upgraded from a 7900 to an 8800, but I did do a before and after FSX test of this config change. The result was a measly 2.8% improvement in FSX performance using the 8800 over the 7900, at that was at 3360x1050 and using in-game AA/AF. Given that most people don't run FS9, let alone FSX, at 3360x1050 AND it is pretty commonly accepted that FS9 is less demanding on the graphics card than FSX is, the improvement in FS9 performance would likely be in the 1-2% range at most.So yes, the 8800 is a nice card and the GT is a really good price, but it would be an extremely poor bang for buck upgrade for someone already owning a 7900GT and primarily using FS9.Gary

That's fine Gary. A good benchmark would have given us a good answer there I agree. I do benchmark everything I do here with FS9 & FSX. But my last upgrade was a complete upgrade so I cannot correlate the data to a video card gain only: FS9 actually doubled in my benchmarks (old fsbench files)that is going from Athlon64 2.4ghz 2gig ram ati X850xt256meg to e6850 3.0ghz 2gig 800 ram nvidia8800gts640meg. Grounds shadows were checked (something I couldn't do before) and clouds coverage at maximum (that's also something I couldn't do before). With the old setup, the lows were recorded close to 20 but with the new setup, the lows were in the 40's.Pierre

About a year ago, I upgraded from an ATI 9800Pro to the Nvidia 7900 GS. The Nvidia 7900 GS allowed be to turn up both AA and AF without any loss of framerates. However, even with the overclocked FX57 (at 3.0 running FS9), I still get times, in heavy clouds and near big airports, that my frames-per-second go into the single digits. If the Nvidia 8800gts 640Mb videocard would allow me to go though heavy clouds and to approach large and busy airports without significant loss in framerates, I would purchase one today. What do you think?Thanks,RH

Well guys - I just purchased the eVGA e-GeForce 8800 GTS Video Card (320Mb edition). I will install it over the weekend and give you a review on its performance, when compared to my current 7900GS, both running FS9.RH

Look forward to your findings ! I'd be quite surprised if there is a big difference..

I'll definitely keep you posted. If there is not significant improvement, then it's going back.RH

I installed the 8800 GTS while the wife was taking a long bath. I won't be able to test it with FS2004 until in the morning. I can't wait. I'll let you guys now how it goes.It was a snap to install. I just uninstalled the 7900 GS drivers and used driver cleaner to remove all Nvidia software. I installed the 8800 GTS and then the drivers, and here I am.RHI'll let you know how it goes in the morning.RH

I could not wait. I have been playing around with FS9 and my new 8800 GTS (320Mb). I don't have specific numbers at this time, but it appears that the 8800GTS (320Mb) is giving me at least twice the framerates as did the 7900GS in all situations.I have not experienced this much difference from one card to another since the days of FS98 (10 years ago). Even going from the ATI 9800 Pro to the PNY 7900 GS did not show this much improvement (not nearly!). All I could do back then was turn up the AA and AF without losing frames per second. Now, I am getting at least double!!! RH