I posted this in hardware section and got a few responses.Thought I would try here to.Probably will get moved.Do I want Win XP Pro or Vista on new unit built mainly for FS?My post at hardware forum: Building new unit and my computer guy is saying to use Win XP Pro as it is system recommended.What about availability of DX10 with XP Pro?Thanks,Ron

You can only get DX10 functionality running Vista as your OS. XP is DX9. Seeing how the DX10 implmentation in FSX is termed DX10 preview and has alot of issues, making a recommendation to run XP Pro is a decent one.I run FSX on a Vista System that was specfically built by me to run FSX under DX10. Unfortunately FSX DX10 performance and graphical quality pails in comparison to FSX under DX9. So I'm running FSX on my system under DX9.

Thank you for the information.I am an old guy that relies on the info I get here in the forums.I am looking for good graphics and smooth flying.I am now running 5 yr old P4 2.4 with 1.5 ram and nvidia 6600 256 card.I have it running OK with sparse AG and not going into high population areas.I can afford a new setup to balance off my wife's cart fee at our golf course because I WALK with push cart.Thanks,Ron

Ron,I'd also advise sticking with XP. I have a dual-boot system and have FSX installed under both XP and Vista....which one do I use for FSX??..... XP!RegardsJim

>You can only get DX10 functionality running Vista as your OS.> XP is DX9. Seeing how the DX10 implmentation in FSX is>termed DX10 preview and has alot of issues, making a>recommendation to run XP Pro is a decent one.>What kind of issues? Does not DX10 offer anything over DX9 in FSX?

>What kind of issues? Does not DX10 offer anything over DX9 in>FSX? Number one DX10 Preview is supposedly supposed to increase performance. On my system its a huge decrease in performance. The AA and AF are application controlled and cannot be adjusted any higher then what they are coded in FSX (which isn't all that high). There's flickering textures everywhere and there is ever constant image tearing because Vsynch cannot be enabled.These are but a few of the issues. Basically the only improvement I see is that light bloom can be enabled with out the major performance hit that it applies under DX9.For me I cannot get DX10 Preview to be anywhere near the visual quality of DX9 nor can I get DX10 Preview to perform as well as DX9.As I've said many times before, the DX10 implementation in FSX was called DX10 Preview for a reason.

i agree, my dx9+fsx+vista is great, the dx10 preview seems to hurt my quality and fps significantly, for some reason

I disagree, when I have DXT 10 turned on, my frame rates jump by 20 to 30%I think it is also more to do with the rig one has.I have a XPS-7104gb ramQuad COre cpue clocked to 3.19Nvidia 8800 GTX 756mbI get even with most settings set to high, mid to high twenties with lots of AI Traffic etc and away from airports, I get 40 to 50fpsWhat do yu get with no DIrect X 10 preview?

I have found about a 2fps decrease with dx10-but after switching between both modes I am staying with dx10-it just looks better. Only gitch so far is the shimmering runways-everything else works fine.8800 gt 512dual core e6750 2.66 ghz 4 gigs ramhttp://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

>I disagree, when I have DXT 10 turned on, my frame rates jump>by 20 to 30%>>I think it is also more to do with the rig one has.>I have a XPS-710>4gb ram>Quad COre cpue clocked to 3.19>Nvidia 8800 GTX 756mb>>I get even with most settings set to high, mid to high>twenties with lots of AI Traffic etc and away from airports, I>get 40 to 50fps>What do yu get with no DIrect X 10 preview?>That's good for you. But were not comparing apples to apples here. Systems, your interpretation of good graphics vice mine, not to mention settings within FSX itself.I will use San Diego Intl for my example comparison. With my system in its present configuration running under DX9 I get get a locked 30FPS. Enable DX10 and leaving ALL my settings exactly the same as they were under DX9 my framerate drops to 17-19FPS. One #### of a performance increase I got there with DX10 and I'm not running a marginal computer here.I must admit that the color under DX10 looks better. I wish DX10 would perform with FSX as advertised, unfortunately for me it does not.Also for me running DX10 its not just the runways that shimmer. The runways are very bad, however the rest of the worls is a shimmering mess compared to DX9 because the same level of AA and AF cannot be applied to FSX. Also not being able to force on the Vsynch under DX10 means no way to combat the visual tearing when panning.I know what good can look like in FSX. I have it under DX9 and under DX10 I can't even remotely come close (either in FPS or visual quality) and there is no amount of toying with settings that can or will make it happen at this point in time (trust me I've spent weeks).

I just got rid of all the runway shimmering going outside the sim and using the nvidia panel-turning all settings (aa, anisotropic) to the highest levels. I also turned video sync off. I not only got rid of the shimmering, but also got about a 4 fps increase.I also noticed pre doing this that the location made a difference. Some locations dx was significantly faster (rural in general)-but cities seemed to be significantly lower.In any case-I am sticking with dx10-everything looks more real and I seem to have achieved stability and good looks. http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Geofa,One final question on your new setup because I'm going to my computer guy tomorrow and I really value your input.Why did you go with Core 2 duo 2.66 instead of core 2 quad?I hope I am asking this right.Best value for the money or better performance?My choices are 2.66 core 2 duo or 2.4 core 2 quad.Price difference not a factor between the 2.Thanks and I won't bother you again for advice till tomorrow!Ron

Simply cause I told my guy to keep it around $1000-and he said a quad would take it much higher and in his opinion not worth it.

Thank you.That's what I wanted to know.Ron

Actually,price is always a factor but he tells me it is 40.00 less to go with 2.4 core 2 quad than 2.66 core 2 duo?Ron