HiI am just about to buy a new computer (self build) and would appreciate any comments on what I am planning to purchase. I am aiming the system to be "capable" of running FSX (primarily) and other games on the market - but with an element of future-proofing (ahh nirvana!). I appreciate from reading the posts on FSX for the past year or so that one persons "FSX is capable" can be different to another persons for a whole range of reasons from add-ons, drivers, tweaks, phase of the moon etc......So I have been buying the mags (UK Custom PC, PC Format) reviewing the websites (toms hardware, 3dguru, anandtech, etc) to try and come with a logical set of components. Where relevant I have indicated why I have selected a component - if you see any contradictions, errors of judgement please shout!CaseCoolermaster Stacker RC-832- should provide space/flexibility for future upgrades- bit expensive but reviews seem positive. MotherboardGigabyte GA-X38-DQ6- features; x38 chipset, PCI-E 2.0, o/c capability, should provide some longer term capability if I update processor in 18-24m.- one concern I had was a review I read that said "BACK PLATE PREVENTS COOLER FROM GETTING MOUNTED" - would this affect the CPU cooler?ProcessorIntel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Go stepping - seems to be a recommended processor for cost/capability - I am aware of the Q9450, was due to be January, but pcperspective (19 Dec) indicated this has been slipped back to Feb/March. Video Card (gnashing of teeth time!)xfx 8800GT alpha dog xxx (PV-T88P-YDD4) 512MBor (if budget can stretch)512MB BFG Technology 8800GTS, PCI-E 2.0 (x16),(BFGR88512GTSE)- the xfx card has "NVIDIA nView Multi-Display Technology" - does that mean anything useful for FSX? I may get a 2nd screen later this year or even look at getting the Matrox TH2GO so does the nView help with either option?- This uses the G92 graphics chip but I wonder about the 9800GTX. I seen it mentioned (on this forum) as being available in Jan but havent found much about it on the web - should I hold fire for a couple of weeks or just go with the 8800GT? I have just found a news article at pcperspective that only refers to a mid range geforce 9600 due in Feb 08.MemoryCrucial Ballistix BL2KIT12864AA804- recommended "Mid range DDR2" in Custom PC- I am going to get 4GB as I will get 64bit Vista. One question I had was whether there is any benefit to FSX with 2x2GB w.r.t. 4x1GB?Power SupplyAntec Quattro 850WHard DriveSamsung Spin Point T166-HD501LJ- a number of positive reviews on this in the magazines (eg Custom PC Elite)- depending on how budget holds out I may buy a second hard drive - some benefit for FSX in running on its own disc?DVD DriveSamsung SH-S203BCPU CoolingArtic Freezer 7 Pro- positive reviews on this in the magazines (eg Custom PC Elite)SoftwareVista Home Premium (OEM 64 bit)and finallyFSX Deluxe!A bit of a monster post, but thanks to others who have posed similar questions or have come up with solutions (esp Mr "RESET MCP ALT") they have all helped in developing my understanding.Happy New Year!Gary

All looks good.The case is worth every penny. It's a very nice beast!Make sure you get four (4)1GB memory modules and not two (2) 2GB modules. Still some issues with 2GB modules.If you are planning on overclocking, I would wait until February or March to get the Q9450. The 45nm chips overclock WAY better than the 65nm chips. FSX will take every CPU cycle you can throw at it. The more the merrier. You may also want to delay to get the G92.

Thanks for your comments esp. confirming the case and the guidance on memory.The video/processor issue is tricky (in a sense!) - can I wait and see what comes over the horizon (cost/performance) or I do I want to plunge right in now....given I am creaking along on a PC 5yrs old I am keen to take a big step up now, hopefully get a "capable FSX", save some more pennies and upgrade the processor in 18-24m just in time for FSX11....!!!!I'll sleep on it for a few days and see if early Jan shows any signs of further news on when the Q9450 gets released.TaGary

There will be no upgrade path for a P35 (aka X38/48) mobo. Intel's next CPU will need a whole new mobo. The X38 provides no increased functionally over the P35. PCI-e 2 is Not needed now, or even in the forseeable future. The Penryn series are running lower multipliers. The Q9450 will have the highest (of these now reduced multipliers) at 8. Even at 8, this lower multiplier creates a serious roadblock for we O/Cers. This is exactly what Intel intended. The Penryn has effectively ended (or severely restricted) our 'free lunch,' O/Cing capability. Here's what's going on: With an 8 multiplier, it will take a 450Mhz FSB to get a 3.6Ghz CPU clock. This is about as far as you want to take any P35 based (X38/et al) mobo. This lower multiplier effectively limits the Q9450's O/Cing potential to 3.6 Ghz. This means the Q9450 has No Greater Performance Potential than the current Q6600. So why wait? Just get the cheaper Q6600 and take it to 3.6Ghz with a more stable 400mhz FSB . . . now.The Thermalright Ultra 120 is the big dog right now. There's no need for a 850 watt PS. Component power requirements are Reducing. A quality 600 watter is plenty. The 64bit op system is the smart choice.HD? ST3500320AS. Same cost and the Fastest 7200 RPM drive drive available.Check this out. It's a pretty well optimized build.http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/wishli...tNumber=7162186

>>Make sure you get four (4)1GB memory modules and not two (2)>2GB modules. Still some issues with 2GB modules.>Good to know, thanksAny idea as to when this state-of-affairs will change? I would rather get 2x2 but I'll go with 4 single sticks if this isn't ironed out by March-April-ish.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,Not sure when the 2GB issues will be ironed out but overclocking 4 1GB modules can be a bit of a pain in itself.

>>Case>Coolermaster Stacker RC-832>- should provide space/flexibility for future upgrades>- bit expensive but reviews seem positive. >Great case! It's the one I have researched and am 99% committed to for my March build.>Motherboard>Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6>- features; x38 chipset, PCI-E 2.0, o/c capability, should>provide some longer term capability if I update processor in>18-24m.Probably will not end up being future-proof for Nehalem cpu. :( But motherboards always seem to go obsolete the fastest, so you can't win either way.>>Memory>Crucial Ballistix BL2KIT12864AA804>- recommended "Mid range DDR2" in Custom PC>- I am going to get 4GB as I will get 64bit Vista. One>question I had was whether there is any benefit to FSX with>2x2GB w.r.t. 4x1GB?>Don't get "mid-range" ram if you plan to overclock. If you're already spending $xxx on ram, what's an extra $50 for high-line ram? Consider some of Patriot's higher-end ram offerings.In my experience, mid-range ram will allow a mild overclock, that's about it.>Power Supply>Antec Quattro 850W>Consider PC Power & Cooling, CoolerMaster, Silverstone, etc. 600 watter over any Antec p/s. Antec is fine, but it's all about that little extra when it comes to future-proofing and overclocking.>- depending on how budget holds out I may buy a second hard>drive - some benefit for FSX in running on its own disc?>I think so. I keep OS/pagefile on disk1 and FSX on disk2. Hard drives are so cheap now, anyway, so you can do that if you want.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

sargeski your system is almost exactly the same as my previeous one. It runs fsx really well. Now if your getting a Q6600 overclock it to something over 3GHz and you should be able to run FSX on medium high/high settings. Even 4.1GHz machines have trouble with FSX at MAX Settings.

2 gig sticks are fine. If you get PC6400 (aka DDR2-800) rated ram, a Q6600 O/C'd to 3.6 will simply run that ram at its guaranteed, rated speed.DDR ram Doubles the Data Rate (DDR) of whatever FSB speed it sees. A Q6600 O/Ced to 3.6 will have a FSB of 400Mhz (400Mhz x 9 = 3.6). Any DDR ram installed will Double the Data Rate of that FSB (400Mhz x 2 = 800). Any PC6400 (DDR2-800) stick will run at 800Mhz.At a FSB of 400mhz, DDR2-800 ram is NoT overclocked. It's simply running at its rated speed. Even a 2 gig stick that is rated at DDR2-800 will run at 800mhz, or it's a bad stick. RMA it.

>Rhett,>>Not sure when the 2GB issues will be ironed out but>overclocking 4 1GB modules can be a bit of a pain in itself.So, it's a pain either way you go :) is that what you are saying?How are all of these overclockers running 3.5-4+ ghz with 4 gigs of ram? It must not be too much of an issue I suppose.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,Well i guess it depends on your definition of "not too much of an issue". Took me almost two weeks of tinkering to get my timings and voltages locked down solid on this system. Maybe, it would have been better stated by me if I had said it requires great patience.

Gentleman! "At a FSB of 400mhz, DDR2-800 ram is NoT overclocked. It's simply running at its rated speed. Even a 2 gig stick that is rated at DDR2-800 will run at 800mhz, or it's a bad stick. RMA it."If you're trying to get ram that's rated at 800mhz to run at 1000mhz, that could take some tinkering . . . or you could just buy ram that is rated to run at 1000Mhz (That'd be DDR2-1066).Be aware of what DDR means. It means the ram will run at 2X FSB. If your FSB is 300Mhz, the ram will run at 600Mhz. AnY DDR2-666 module will run there. Just get the cheapest. If you are running a FSB at 400Mhz, then the ram will run at 800Mhz. AnY DDR2-800 module will run there. AnY! It's possible to run ram faster that DDR, but it's entirely useless. It would take scientific instruments to see any performance difference between ram at 800Mhz and 1200Mhz. There's absolutely no (performance) point in clocking ram beyond its standard DDR (double data rate). But that said, it's great fun to play. I have my FSB at 400 and my Patriot DDR2-800 (4 sticks @ 1G each) happily running at their Rated 800Mhz. Ahhh, but what fun is that!? 400 is where I want my FSB (to keep the Q at 3.6) but I've had the ram to 960Mhz. That was fun. It made no difference except to entertain me one evening, but so what? I had fun.It's not a PITA - at all - to get maximum performance from ram. Just know what FSB you are shooting for and buy the correct speed grade ram. 5125MB, 1G, 2G? It does not matter. Get what you want. Get the cheapest.

I beg to differ. Its not always as easy as you expalin it. Memory modules when tested and rated are tested in matched pairs (not matched quads). There is no guarantee as to what will happen when polpulating memory slots (I suggest to anyone upgrading to read the motherboard manufacturers literature for tested and approved memory modules). On my current system which is DDR3 not DDR2 I couldn't get 4 1GB sticks to work at stock voltages and timings. Asus said the memory wasn't approved and it was Super Talents modules that were bad. Super Talent claimed to burn in and pair all modules on the exact same Asus motherboard as I have (not burn in and test quad modules). I got very little guidance from Super Talent other than to try upping the RAM voltage.I spent alot of time with mobo voltages and timing to get these 4 1GB sticks of RAM running acceptable and the 4GBs of RAM is running well below their rating of 1866MHZ. If I remove two sticks of RAM, I can push the RAM over 2000MHZ easily without any issue.It's a real b_tch when you spend $1200 on RAM which is non-returnable/refundable and can't get any help out of the RAM or MOBO manufacturer. Live and learn I guess. Just lucky it wasn't the hardway and $1200 down the crapper.

DDR3 was not ready for prime time and (most likely) still is not. 1) DDR3 provides No performance advantage over same-clocked DDR2. 2) DDR3 guarantees a higher clock. . . that it cannot simply achieve. (i.e., "This boat will float, if you can bail really, really fast.") 3) Even if it could achieve a higher clock, an increased clock speed will not provide AnY performance advantage.So far, DDR3 is just marketing jabber. Everyone. Leave it alone for now. This is a strictly DDR3 problem.If a builder is looking at a new system, make sure it's a DDR2 mobo. If you are aiming for a 400Mhz FSB, DDR2-800 is your stuff. If you are going toward 500mhz, DDR2-1066 is what you want. No tweaking or fiddling. DDR2 works. Leave DDR3 for the explorers . . . . and thank them for their efforts!

>DDR3 was not ready for prime time and (most likely) still is>not. >>1) DDR3 provides No performance advantage over same-clocked>DDR2. >>2) DDR3 guarantees a higher clock. . . that it cannot simply>achieve. (i.e., "This boat will float, if you can bail really,>really fast.") >>3) Even if it could achieve a higher clock, an increased clock>speed will not provide AnY performance advantage.>>So far, DDR3 is just marketing jabber. Everyone. Leave it>alone for now. This is a strictly DDR3 problem.>>If a builder is looking at a new system, make sure it's a DDR2>mobo. If you are aiming for a 400Mhz FSB, DDR2-800 is your>stuff. If you are going toward 500mhz, DDR2-1066 is what you>want. No tweaking or fiddling. DDR2 works. Leave DDR3 for the>explorers . . . . and thank them for their efforts! I'll agree with you 100% on your statements. I should have went with a DDR2 setup when I built this system as many here suggested. DDR3 was a big waste of cash and alot of heartache (that I did learn the hardway).