Hi all,forgive me, if there's already answers. I'm currently short in time and have difficulties to follow i.e. the benchmark thread.And it's a FS2004 question. I made my mind up and now I plan to get a new PC for FS2004, upgrading from FS2002. It's a short term computer while waiting for FS11, so I try to cut down costs.Question 1: Is it true, that even a CPU E6750 doesn't hold roughly 30fps in FS2004 in all circumstances? My planned profile to use FS2004 is at the end of this mail. Anybody with experience?Q2: IF a E6750 is very sufficient, then how does a cheaper E2xxx or E4xxx behave at the same (over)clock? What is the specific influence of the smaller L2 cache in FS2004? Q3: I already heard that a Nvidia GF8500 might not give enough performance for my planned settings. Any comments on the affordable 8600 models? Or shall I wait for the 9600 model?I plan 1600x1200x32 on 1 monitor, the Geforce 8 improved Aniso-Quality and a "midrange" Antialiasing at this settings (4xAA?). If far from reality, I could also consider 1280x1024 instead of having a GF8800 Ultra ;-)Here's my profile resp. intented use:FS2004 at max. settings, internal weather systemWILCO 737PIC, using Virtual Cockpit with TrackIRDense Scenery like the new Hong Kong or Megaairport sceneries.online in VATSIM being able to attend dense traffic events like realOPS or Overloeads.Target: not much less than 30fpsIs there any profound knowledge out here? THX, Bigean

General Best Flight Sim machine comments:Now, the dual core CPU to build a system around is a e8400 3Ghz stock with 6mb cache.With the right MB and ram, it will overclock to 3.4 very easy and 4.0 Ghz with effort.Read some user reviews.If cost is not a concern, a quad QX9650 is the one, which most seem to hit 4Ghz on air.For a GPU the 8800GTS 640 SSC 320bit, or GTX / Ultra seem best at 384bit.Not the 8800GT, or 8800GTS 512MB which have a lower 256bit memory interface. What you want for FS is a larger memory bus interface, at least according the FSX team leader.See http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/default.aspxWill that meet your specific FS9 needs, dont know, but its the best CPU and GPU you can buy now for Flight Sim,and just about anything else.

Thanks jackcnd,interesting, but I don't wanna have the generally best PC, I want a good value deal for FS9. If I could spend $3000 I wouldn't ask, would I ;)Anybody with experience? Again, please note my specific scenario. Who has a similar use case and what's his/her experience with a given PC? THX, Bigean

Hi Bigean,If you look at the 1st machine in my sig, I purchased the 1st four pieces of hardware for about $375.00, used a free case and a decent PSU out of another rig - ported over the rest for an interim build. Best bang for the buck I've ever done for FS. With dual monitors at high reolutions I pull about 24-25 FPS rock steady, with most all sliders maxed and loads of traffic. I run default planes with some replacement textures. I hope that gives you some idea about the e6750 along with an aging GPU.What I would suggest is to first set a budget for which you feel comfortable spending. That makes it easier to divy up the hog, so to speak, and allows you to set priorities (whether there is room enough for a e6750 or we settle on a cheaper e2180 CPU for example)After that and setting your priorities, which should have the best CPU you can afford at/near the top, you can begin to shop around and price things out. Consider what can be ported over from your old machine. If you already have an SATA HD, cool use it and save some cash, if not we need to factor all that stuff in, as well. Get the idea here? Along with CPU/GPU I would make sure I have a one good PSU. After that things aren't so critical.Post back with what you have along with your budget and I'm sure someone will point you in the right direction. I just saw a e2180 for $72 shipped and is an easy overclock to 3-3.2 GHZ on stock cooler. I don't think the smaller cache makes much difference in FS. I went with the e6750 because it was the best match within my budget at the time. I could afford a new $1000 quad, but having the latest and greatest isn't my gig and not a priority in my life. Like you and many others, I'm looking for some good value while trying to futureproof a little as best as possible. Hope it helps.Regards, Kendall#1: [email protected]/Coolermaster HyperTX2 Gigabyte P35-DS3L 4GB Crucial Ballistix Tracers PC6400 Seagate 250GB 7200.10 SATA2 Gigabyte X800XT -Cat 6.12's CH Yoke/Pedals/Saitek Throttle Dual Monitor: Dell 2405/1905 #2: Dell 8400 3.2 H.T. 3GB PC4200 Diamond Xtreme/Logitech X-530's

Thanks so far.I cant upgrade, I only have the option to buy a new PC, as much budget bound as possible.1. So I understand the E4500 also OC's quite well. Again, any findings how L2-Cache does affect MSFS and esp. FS9?2. And any new reports out there how your Budget-PC's perform in similar circumstances as - FS2004 at max. settings, internal weather system - WILCO 737PIC, using Virtual Cockpit with TrackIR - Dense Scenery like the new Hong Kong or Megaairport sceneries. - online in VATSIM being able to attend dense traffic events like realOPS or Overloads.???THX, Bigean

>General Best Flight Sim machine comments:>Will that meet your specific FS9 needs, dont know, >but its the best CPU and GPU you can buy now for Flight Sim,>and just about anything else.>But isn't that overkill for FS2004? For example I have descent performence on my system (but the megasceneries are hopeless due to blurries because of load times)AMD 64 3200+ (OC to 2150 MHz but don't notice ant difference)NVIDIA 6600GT 256 DDR3 RAM AGP1 Gb 400 MHz RAMTwo IDE HDWin XP Home

this easily run fs9 max and will also do well in fsx: http://jetlinesystems-store.com/productcar...sp?idProduct=91jourdog.

Thanks jfri for that valuable info.So you've got always good fps even in megasceneries, just blurries? Blurries maybe because of texture load time from Hard Disk, but also the way into the Graphics board possible ... Are you using more than just default planes and some of that equipment I stated?jourdog, sorry, good joke of yours forwarding me to an $1700 PC with an Intel Extreme. :-> Bigean>>General Best Flight Sim machine comments:>>>Will that meet your specific FS9 needs, dont know, >>but its the best CPU and GPU you can buy now for Flight Sim,>>and just about anything else.>>>>But isn't that overkill for FS2004? For example I have descent>performence on my system (but the megasceneries are hopeless>due to blurries because of load times)>>AMD 64 3200+ (OC to 2150 MHz but don't notice ant difference)>NVIDIA 6600GT 256 DDR3 RAM AGP>1 Gb 400 MHz RAM>Two IDE HD>Win XP Home

Actually, the 8800 GT *beats* the 8800 GTS 640 by quite a margin and is about $150 cheaper. And this is FS9, for which even a GeForce 6800 or 7300 will do. But yes, you need a GeForce 8 card to stay with the present and future times ;).

>Thanks jfri for that valuable info.>>So you've got always good fps even in megasceneries, just>blurries? Blurries maybe because of texture load time from>Hard Disk, but also the way into the Graphics board possible>... I have in most cases smooth performence even if fps drops. And it's mostly just blurries and mainly in urban areas but for example megascenery NC works quite well outside San Fransisco.>Are you using more than just default planes and some of that>equipment I stated?>I use complex addon planes like LD767 ATR 72-500 Carenado 182 Dornier Do-27. Also I use FSFenesis mesh UT GEProII Active Sky, Radar Contact, PAI.>>AMD 64 3200+ (OC to 2150 MHz but don't notice ant>difference)>>NVIDIA 6600GT 256 DDR3 RAM AGP>>1 Gb 400 MHz RAM>>Two IDE HD>>Win XP Home>

I you want a good gfx card thats easy on the wallet, go with ATI. Their new 3870 which (from what I've read on other posts) outperforms the 8800's. Plus, ATI is cutting the cost on the 3870 and 3850 series tonight. 3870 will go down to 189 and the 3850 to 169.