Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest shadown7

Advice on this Setup before I buy it

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone,I'm on a budget and am looking at this rig from Dell. Please note I'm picking a cheap PCI-E Video card in the default system and plan and buy something better later.Any advice on the below specs besides the video card. I'm planning on using this mostly for FSX.I realize this will in no way max the settings. I'm just trying to get decent visuals without making the game lag.Thanks in advance.Dell Inspiron 518Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q6600 (8MB L2 cache,2.4GHz,1066FSB) -$100 upgrade to Q9300 12MB L2 cache, 2.5GHz, 1333FSB. Is it really worth it?)Genuine Windows Vista

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

If your really just looking for a prebuilt FSX system, I'd suggest going with a dual core 3+ Ghz CPU system. CPU speed is key for FSX framerates.The Intel E8500 is a good value at 3.16GHz.For GPU look at the 8800/9800 series from nVidia.Another option is to build your own quad based system and overclock it, then you can get the right video card to start too.Dells are not overclockable, no options for that in the bios,something to think about. The quad based system at 2.4 will run FSX but performance would be much better if you get to 3GHz or more.Little difference in FSX between dual and quad, quad will load somewhat faster, but framerate will be the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply.I've never overclocked anything before and was trying to just buy a prebuilt system. I'm not even sure how to overclock anything or when too much overclock is enough. That kind of scares me. :-) I don't want to fry any components.I'll give Newegg or Tirget Direct a look see for custom PC parts.Thanks again,Keith>If your really just looking for a prebuilt FSX system, I'd>suggest going with a dual core 3+ Ghz CPU system. CPU speed is>key for FSX framerates.>The Intel E8500 is a good value at 3.16GHz.For GPU look at the>8800/9800 series from nVidia.>>Another option is to build your own quad based system and>overclock it, then you can get the right video card to start>too.>>Dells are not overclockable, no options for that in the bios,>something to think about. The quad based system at 2.4 will>run FSX but performance would be much better if you get to>3GHz or more.>>Little difference in FSX between dual and quad, quad will load>somewhat faster, but framerate will be the same.>>>>>>>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people dont want to build, maybe a local small computer store will let you pick parts then they will build if for you.If not, consider a 3GHz plus, Dell prebuild.Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any issues building it myself and honestly I never gave it any thought. The only issue I have is with overclocking.If I can get a better system by buying the parts for about the same price myself I'll do. Thanks to your advice I'm going to research overclocking and become more familiar with it so perhaps I can do the same. During my research I've notice a lot of people have overclocked CPU's and GPU's.You have been very helpful and I thank you for your time!Keith>A lot of people dont want to build, maybe a local small>computer store will let you pick parts then they will build if>for you.>>If not, consider a 3GHz plus, Dell prebuild.>>Good luck.>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your help!I have decided not to buy from Dell because of the PSU is only 300W and the MB will not allow me in the future to use SLI.I have decided to just build my own system with the below specs that still fix in my budget.Case- Antec 900 Black SteelPower Supply- Antec True Power Trio 650 Watt (SLI)Mother Board-EVGA 780iCPU- Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600CPU Fan - Not sure which one yetVideo Card -EVGA GeForce 8800GTS (G92) 640MBMemory -4GB 1066MHz Crucial BallistixHDD- 250GBDVD ROM- AnySound Card - Sound card with it's own CPUOS -XP Pro because I already own itMonitor- 20" to start. Plan on buying two 17" to use TH2GThanks again for your help on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Dells are not overclockable, no options for that in the bios,>something to think about.What about the Dell XPS 730? It has water cooling and the QX9650 is oc:ed to 3.67GHz. Must have a BIOS supporting oc:ing.Ulf B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to buy that system but it is quite a few bucks over my budget. I'm looking to not spend over 1500.00 with a monitor. I realize this limits what I can do with FSX but I'm just looking to have half way decent graphics and from what I'm been researching I can archive that with the budget I'm on.The question that I'm wonder about now is what Graphics card should I get in order to use TH2G that will still allow me to have decent frame rates? Any idea?Thanks,Keith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I'd love to buy that system but...Keith, That wasn't my suggestion ;-) It was a respons to jackcnd, who said that BIOS on Dell computers don't support overclocking.I would never by a XPS system. Much better to build your own pc.Ulf BCore2Duo X6800 3.3GHz4GB RAM Corsair XMS2-8500C5BFG 8800GTX, Creative SB X-FiFSX Acc/SP2, Vista 32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:-)I understand. I enjoy building my own as well. This time though I'm so confused on what I need because of the requirement of the game. I think I've figured out all the components except for the video card. I'm looking at using the TH2G with 3- 17" monitors and I want a video card that will allow me to have decent graphics and frame rates using the 3072 settings.Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>:-)>>I understand. >>I enjoy building my own as well. This time though I'm so>confused on what I need because of the requirement of the>game. >>I think I've figured out all the components except for the>video card. I'm looking at using the TH2G with 3- 17">monitors and I want a video card that will allow me to have>decent graphics and frame rates using the 3072 settings.>>Thanks!You say you want to spend under $1500. I spent only about $1400 on my new box, and it's an E8500 and runs FSX great. The detailed specs are below. You could spend less too, avoiding the topline motherboard, and topline power supply. You only need mid-high spec stuff there for your uses.On the TH2G I'm not sure about because I am a single-display guy. Get at *LEAST* 512mb of vid mem on the card(s) though.RhettFS box: E8500 (@ 3.80 ghz), AC Freezer 7 Pro, ASUS P5E3 Premium, BFG 8800GTX 756 (nVidia 169 WHQL), 4gb DDR3 1600 Patriot Cas7 7-7-7-20 (2T), PC Power 750, WD 150gb 10000rpm Raptor, Seagate 500gb, Silverstone TJ09 case, Vista Ultimate 64ASX Client: AMD 3700+ (@ 2.6 ghz), 7800GT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few comments on your system if I may...1).I would recommend a E8400 at 3Ghz rather than the 2.6GHz Q6600. FSX does not greatly benefit from quad-core but will benefit from a higher clocked CPU and the 1333MHz FSB.2) The 8800GTS is okay at lower resolutions but at 1920*1200 the 8800GTX is a better performer. If you do decide on a large display without TH2G the GTX would be better.3) A 250Gb HDD is very small. Two 500Gb would be better - one for the OS and one for FSX.4) Three montors is better for TH2G otherwise the critical centre part of the display will be compromised on the edge of both monitors.Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This statement I question....But I respect it also...A 250Gb HDD is very small. Two 500Gb would be better - one for the OS and one for FSX.A 500 G HDD for the os is pretty big...Many people today are putting their OS on 74 G Raptors and theres plenty of room left for tons of Apps...My OS sits on a 150 G raptor with all my Apps and it looke empty...LOlThen I have a 150 g raptor for FSX only...And a 250 Sata for FS9 and storage.....And it all performe beautiful that way.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I respect your opinion. :-)Over the years I have built PCs I have rarely found that a HD is too big for a system. I know 500Gb sounds large but you will inevitably add other programs and that space will reduce over time.Given the relatively low cost of a 500Gb HD and the fact that you will probably only populate the fastest outer part of the drive it will keep your system fast throughout its lifetime.Smaller HDs cost only slightly less and the more they fill up the slower access to data becomes as data is stored further away from the fast outer sectors.I have a 37Gb Raptor on my old P4 system and to me they're hugely overpriced for the 10000rpm speed. I'd rather have a 7200 500Gb drive for less money than a Raptor. They're just not worth the price premium in my opinion.If money is tight then a 250Gb for the OS would suffice but the price reduction is not great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point...But I'm refering to a small drive for just the OS and some apps.......Thats all.......I add extra drives as I need them........When the drive bay is full of em...I'll switch to a terobyte one or two then.....But your point is well taken here......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a Digital Storm Q 9450 2.66 O/C to 3.2 .... 8800 GT....4 GB Corsair memory Runs fsx great... I have FS Genesis...My Traffic...GEX...FEX...Runs all this with no Problems...DS will O/C it for you and make sure it is stable....Regards Lamar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I'm refering to a small drive for just the OS and some apps.......Thats all.......Through experience I've found that "some apps" tends to grow over time and can soon fill up a smaller drive. My 37Gb Raptor filled up quicker than I expected. For example 110Mb just for a read-only Adobe Acrobat. And if you have a digital camera those images have to be stored somewhere.Bear in mind a substantial part of any HD is reserved for use by the system. Once you get to about 75% used a drive does become quite inefficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites