All with 4GB RAMFor FS9:E8600, Q9300, or Q9600For FSXE8600, Q9300, or Q9600And what video card works best with these systems. Thanks.

I can only say, great experience with E8600 for FS9. Clocked to 4,5Ghz stable, running almost every scenario at 40fps smooth with complex addons (aircraft + scenery).

CPU FS9: The E8600 will be much more than you will ever need.CPU FSX: Go with the fastest clocked quad core you can afford - Q6600 minimum or Q9450 or higher.GPU FS9: Runs very well on most half decent cards. GPU FSX: 9800GTX+ or GTX260. 8800GTX/Ultra if you can find them. For FSX generally stick with Nvidia. Hope this helps.

I'd go with the E8600 for FSX, if you're aren't going to wait for the Core i7's from IntelYou can overclock the E8600 to 4.0 easy... it's better to have a faster cpu for fsx than more cores

Thanks guys! This is help me narrow down my selection. I guess I need to start looking for a good dual core.

Just to be clear here - in FSX a Quad at 3GHz and a Duo at 3GHz the quad wins hands down. A quad at 3GHz and Duo at 4GHz and the Duo will start edging ahead (not sure how crystal clear cut this is in REALLY heavy weather/scenery scenarios on finals with PMDG's MD-11 for example).This applies to FSX and most current games. New games take more and more advantage of 4 cores (Far Cry 2, for example, really likes 4 cores) as do more and more apps. This time next year and there will be even fewer game titles to really benefit from raw speed over more cores. Consider that as well.If you are going to go for the Duo with FSX then only the E8600 will be of any interest as it is the only one with a 10x multi making it "fairly" easy to get to 4GHz on a 400FSB as long as the rest of your rig will play ball. If you can get a 450FSB on your mobo and RAM then you are really cooking with the E8600!I would spend that little bit more and get the Q9650 if I were buying today. No problems at 3.6GHz on air cooling and that the E8600 is going to struggle to top in FSX. Much better long term investment.

>Just to be clear here - in FSX a Quad at 3GHz and a Duo at>3GHz the quad wins hands down. A quad at 3GHz and Duo at 4GHz>and the Duo will start edging ahead (not sure how crystal>clear cut this is in REALLY heavy weather/scenery scenarios on>finals with PMDG's MD-11 for example).I have pitted a dual core against a quad more than a few times. ;-)It's more like: in FSX a Quad at 3GHz and a Duo at 3GHz the quad will load scenery almost twice as quickly, but the FPS will be roughly the same. A quad at 3GHz and Duo at 4GHz and the Duo will noticably faster (by about 20-25% in fact).Gary

Well sure but a 3GHz quad will cost more than a 3Ghz dual core.Plus the 8600 will go over 4 easy if you have good cooling. How many people have their quads over 4?