For fun...start reading the topics and postings from the LAST PAGE of this forum...and move towards the first page.Check out the excitement of the posters...as they embraced the 'hottest' tech and spec's that was available in 2002!It does put a smile on your face when you reacquaint yourself with what exactly WAS the bleeding edge in 2002!Then think of what you have in front of you at present if you have not recently upgraded to duo or quad core CPU-based systems.......and it will 'reset' your expectations and perhaps the 'I'm still happy with what I have...and what's paid for' button, lol.I finally am going to the i7 platform...but for the last six years...was happy with a P4 3.4 GHz, running a high-end 256 MB GPU part.Anyway...go check out what people were posting about in 2002! Truly...it is quite entertaining. What you will discover...is except for the year-to-year change, NOTHING IS NEW!!!!Same problems, same questions, same initial frustrations. :)Cheers!

Maybe so, but I would'nt trade my i7 for anything. On my older systems I spent ALL my time tweeking this and tweeking that to no end. i7..... no tweeking except adding bufferpools to the config. Needless to say I do alot more flying now. Good luck and have fun with your new system!

Maybe so, but I would'nt trade my i7 for anything. On my older systems I spent ALL my time tweeking this and tweeking that to no end. i7..... no tweeking except adding bufferpools to the config. Needless to say I do alot more flying now. Good luck and have fun with your new system!

-----------------------------------------Thanks! :)I guess that I really wanted to wait until the technology could really bring out some incredible renderings as I have seen with those running the i7 systems. I sprang for an i7-975/GTX285/6 gig -1800 MHz combo.I'm sure that it will dish up some of those great, clear, ground textures I have been waiting so long for!!!!! :)Can't wait to join the fun...Cheers!

For fun...start reading the topics and postings from the LAST PAGE of this forum...and move towards the first page.Check out the excitement of the posters...as they embraced the 'hottest' tech and spec's that was available in 2002!It does put a smile on your face when you reacquaint yourself with what exactly WAS the bleeding edge in 2002!Then think of what you have in front of you at present if you have not recently upgraded to duo or quad core CPU-based systems.......and it will 'reset' your expectations and perhaps the 'I'm still happy with what I have...and what's paid for' button, lol.I finally am going to the i7 platform...but for the last six years...was happy with a P4 3.4 GHz, running a high-end 256 MB GPU part.Anyway...go check out what people were posting about in 2002! Truly...it is quite entertaining. What you will discover...is except for the year-to-year change, NOTHING IS NEW!!!!Same problems, same questions, same initial frustrations. :)Cheers!

Ya, know what you mean. I am STILL on a 3.2Ghz P4 with a AGP slot graphics card (512mb). I cannot wait until the end of this year when I can finally get a i7 with W7 in 64bit for FSX and finally get rid of FS9.

For fun...start reading the topics and postings from the LAST PAGE of this forum...and move towards the first page.Check out the excitement of the posters...as they embraced the 'hottest' tech and spec's that was available in 2002!It does put a smile on your face when you reacquaint yourself with what exactly WAS the bleeding edge in 2002!

-------------------------Sesquash- A great suggestion to relive the past!Reminded me that my current processor (AMD XP2200 1.8 GHz) was the latest and greatest way back in summer 2002!I need to be reminded because it still works so well that I have no plans to replace it. (Unless the Smithsonian would like to display it!)Will an i7 run triple monitors/triple views?Alex ReidDreamFleet Bonanza turning final for R09 CYYJ Victoria.

-------------------------Sesquash- A great suggestion to relive the past!Reminded me that my current processor (AMD XP2200 1.8 GHz) was the latest and greatest way back in summer 2002!I need to be reminded because it still works so well that I have no plans to replace it. (Unless the Smithsonian would like to display it!)Will an i7 run triple monitors/triple views?Alex ReidDreamFleet Bonanza turning final for R09 CYYJ Victoria.

------------------------------------------------------------Forum back-to-front really gives us a 'grounding'. It should make us all appreciate what we have RIGHT NOW..., and not so much on the ' I WANT-wish list'. My P4 3.4 (which is what I am posting on), was my main-stay for the last six years...and after this post...will send me once again...into the virtual clouds...:) It was a good time for me to make the next upgrade. I'll probably have my i7 for another six great years! :)I raise a glass to everyone's computer platform in situ....for one in the hand...is better than never having had one! :) They're all good!Cheers.Mitch

Ya, know what you mean. I am STILL on a 3.2Ghz P4 with a AGP slot graphics card (512mb). I cannot wait until the end of this year when I can finally get a i7 with W7 in 64bit for FSX and finally get rid of FS9.

I thought I would be able to go "FSX Only" after getting my i7. If you fly GA and sea planes though, by all means it will be amazing. But don't go near the cities with jets.I am still 99.7% on FS9. It's not totally the magic bullet for FSX people rave about it being but I agree - there's virtually no tweaking, no page file issues, no OOM's, no services to shut down, no CTD's, no FSautostart, no having to use low res texture options, no blurries, no cfg file tinkering. etc.Also, with my rig I can play a game of Call of Duty 4 whilst I am in cruise. :(

I thought I would be able to go "FSX Only" after getting my i7. If you fly GA and sea planes though, by all means it will be amazing. But don't go near the cities with jets.I am still 99.7% on FS9. It's not totally the magic bullet for FSX people rave about it being but I agree - there's virtually no tweaking, no page file issues, no OOM's, no services to shut down, no CTD's, no FSautostart, no having to use low res texture options, no blurries, no cfg file tinkering. etc.Also, with my rig I can play a game of Call of Duty 4 whilst I am in cruise. :(

sigh I'm about to build a i7 sys and to think FSX is still a struggle is a bit disappointing, good point about looking back though lol, I'm trying to look ahead to see if i can somehow give this build some legs but came to the conclusion that it's best to just build the best I can afford now and enjoy as only weeks down the road the next best thing will be out, so looking a year ahead is pointless? Cheers Tony

sigh I'm about to build a i7 sys and to think FSX is still a struggle is a bit disappointing, good point about looking back though lol, I'm trying to look ahead to see if i can somehow give this build some legs but came to the conclusion that it's best to just build the best I can afford now and enjoy as only weeks down the road the next best thing will be out, so looking a year ahead is pointless? Cheers Tony

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hey Tony,Why I let 6 years go by without upgrading from my P4 3.4 platform was that I have seen personally,... that for a really eye-opening, A-B 'WOW FACTOR' test...you need about five-or-so years between technological platforms. Sure....the duo and early quad platforms upped the ante...BUT...BUT..., there were still the jagged roads, the blurries, the slow and topped-out renderings coming from the CPU/GPU combo's. The i7's (of course...this is my own personal opinion stated here...) is the FIRST platform between my 2003 purchase (P3.4) and today that brings roads to straight lines, has trees that you can count the leaves on from 3,500 feet (DROOL) etc.... and no matter whether, it is an i7-920, and up through to the 975 part. I waited....and waited some more! For myself, the trigger to upgrade is the i7 platform. Finally...there has been enough time, and techo-steps between my P4 3.4GHz...up through the duo's, the former quad's....to today. Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaw! I still won't dump FS9. Too many great add-on's...and (slobbering over myself as I type the following....) I can ONLY IMAGINE what the stick-handling performance will be when I slap FS9 onto my soon-to-be-delivered system! FSX? I'll gratefully take whatever performance benefits that comes with the i7....absolutely! Coming straight from an P4 3.4....I anticipate and expect much! Excited? You bet I am. This has been a long time coming...and also, this in no way disrespects what my P4 3.4 system has given me, still gives me...and will give my son,... ASAP. He is drooling as well :) All things are relative in the eyes of the beholder...and bestowed...Now...off for some fun and sun on my 'ride....too nice a day to be typing in front of a computer, LOLOLOLOLOL! Somewhere out there is a lake, with my name written on a patch of beach! Life is good, Life is....good! :)Cheers,

sigh I'm about to build a i7 sys and to think FSX is still a struggle is a bit disappointing, good point about looking back though lol, I'm trying to look ahead to see if i can somehow give this build some legs but came to the conclusion that it's best to just build the best I can afford now and enjoy as only weeks down the road the next best thing will be out, so looking a year ahead is pointless? Cheers Tony

It will be a disappointment if you get an i7 920 and don't overclock it since its only 2.66 ghz per core. If you get the i7 or what ever chip you decide on your going to really need to get to 3.0 ghz or over that if you want to fly FSX at complex settting with good performance. Tony, why don't you get an E8500 or E8600 if you can find one of these. They run stock at like 3.16/3.33 ghz and would be a good start for you to enjoy FSX at a good level?flyhalf said: "I thought I would be able to go "FSX Only" after getting my i7. If you fly GA and sea planes though, by all means it will be amazing. But don't go near the cities with jets."Completely different experience for me and I don't have an i7. I have an E8400 overclocked to 3.85 ghz with only 2 gb's of RAM running at 1081 mhz and I have no problems going into cities, even large cities flying complex a/c like Level D 767 and such. Even with UT2 and airline traffic set at 100% I can still get into LAX with 18+ FPS with scenery complexity set at max.Bottom line with my experience in FSX is that whether you have a quad or dual core is that your going to need 3.0 ghz per core or more if you want to fly FSX with medium to high settings and get good performance, not to mention having the operating system, video card and FSX set up to optimize performance whether it be by NickN's guide or a pay service like FS-GS. Either way, my experience performance wise has been great enough with my E8400 that I can run FSX pretty much full tilt any where I want in any a/c I want and get great performance, great enough that I was able to completely ditch FS9.I know this has been debated to death but this is just my .02 cents.Good luck Tony.

yip correct there are more important things in life than worrying about FPS, also went for a ride on my gixxer today and boy those FPS will get you in jail pronto, luckily the cops were catching real criminals? Ive been off FS for a while but the virus seems to be reoccurring again ( Must have taken the wrong pills) so I thought it's about time to splash out, currently been using my iMac 24 inch so this new sys will be way better for FS, also I still love FS9 and all those fantastic addons I never yet explored anyway, so can't wait to really push the settings to the max, 1st for me & Track IR. At the moment I'm just finalising each and every component to make 1000000% sure there are no bottlenecks!!! Intel i7 920 @ 2.66 -----> 4GHz maybe 3.8 who knows never overclocked before, should be nerve wrecking Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme Asus Rampage II Extreme Asus GTX285 - perhaps the EVGA one that has 2gb mem? OCZ 6GB (3x2GB) DDR3 1600 (PC3-12800) Corsair HX850W Eps12V 850w and of course a good LCD to actually see all this glory so FS9 should be amazing for the heavies and low & slow for FSX = BUT NO STUTTERS For the last 10 years of flightsim enough is enough!! Cheers Tony

Hi flyhalf,I'm running an I7-975 overclocked and I have no problems running FSX with an airliner near big cities. My software setup. 1. FSX (with both service patches) 2. Level-d 767-300ER 3. REX 4. Ultimate Traffic II 5. 3D Lights Redux 6. Radar Contact 7. FSGenesis Mesh Terrain (All of them) 8. Ultimate Terrain X (All of them) 9. Ground Environment X10. AES11. Mega Scenery Earth12. FSPasengersX13. Addon airports (FSDreamTeam, Imagine Simulation, Cloud 9, FlyTampa, Aerosoft)

I thought I would be able to go "FSX Only" after getting my i7. If you fly GA and sea planes though, by all means it will be amazing. But don't go near the cities with jets.

It is for me, and I spend 99.99% of my flight time in the Level-d 767-300ER. It runs so good, I removed FS9 and the thousands of dollars of addons from my computer.

It's not totally the magic bullet for FSX people rave about it

Hi flyhalf,I'm running an I7-975 overclocked and I have no problems running FSX with an airliner near big cities. My software setup. 1. FSX (with both service patches) 2. Level-d 767-300ER 3. REX 4. Ultimate Traffic II 5. 3D Lights Redux 6. Radar Contact 7. FSGenesis Mesh Terrain (All of them) 8. Ultimate Terrain X (All of them) 9. Ground Environment X10. AES11. Mega Scenery Earth12. FSPasengersX13. Addon airports (FSDreamTeam, Imagine Simulation, Cloud 9, FlyTampa, Aerosoft)It is for me, and I spend 99.99% of my flight time in the Level-d 767-300ER. It runs so good, I removed FS9 and the thousands of dollars of addons from my computer.

Same here, but with an E8400 OC'ed. I think the 920's unclocked are not going to give the best performance and that's why flyhalf struggles around big cities.BTW, looks like we have almost all the same addons, and I agree, the LDS 767 is no problem in FSX in large hubs.

Bottom line with my experience in FSX is that whether you have a quad or dual core is that your going to need 3.0 ghz per core or more if you want to fly FSX with medium to high settings and get good performance, not to mention having the operating system, video card and FSX set up to optimize performance whether it be by NickN's guide or a pay service like FS-GS. Either way, my experience performance wise has been great enough with my E8400 that I can run FSX pretty much full tilt any where I want in any a/c I want and get great performance, great enough that I was able to completely ditch FS9.I know this has been debated to death but this is just my .02 cents.Good luck Tony.

See, here's where I get frustrated with FSX. I built a new system about a year ago and I just cannot see the performance that I feel I should be getting from it for FSX, although for FS9 (which is my 99% sim time) runs excellent. I should mention that I ONLY fly one aircraft all of the time- the default Learjet 45 in both sims. Why? I have a full size cockpit :-)My specs: AMD 64 X2 3.0 Ghz w/ 4 Gigs of DDR2, Nvidia 9800 GTX 512, XP Home. So, where does this fall into the discussion about i7 envy? Due to the comment made above by cmpbellsjc I find it hard to believe that this system of mine could run FSX satisfactorily after trying Nick's FSX/System set up, etc. I run FSX with GEX but everything else is default except some nice 3rd party addons for airports like Imagine Sim, Fly Tampa, etc.Trust me, if I could run FSX satisfactorily I would but I just dont understand what is going on here to have high frame rates in FSX, but it be full of micro stutters, etc. since I am running a dual core 3 Ghz cpu. It makes me so aggravated to see others getting great performance with a similary setup but mine just doesnt feel right. Each time I go back to FS9 after re-trying FSX, I go to a happy place. I wish I had that with FSX :-(

See, here's where I get frustrated with FSX. I built a new system about a year ago and I just cannot see the performance that I feel I should be getting from it for FSX, although for FS9 (which is my 99% sim time) runs excellent. I should mention that I ONLY fly one aircraft all of the time- the default Learjet 45 in both sims. Why? I have a full size cockpit :-)My specs: AMD 64 X2 3.0 Ghz w/ 4 Gigs of DDR2, Nvidia 9800 GTX 512, XP Home. So, where does this fall into the discussion about i7 envy? Due to the comment made above by cmpbellsjc I find it hard to believe that this system of mine could run FSX satisfactorily after trying Nick's FSX/System set up, etc. I run FSX with GEX but everything else is default except some nice 3rd party addons for airports like Imagine Sim, Fly Tampa, etc.Trust me, if I could run FSX satisfactorily I would but I just dont understand what is going on here to have high frame rates in FSX, but it be full of micro stutters, etc. since I am running a dual core 3 Ghz cpu. It makes me so aggravated to see others getting great performance with a similary setup but mine just doesnt feel right. Each time I go back to FS9 after re-trying FSX, I go to a happy place. I wish I had that with FSX :-(

Well its really hard to say since there are so many variables. Before I overclocked and was at 3.0 ghz I still had really good performance, but the overclock gives me a little more headroom when I am in complex scenery areas.I think the one thing that I can really attribute to my good performance was the fact that I used FS-GS service to set up my operating system, drivers, and FSX. I know that Nick's guide is a good guide for those who want to do it themselves, but sometimes using a pay service to get everything optimally set up is a good way to go as well. I do know that a lot of people who use his service spend more time flying than they do spend tweaking, including me. In my case, I don't even have FS9 installed anymore because there is no need for it. Granted I do miss a few of my addons, but I really don't like the way it looks anymore and I get such good performance now with FSX I feel no need to have it. If I didn't get such good performance I would never have bought so many new addons for it, thats for sure.