You are funny .. if I quote you with "Yes Tim, I do hear the ocean calling" then YES I'm talking directly to youand "the old enough" thing was NOT an insult since I AM old enough to remember those days ... if was a fact but if you want to take it as an insult be my guess Some wear bigger shoes than their feetGood day

You are funny .. if I quote you with "Yes Tim, I do hear the ocean calling" then YES I'm talking directly to youand "the old enough" thing was NOT an insult since I AM old enough to remember those days ... if was a fact but if you want to take it as an insult be my guess Some wear bigger shoes than their feetGood day

Lets leave it at differences and how each communicates in their own cultural environment. Here, to say such a thing with the term: I'm pretty sure you are old enough" or "I would think you are old enough" when it is quite obvious the person is, and, placed in reference to a subject the person would also be quite knowledgeable about, could be considered a slick insult. It can be used by someone who wish to insult another in a group or in public and leaves them the option to deny that act.But as I said, cultural differences may define a different use. Regardless of that, your original post was in fact derived from the discussion prior to your post.The OP never asked about 'a really excited user', cost, or if people are lying about Intel/AMD performance.. and although anyone can say.. "I was not talking to anyone directly" I for one most certainly wont hide behind that approach nor I am going to get into "whos shoes are bigger or dont fit" Again, perhaps a cultural difference which makes something appear one way to another individual than it was intended.Thanks for clarifying

just in case what I posted above didn

You posted a subject that has a high differential in opinions usually based on what a person has purchased. Most AMD users have never seen an Intel system run FSX (like you stated about yourself) and most Intel users have never bothered with AMDIn that, the answers you get will vary and have a high probability for very inaccurate comparison (AMD or Intel) based on emotional need to justify the purchase and not a defined response that addresses the question at hand.. which one will provide the better result. You never said cost was a factor. As posted I have both Intel and the mentioned AMD systems sitting right here in which I do check side by side with different hardware (ie; memory, video adapters, coolers)So although I do agree my initial post may have been directed at clarifying a web benchmark which displays numbers that are not consistent with real world FSX use between Intel and AMD and that are if fact on topic since the question you placed to the forum was " are the intel chips better or what......", I most certainly clarified there is a difference between the two and did so without any bias to the brand or the cost of each platform. Bottom line: Although a user can use AMD with FSX and get very good results based on what 'they' consider 'good' as compared to past AMD product line and FS9 or FSX, the AMD user will not be presented with the same performance curve ability with respect to application load in FSX. AMD has certainly gotten better in the last year but they have not overcome Intel in Flight Simulator X performance. If cost is a high factor for you, which was not stated in your original post, then buy AMD. It will certainly run FSX significantly better than the older AMD products, but it will not run it equal or better than current Intel. Hopefully that will change in the future as we could all use some relief in that respect. good luck with your decision.. as I stated earlier, make it a good one. :(

Nick_N, I would like to thank you for your very informative reply to my original post, and has opened my eyes to the tricky aspect of choosing a system to run FSX. I may be a little wiser but sadly no better off. I was hoping to get more replies from different people so as to gain from there experiences.... but it seems most simmers who have systems that run FSX to there likes, are not interested to share.... You are correct in saying that simmers are biased in there choice of cpu, I understand that, I did the same when AMD was the chip to have, but now Intel have been at the top and AMD are fighting back, all I was hoping was, that simmers who have got AMD Phenom II x4 955 black editions running FSX could give there views on how good or bad FSX runs. NOT if their rig is better than Intels. And people running Intel's could do like wise. ........Maybe I should of just posted that. Peter

Nick_N, I would like to thank you for your very informative reply to my original post, and has opened my eyes to the tricky aspect of choosing a system to run FSX. I may be a little wiser but sadly no better off. I was hoping to get more replies from different people so as to gain from there experiences.... but it seems most simmers who have systems that run FSX to there likes, are not interested to share.... You are correct in saying that simmers are biased in there choice of cpu, I understand that, I did the same when AMD was the chip to have, but now Intel have been at the top and AMD are fighting back, all I was hoping was, that simmers who have got AMD Phenom II x4 955 black editions running FSX could give there views on how good or bad FSX runs. NOT if their rig is better than Intels. And people running Intel's could do like wise. ........Maybe I should of just posted that. Peter

Understood PeterIt really comes down to what you can afford. If saving money is the goal and still have a really good sim experience then by all means, the newer AMD chips will provide that and a Charly said he very much enjoys what he gets for the savings but then again if we are talking about a 975 compared to the latest AMD there is no way to try and put a cost compare into the mix. Even Intel people know they are going to pay that premium in which a user does get more for their money even if that cost may not be in line. Most simmers have come to the smart conclusion that they have choice.. spend on a very good system and forget the rest.. enjoy the sim, or, purchase cheaper and enjoy but eventually want more and purchase again soon thereafter. In that, I have to wonder where the savings really are. If one is satisfied and will not purchase again and again to try and get more the there is a cost savings.. if not I see no savings in the long run.The platform selection is only part 1... selecting the right components to support that platform and get the most out of it is part 2. In example, someone who purchases an i7 920 and runs dual channel 1066 9-9-9 timing memory to save money would be very disappointed. It is the same with AMD or Intel. You are going to read a lot of opinions and some of them can come from people who (on both sides AMD or Intel) may have bought a good processor but did not build the rest of the system correctly. Their opinion will have been made from a place of ignorance instead of factual ability in the platforms and setting them up correctly.

Nick_N, I would like to thank you for your very informative reply to my original post, and has opened my eyes to the tricky aspect of choosing a system to run FSX. I may be a little wiser but sadly no better off. I was hoping to get more replies from different people so as to gain from there experiences.... but it seems most simmers who have systems that run FSX to there likes, are not interested to share.... You are correct in saying that simmers are biased in there choice of cpu, I understand that, I did the same when AMD was the chip to have, but now Intel have been at the top and AMD are fighting back, all I was hoping was, that simmers who have got AMD Phenom II x4 955 black editions running FSX could give there views on how good or bad FSX runs. NOT if their rig is better than Intels. And people running Intel's could do like wise. ........Maybe I should of just posted that. Peter

Here's a hint. The topic of the post you chose is "I7 vs AMD"! That's bound to stir some riff raff! :(

Here's a hint. The topic of the post you chose is "I7 vs AMD"! That's bound to stir some riff raff! :(

Point taken......And thanks to all those that gave there time to try and help a fellow simmer....... Regards Peter.

Peter,IMO Nicks advice to go for Intel Core i7 is the best (for now). Here are some articles at AnandTech that will give you some information:http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3574http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showd...?i=3572&p=1http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3551http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showd...?i=3382&p=1Don't miss the "Final words" section in each article.Some years ago I used AMD based computers, but after the release of Intel Core2Duo, AMD wasn't the right choice any longer when flying with FS and if you want good performance. Sure, AMD is cheap. You get what you pay for.