I need some guidance. I'm considering getting a 24" iMac that has 4 gb 1066 mhz ddr3 sdram (2x2gb) and a NVIDIA GEOFORCE GT 130 512mb graphics card. It has a 3.06 ghz Intel Core 2 Duo processor.Will FSX run smoothly on this system?I can get a ATI Radeon HD 4850 512 mb card for an additional $50 but I would have to order. Would probably be 5-6 weeks to get the system. Would this card make an appreciable difference?I'm not a heavy flight sim user but it would be nice to run FSX as out of the box smoothly.Any expertise you can give me is greatly appreciated.

I run FSX on an older 24" iMac and its ok. DO NOT get an ATI card - they can't run FSX with detailed clouds. There is no way I can REX with my iMac. My job is in digital media, so I have to have a Mac - but when I have the money, I'm going to buy a PC. Dont buy a mac to play games or run FSX. You can't upgrade the system. If you have to have a mac, get a mac pro - that way you can always upgrade components of it.

Are you sure you want to buy a Mac? I have two in the house, and my 3 year old iMac just died. It had been locking up occasionally ("I thought Macs did not lockup"), and finally it got real serious. My extended warranty expired 10 days prior. Apple agreed it sounded like a hardware failure and advised "...just take it to an Apple service center, it shouldn't cost that much to fix." Ya, right. I have a bunch of computers around the house (like 9) and have never had one fail so young. Coupled with (IMO) a cumbersome OS, I'll never buy another Mac. So much of their persona is *hype*. One of the reasons I bought them originally, was to cut through the hype and see what they are really like. Now I know. I've used the Macs every day since I've gotten them, since they are part of the network at home. I much prefer working on a Vista machine, for any number of reasons. Hehe, I'll bet you're wondering how I really feel!If you're stuck on getting a Mac for something other than simming, so be it. I'd think you could run FSX via Bootcamp, and it would go OK, though Mac + ATI doesn't bode well. Heck, you might as well run X-Plane, which works in the Mac OS.Do they still come with a one button mouse?Noel W

Noel: You know, I can rewrite your post the other way around, all in favor of Mac, and you'd picture my situation. I have 10 computers in this house, 8 Macs, 1 PC, and 1 that has Windows and Mac on it (which is my laptop - a 1.2 year old Macbook Pro from the mid 2008 series). All the Macs have always worked great, save for some quircks here and there, but the PC was a problem from the beginning. Alas, I don't want to start a Mac vs PC war here, I have done one too many of those. Suffice to say that in my opinion, you can only be "stuck" on a Windows machine.I'll give you credit for one thing though: wanting to see for yourself, although I'm a bit puzzled by your experience. I think it probably ends up with what you are ultimately most used to. Who knows, maybe if I hadn't grown up with Macs, I would have liked Windows?Kenneth: I'm working on a mid 2008 Macbook Pro, and I can run FSX on medium to medium settings with decent framerates. It's certainly not perfect, but it gets the job done and I'm happy. I will add, though, that if you buy this computer solely for gaming purposes, than I think you should just get a PC, because you can upgrade that one, and there are not a lot of games for Macintosh. If you are tied to Macs because of personal preference or work you do, then you *should* be able to get the job done with that iMac, but don't go bananas: it'll work, but probably not with settings on anything higher than "high".

I run FSX on an older 24" iMac and its ok. DO NOT get an ATI card - they can't run FSX with detailed clouds. There is no way I can REX with my iMac. My job is in digital media, so I have to have a Mac - but when I have the money, I'm going to buy a PC. Dont buy a mac to play games or run FSX. You can't upgrade the system. If you have to have a mac, get a mac pro - that way you can always upgrade components of it.

I doubt that an ATI HD 4850 512MB which is top of the line, will not rune detailed clouds, if I can run mine on MAX detailed clouds, with all other settings higher than ultra high tileproxy or no tileproxy over 30FPS, and most of the time it hovers around 40-50fps..... Optimization is key. Get back to reality.... If performance was really that bad, I don't think anybody would buy them. To the original poster, I say go ahead. The 4850 512MB is a great choice, higher than my card, which will mean probably more performance, and it will make your computer futureproof for a while, since your running a Mac. Bootcamp with Mac and an ATi card should work great, because Windows will be accesing your hardware directly, and not through some fake virtual graphics card, so performance should be similar just as if you were using Windows on a PC.BTW look @ this video which is an ATI card.

I doubt that an ATI HD 4850 512MB which is top of the line, will not rune detailed clouds, if I can run mine on MAX detailed clouds, with all other settings higher than ultra high tileproxy or no tileproxy over 30FPS, and most of the time it hovers around 40-50fps..... Optimization is key. Get back to reality.... If performance was really that bad, I don't think anybody would buy them. BTW look @ this video which is an ATI card.To the original poster, I say go ahead. The 4850 512MB is a great choice, higher than my card, which will mean probably more performance, and it will make your computer futureproof for a while, since your running a Mac. Bootcamp with Mac and an ATi card should work great, because Windows will be accesing your hardware directly, and not through some fake virtual graphics card, so performance should be similar just as if you were using Windows on a PC.

Well you'd be wrong because I have a 256MB ATI card - and I can assure you, I can't run detailed clouds...do you think I'm making things up for fun?? Don't tell me to "get back to reality". It is WELL known that ATI cards SUFFER with FSX clouds.You take care now killer...EDIT: That's on an i7 computer - of course it looks great, tool. We know that processor power is King when running FSX.

Well you'd be wrong because I have a 256MB ATI card - and I can assure you, I can't run detailed clouds...do you think I'm making things up for fun?? Don't tell me to "get back to reality". It is WELL known that ATI cards SUFFER with FSX clouds.You take care now killer...EDIT: That's on an i7 computer - of course it looks great, tool. We know that processor power is King when running FSX.

Did you look @ my specs.... did you read my post. I run OVER Ultra High, and I still get over 40 FPS with detailed clouds. I run an ATi Radeon 3850 512MB, which 1 generation ago.... (2 if you count the unreleased Radeon 5 series that are coming very soon)Ok... you have a 256MB ATi card.1st. Any 256MB card with FSX is a HORRIBLE idea.2nd. You didn't state what model. I bet its one of the low end ATi cards such as the 3450, or something that would come standard with the mac...3rd. Max + gaming = Horrible. I do agree with thatOk he has a Core i7. Your overall point was not to get an ATi card because it has bad performance with detailed clouds. Well, the i7 still had an ATi card, it still got great performance. If he was running a Geforce 8600 or ATi 3600 it would be a different story. Just because the CPU is powerful doesn't mean it can overcome the limits and bandwidth of a graphics card. A Core i7 and Intel integrated chips will always yield in horrible results. BTW I have other videos up now with ATI cards even without a Core i7 and it still runs well.Checkmate...Quote: "It is WELL known that ATI cards SUFFER with FSX clouds."Haha, ya right. Maybe on a Mac or a PC that has Catalyst 8 drivers, or horrible optimization, or a horrible cpu, etc. or maybe its just a low end ATi card. Bottom line If you want to run FSX Get a 48** series, 58** series. Gefroce GTX260 or higher, Geforce 98** or higher. Always have more than 512MB of RAM onboard the gfx card. Since you have a 256MB card, I can't take your results because that is not sufficent for any modern day game. If you want good performance in FSX with any card get 512MB or higher. This is also why the Nvidia GTS 8800 320MB version has horrible FPS in clouds. Nvidia also gets the same results in clouds with some cards/drivers because of they way FSX generates them which is a bunch of flat 2D images, put together to give it a 3D effect. They are not volumetric particles...

Did you look @ my specs.... did you read my post. I run OVER Ultra High, and I still get over 40 FPS with detailed clouds. I run an ATi Radeon 3850 512MB, which 1 generation ago.... (2 if you count the unreleased Radeon 5 series that are coming very soon)Ok... you have a 256MB ATi card.1st. Any 256MB card with FSX is a HORRIBLE idea.2nd. You didn't state what model. I bet its one of the low end ATi cards such as the 3450, or something that would come standard with the mac...3rd. Max + gaming = Horrible. I do agree with thatOk he has a Core i7. Your overall point was not to get an ATi card because it has bad performance with detailed clouds. Well, the i7 still had an ATi card, it still got great performance. If he was running a Geforce 8600 or ATi 3600 it would be a different story. Just because the CPU is powerful doesn't mean it can overcome the limits and bandwidth of a graphics card. A Core i7 and Intel integrated chips will always yield in horrible results. BTW I have other videos up now with ATI cards even without a Core i7 and it still runs well.Checkmate...

Then your whole response to my posting is moot. I know that a 256 card for FSX is horrible - I didn't buy my MAC to play games on, I bought it to work on. The OP should take my advice and get a PC, or something that he can upgrade - because as you can see, in my current predicament - I can't upgrade the card on my iMac.Think before you post. It would save everyone time....

Then your whole response to my posting is moot. I know that a 256 card for FSX is horrible - I didn't buy my MAC to play games on, I bought it to work on. The OP should take my advice and get a PC, or something that he can upgrade - because as you can see, in my current predicament - I can't upgrade the card on my iMac.Think before you post. It would save everyone time....Checkmate? Didn't know we were playing chess you weirdo. I'll let you get back to getting off on system specs. I bet you have tape between glasses you tool.

Wow, you deserve a ban... thats no way to respond to someone regardless of age. Tool? What are you talking about... Wierdo? Your the wierd one, you don't even know me, I'm just stating the facts... Think before I post... hmmmm. you know 256MB performance is horrible? Then why did YOU post in the first place, and make false statements Maybe you should have thought before you posted do not get ATi cards because the performance in detailed clouds is horrible which is a MOOT point, because you need a good GPU in combination with the CPU of a PC to get good results in the sim. I think almost anybody would agree, that your post is downright mean... Next time think before you post. If I had a 256MB nvidia card, and I was getting horrible performance in FSX, do you think that applies to all cards, including the high end? Any 256MB video card is low end in the first place, because your memory limits you, and the manufacturer would never put so small an amount on high end graphics card.

The original post was regarding iMac's and FSX. I was responding with my situation...which for some reason you didn't want to believe me. You didn't even bother to read that I posted I had an older version of an iMac. And I'm sorry - there have been many, many posts regarding ATI cards and their problem rendering clouds, regardless of the CPU.

The original post was regarding iMac's and FSX. I was responding with my situation...which for some reason you didn't want to believe me. You didn't even bother to read that I posted I had an older version of an iMac. And I'm sorry - there have been many, many posts regarding ATI cards and their problem rendering clouds, regardless of the CPU.

Well, they probably do not have or do this:*Optimize their PC*Have a good card for FSX*Be like you and think a 256MB should get excellent performance*Have a good CPU*Have at least 3GB of memory.*etc, etc, etc. There are so many people that get good performance out of the RIGHT ATi card for FSX, and I'm one. You have to know how to tailor your PC to your needs and configure it to run at its peak. The 1st drivers that came out for a graphics card may give horrible performance so if anybody has these on either brand, its time for an update....I didn't want to believe you because you said Don't get an Ati card because they can't run detailed clouds which is FALSE. Doesn't matter if someone has a Core i7, even a dual core with a 4850 or higher can run detailed clouds. Maybe you should have said don't buy lower than a 38** series or 48** series card, or do some research before you go off saying things like that... Older version of iMac or not you still said ATi cards, you never said FSX runs horrible on an old iMac with this ATi card, and since he has a new iMac, I wouldn't see how its relevant in the first place. Stop wasting your time, trying to backup what you said, because if its wrong its wrong...Kenneth sorry to have this arrgument in your thread... I would have been nicer, if someone choose not to say things when he doesn't even know me...

Well, they probably do not have or do this:*Optimize their PC*Have a good card for FSX*Be like you and think a 256MB should get excellent performance*Have a good CPU*Have at least 3GB of memory.*etc, etc, etc. There are so many people that get good performance out of the RIGHT ATi card for FSX, and I'm one. You have to know how to tailor your PC to your needs and configure it to run at its peak. The 1st drivers that came out for a graphics card may give horrible performance so if anybody has these on either brand, its time for an update....I didn't want to believe you because you said Don't get an Ati card because they can't run detailed clouds which is FALSE. Doesn't matter if someone has a Core i7, even a dual core with a 4850 or higher can run detailed clouds. Maybe you should have said don't buy lower than a 38** series or 48** series card, or do some research before you go off saying things like that... Older version of iMac or not you still said ATi cards, you never said FSX runs horrible on an old iMac with this ATi card, and since he has a new iMac, I wouldn't see how its relevant in the first place. Stop wasting your time, trying to backup what you said, because if its wrong its wrong...Kenneth sorry to have this arrgument in your thread... I would have been nicer, if someone choose not to say things when he doesn't even know me...

Where did I ever once say that I think I should get good performance with a 256 card?? Please, show me. My whole argument was that my system WAS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. I'm sorry - but are you a little slow or something? Hahaha - this thread is ridiculous.

Where did I ever once say that I think I should get good performance with a 256 card?? Please, show me. My whole argument was that my system WAS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. I'm sorry - but are you a little slow or something? Hahaha - this thread is ridiculous.

Ya, this thread is ridiculous. slow? no, and BTW this is what you said:

I run FSX on an older 24" iMac and its ok. DO NOT get an ATI card - they can't run FSX with detailed clouds.

I'm not even going to argue with you anymore...

"Will FSX run smoothly on this system?"Getting back on topic...that is a "loaded" question. What level of detail are you shooting for when you ask if it will run smoothly? If you wish turn off all the bells and whistles to run FSX smoothly and you are happy, then it runs smoothly. If you want to run it at full Ultra settings and 100% AI at KORD smoothly, that is another thing all together. The first thing you need to do is understand your own expectations. Look around at some of the screenshots. You'll notice that the vast majority of user screenshots (and many developer screenshots for that matter) look absolutely horrible with blurries and jaggies but the users obviously are satisfied enough to run continue running FSX. In the same token some users and developers produce screenshots of FSX that leave your mouth open in awe, obviously those users are satisfied enough to run FSX too. Its relative. The technology has caught up to FSX, without a doubt, but that technology is on the very high end to be able to run FSX in all its glory without totally crippling FSX or attempting to land your PMDG 747 at 2 FPS.The first thing to understand about FSX is that the more you spend on hardware to run it, the more it will use, the better it will look, the smoother it will run, the less tweaking you will do, the happier you will be. If you are on a budget and get a 512K card (for instance) vs a 1MB card, or a Core2 vs an i7 CPU, then you need to set your expectations accordingly. Then you add the fact that you are now running FSX on a Windows Emulation on a MAC must also be considered a minus.Remember that you are buying a MAC that was designed with MAC OS in mind (not Windows), MAC OS is UNIX based so, at its core, is a very light weight OS that doesn't need the heavy lifting of Windows just to run the OS. MACs are designed at lower specs (comparitively speaking) to run everyday MAC related software because the OS is not sucking the live out of the system even before you actually run an application! BUT, if you need to run high end Graphic proggies then you HAVE to beef up the MAC (with flagrantly over priced memory and graphics cards or processor upgrades).As an aside, I have a ATI 4890 with 1GB of RAM and it is simply the hottest thing smoking and can run FEX or REX high def textures without batting an eye... If however, you have a 256K card (seriously?) and you find your sim to be a stuttering mess then don't blame ATI, blame the fact that you don't have enough texture memory.But I digress. Decide what you expect from FSX and then make your decision accordingly. The vast majority of posts expressing utter frustration and endless tweaking of FSX stems from the fact that users expect to fit 10 pounds of sausage into a 5 pound bag. To continue the analogy, if you buy a 5 lb bag, expect to fit 5 lbs of sausage into it and realize that all the sqeezing in the world won't allow you to fit more into the bag than it was designed to hold.Judging by your MAC specs, it is a MID range system by today's standards so expect MID range performance from FSX and you won't be disappointed.OR, If your situation allows, I am sure for the bloated price you are spending on a MAC (yes I know, shiny sleek aluminum cases, chrome do-hickies and aerodynamic styling cost money) you can probably buy a HIGH end PC since instead of paying extra money for break-away plugs or magnesium solar-flare shielded Apple Keyboards you could add a quad core i7 and dual ATI 4890 in X-Fire instead! <--how could I pass up a shameless jab at Steve Job's cult of personality? :( SO, "Will FSX run smoothly on this system?" The answer is yes it will, and, no it won't, it all depends on YOU.

As an aside, I have a ATI 4890 with 1GB of RAM and it is simply the hottest thing smoking and can run FEX or REX high def textures without batting an eye... If however, you have a 256K card (seriously?) and you find your sim to be a stuttering mess then don't blame ATI, blame the fact that you don't have enough texture memory.

Thank you this was what I was trying to say the whole time, but he was acting dumb, saying that he never said this or that, and making attacks at me. Good to hear another ATi system is working well, especially that you have FEX and REX! :(. I'm just trying to help, didn't mean to get the thread so off topic. Very sorry to the original poster... and I totally agree with Mike T, make sure you get a 512MB video card or higher, and make sure to stay away from low end cards with 512MB such as the Geforce 8600, although ATi rarely does that with their low end stuff, as to not confuse customers....Good luck and I hope you enjoy your system. In my opinion although, I say next time get a PC for gaming because the hardware is not limited (there are different BIOS for an ATi Radeon for Max and ATi Radeon for Windows) , it's far cheaper, and its cheap to build your own pc (there are many step by step guides, in the library, or the internet). There are also little proprietary things on a PC. Infact all the hardware I put together to make my PC is not proprietary, which can mean support and warranty for each product, less hassle, and more $$$ saving.! :(