Only in load times? Not in fps? I always thought those disks were good for FSX because they would make FSX run better (because things are loaded easier).

I couldn't tell you if it improved anything else because it was on a new system leaving me nothing to compare to.What I can say is my load time for FSX is about 1 minute. Flights load in less than a minute. The load time has gone up since I have added things but they are still in the minute range. On a fresh install, it was almost instantaneous.

Now, when I start an actual flight it takes about a minute to a minute and a half to fully load depending on location, aircraft, traffic, scenery complexity etc.I guess I am want to know (for Smiles & Grins) what determines the speed of the load time: A fast CPU, or fast hard drive?

In this case, it is drive speed. That's the biggest impact a fast drive will have.7200 RPM Drive (Your average drive)Loading Flights: Normal performance - a minute or two to load. In-Flight: Maybe some texture related pop-in when changing views. (microsecond stutters) 10,000 RPM Drive (Velociraptor) Loading Flights: Noticably faster, but certainly not instant. In-Flight: Fewer stutter events when changing views, no FPS change. SSD DriveLoading Flights: Drastically faster - many times faster than either of the above. In-Flight: Even fewer, if not no stutter events when changing views, still no FPS change.

Those SSD

Those SSD

I'm using a 160GB Intel X-25M as my FS9/FSX drive.I never said or implied that the 2TB Caviar is a "showstopper" of any sort...my point is that when the sim needs to load large numbers of scenery files that aren't already in the cache, such as when panning around, it's then that fast random access makes it's presence known. If I push up the scenery density and pan around the acft in an area with a lot of autogen trees, there's a noticeable difference in smoothness between the SSD and the Velociraptor. That's on a well-tuned i7-975 running at 4.4GHz and a moderately overclocked GTX285.RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

I use UTII and there is a noticeable and positive difference in the completion time to drop UTII ai aircaft into a scene even at large & busy airports since using my SSD. In fact this hiccup factor is now ignorable and we all know that UTII reloads AI every time a FSX menu item is accessed. :(

I use UTII and there is a noticeable and positive difference in the completion time to drop UTII ai aircaft into a scene even at large & busy airports since using my SSD. In fact this hiccup factor is now ignorable and we all know that UTII reloads AI every time a FSX menu item is accessed. :(

I have a velociraptor and also use UT2. I am not having any major issues with traffic injections. I get brief pauses here and there but nothing drastic.

I can't disagree with anything any of you have said. But I submit that many of those issues have NOTHING to do with FLYING the aircraft in FSX. It's a "flight simulator". If you are going to use it as a "let's step outside the aircraft and spin the view around to see what's there", and keep cycling through all the different views while doing this, the LOAD you are placing on the computer system components will never stabilize. Time and time again, I have responded to posts from FS users about "slow loading textures", "blurry textures", "stutters and pauses"...and in many many cases this is happening after they "change views", are "spinning around the aircraft after changing views", etc, etc. Whenever you do these things, FSX has to start "reloading" all kinds of stuff. I can make that happen very easily on my current Q9650 by cycling through all the different views. But if I don't start doing all that kind of stuff, once the scenery loads for my VC view from the cockpit, I have no stutters, no blurry textures, no pauses when taxiing at even the most scenery intensive addon airports, or no slow texture loading while flying. The same things apply if I switch to an outside view like Spot View. If I STAY in Spot View, after everything gets loaded for the Spot View there is no degradation to the scenery as you all are describing. But I can't just keep switching views all the time and expect FSX to keep up with what I am asking it to do, especially in high-density scenery areas.You CAN "control" the need for FSX to NOT have to keep accessing the hard drive so much, resulting in higher disk accesses and the resulting "crunch" it places on the CPU and GPU. Many "stutter", "blurry" and "slow loading of sceney" problems for users are a result of how they are actually using the simulator. You aren't watching a movie with FSX. When you "change scenes" (views) in FSX, the stuff has to get reloaded in many cases. Pick a view for what you want to do, then stay there. That's one of the benefits of using something like a TrackIR with the VC cockpit view. You can "look around" all you want...inside the cockpit, outside of the cockpit at the outside scenery, etc...without having to cycle through all the different views in FSX to "see" stuff.After I get my new computer built with the Caviar Black 2TB, I seriously doubt I am going to have any of the problems described in this thread, even though my FSX won't be on a vRap or SSD. Heck, I don't have them now with FSX on a "regular" 7200 RPM drive on my Q9650...IF I don't insist on making FSX keep stressing the CPU, hard drive, and GPU by switching views all the time. If I'm flying, I stay in the cockpit where a pilot would be. If I want to look at "eye candy scenery" in other views, I go to that view and STAY there to do it for an extended period of time. Even in Spot View doing that, once the scenery gets "loaded" for the Spot View, spinning around the aircraft to look at everything should NOT cause stutters, blurry textures, pauses, or anything else, unless your computer is so old hardware-wise that you are LONG overdue for a system upgrade from a Dual Core to something better. If you are still running FSX on a 32-bit OS with only 3GB of available memory being used, you are behind the power curve with a lot of the scenery addons available today. If you have a 64-bit OS, 4 GB or more of memory, a respectable CPU and GPU, and the computer is maintained and set up correctly for FSX, then AFTER the scenery "loads", either when initially loading the flight or after switching views, even the Caviar Black 2TB will keep up with things...unless you start the cycle of needing to reload everything again by how you are using the simulator.Someday, we will all be able to have uber-fast computers that will allow "instant scenery loading" even when cycling through the views as fast as possible. But that day isn't here yet, even with the fastest over-clocked I7, the "fastest" vRaps or SSD's, and the fastest GPU's available. Actually...we may not ever have it with FSX. The current software coding of FSX probably won't allow it to happen. It would take a complete rewriting of the code and how the software is used to make it happen. In the meantime, we may have to use the sim in ways that WE can "control" the stresses it places on our hard drives, GPU's, CPU's, and available memory it CAN use.Respectfully submitted, of course.

Nice words, FalconAF, but I have stutters when I look around in the same view using my TrackIR. FPS is incredible on my i7 920 @ 3.3 and GTX285 on Windows 7 64 bit with 6 Gb RAM, but I have stutters. The OS is almost brand new and my seperate hard disk (simple Samsung spinpoint) is almost empty. I never switch views because a real pilot doesn't either: I always stick to the VC. But when I look around I get stutters. Looking around is the same as changing views to me, so it seems. So this is why I am interested in a fast drive!

Well, I don't know what to tell you then, Jeroun. Short of looking at your computer. With an I7, you shouldn't be having any problems...even without a vRap or an SSD. They don't happen on my Q9650 at 3.0Ghz...with or without the TrackIR (I don't always use it). That's why I'm not concerned about the Caviar Black 2TB...it's going to be faster than the 1TB SATA drive I have now for FSX.I just see no sense in spending the money required for a multiple vRap or SSD configuration, when I know I will be able to get FSX to do everything without all the problems other folks seem to be having. It can be done. With one 2TB drive at 7,200 RPMs. For a lot less money. Running on a 3-wide TH2G monitor setup, with a 4th 22" monitor running off the second GPU port.Been doing it for amost 2 years already now.

Well, I don't know what to tell you then, Jeroun. Short of looking at your computer. With an I7, you shouldn't be having any problems...even without a vRap or an SSD. They don't happen on my Q9650 at 3.0Ghz...with or without the TrackIR (I don't always use it). That's why I'm not concerned about the Caviar Black 2TB...it's going to be faster than the 1TB SATA drive I have now for FSX.I just see no sense in spending the money required for a multiple vRap or SSD configuration, when I know I will be able to get FSX to do everything without all the problems other folks seem to be having. It can be done. With one 2TB drive at 7,200 RPMs. For a lot less money. Running on a 3-wide TH2G monitor setup, with a 4th 22" monitor running off the second GPU port.Been doing it for amost 2 years already now.

I agree with Falcon you should be getting better performance. As to your original question; yes, by all means get FSX onto a separate drive and defrag by name - often if you make changes to the data in the FSX partition. Following NickN's performace guide will help you get the best out of FSX whatever you decide. The advantage of a separate drive for FSX is easier and better directed maintenance and no I/O interference from other processes which can lead to head contention. Give FSX its own dedicated disk spindle if practible and from your original post it looks as though that might be possible. Good luck with your endevours.

...Give FSX its own dedicated disk spindle if practible and from your original post it looks as though that might be possible. Good luck with your endevours.

Is there a tutorial for doing that somewhere?

Hard drives only have one spindle if that is what you are asking. You might have to uninstall FSX to do this if already installed, but after installing a new HDD, format it, name it then create a folder to put FSX in and direct the installation program to said folder/drive and run the install program. Windows will create registry entries showing where FSX is installed.

I agree with Falcon you should be getting better performance. As to your original question; yes, by all means get FSX onto a separate drive and defrag by name - often if you make changes to the data in the FSX partition. Following NickN's performace guide will help you get the best out of FSX whatever you decide. The advantage of a separate drive for FSX is easier and better directed maintenance and no I/O interference from other processes which can lead to head contention. Give FSX its own dedicated disk spindle if practible and from your original post it looks as though that might be possible. Good luck with your endevours.

Well, I do have FSX on a seperate drive already... But it isn't a very fast one. And I also have some data and music software on that seperate drive... ;) But when it comes to the I/O interference from other processes, this shouldn't really be a problem. This afternoon I gave Nick N's defrag scheme another try (space, space, name, name, space and offline in between too): it didn't make any difference at all. Just as it didn't a few months back...

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, gentlemen. I