I've been looking at what is available to me and reasonable priced: A 775 systemCPU-Q9650 (anyone know the clocking potential??)MOBO-Asus Intel P45 boardMemory-2 or 4 gb of 1066 (CL5 (5-5-5-15)). I could swing this in few weeks. But I'm not even close to the i7 platform.Golli

FYI I currently run a quad (QX9650) and I defintely get better performance from FSX by running it on two cores rather than three or four. I tested every combination and the best solution was isolating FSX to the second and third cores.

I have an i7920 clocked at 3,8GHz, 6 GB RAM, Asus ATI 5870 videocard, Velociraptor 300 GB disk, Windows 7 64 bit and when I load the MD11 FS9 FSDT tutorial flight, I have 40-50 fps although I have some 130-140 airplanes on the ground and god knows how many in the air. When I start the J41 tutorial flight in FSX I get 12-15 fps! If I switch to a default plane it jumps to 50-60 fps.. Whyy...sob sob...

I have an i7920 clocked at 3,8GHz, 6 GB RAM, Asus ATI 5870 videocard, Velociraptor 300 GB disk, Windows 7 64 bit and when I load the MD11 FS9 FSDT tutorial flight, I have 40-50 fps although I have some 130-140 airplanes on the ground and god knows how many in the air. When I start the J41 tutorial flight in FSX I get 12-15 fps! If I switch to a default plane it jumps to 50-60 fps.. Whyy...sob sob...

I dont fly with AI so what are your framerates when you have it turned off?

I have a Q9650 running stock 3GHz, and FSX is just about sliders-right only holding back on water effects and that silly-looking autogen stuff. Nice and smooth, sometimes it takes a second or two for aircraft model textures to fill in after switching cameras but I can live with that.I've always expected I would play with over clocking, but haven't found the motivation to try yet.

Whyy...sob sob...

Hey Krister, I don't own the JS41 yet, but curious to what airport it starts you off at? Most of the tutorials I've done like to tend to use the more popular of the Large hubs. So if you you're saying you get the frame rate you do, I am guessing it is at a much smaller airport. Even with a default cessna I can't imaging that high a frame rate if you were somewhere like KORD, KJFK etc... The more sophisticated the aircraft of course will take more cpu equaiting to fps hit, but no way going from 50-60 to 12-15 just because of the Aircraft. That would have to be tied into a lot more, like airport and weather. Also important to mention is if you're use to starting at the active runway and then dealing with the difference of a tutorial that is normally starting at a gate or ramp. If you don't normally start at the gate area and have lots of AI the performance hit in the beginning is becaue the fact that when you start, all the jetways and such are being triggered (if your complexity is up far enough anyway) and depending how much traffic will make hugggge differences in performance. Especially if your at a larger airport than normal.To add to Rob's question, what traffic program are you running?

All my flights are on Vatsim so I haven't used default ATC or traffic in years, I also plan to keep it that way in FSX. I was just wondering if the AI traffic is major hit in FSX when people complain about FPS?

I wanted to know if any PMDG MD11/744 users have this CPU for FSX. I'm thinking of upgrading my I7

Rob, I just changed my rig #2 to an i5. I actually think the lower i5s (Clarkdale) are really more like i3s, suitable for workstations and maybe even microcomputing if you use the onboard graphic controller, then the higher i5s. My main rig is an i7 920 - running at stock. It runs FSX fine.

I wanted to know if any PMDG MD11/744 users have this CPU for FSX. I'm thinking of upgrading my I7http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct....rodid=CP-316-IN

Hey friend, don't do that. i7 is far bether than i5. ok ok. it's 2.66mhz but it have 8 threads vs 4 in i5.check this out:http://www.intel.com/consumer/products/pro...ors/ratings.htmPaulo.

I have an i7920 clocked at 3,8GHz, 6 GB RAM, Asus ATI 5870 videocard, Velociraptor 300 GB disk, Windows 7 64 bit and when I load the MD11 FS9 FSDT tutorial flight, I have 40-50 fps although I have some 130-140 airplanes on the ground and god knows how many in the air. When I start the J41 tutorial flight in FSX I get 12-15 fps! If I switch to a default plane it jumps to 50-60 fps.. Whyy...sob sob...

This post, is a typical example of the posts that are scaring the cr*p out me regarding the upgrade. This setup should drive FSX like crazy. But I have ordered FSX, should have it in my hands this weekend.Golli

I have a Q9650 running stock 3GHz, and FSX is just about sliders-right only holding back on water effects and that silly-looking autogen stuff. Nice and smooth, sometimes it takes a second or two for aircraft model textures to fill in after switching cameras but I can live with that.I've always expected I would play with over clocking, but haven't found the motivation to try yet.

This is good to hear. Might I ask, do you use any weather engine, traffic & PMDG airplanes ??As I never fly on-line, I'm thinking of getting the new Ultimate Traffic 2. It is done from the ground up, specially for FSX and the Avsim review states; none or very little FPS impact.Golli

This post, is a typical example of the posts that are scaring the cr*p out me regarding the upgrade. This setup should drive FSX like crazy. But I have ordered FSX, should have it in my hands this weekend.Golli

Golli,I am 100% sure that the rather lacklustre performance I get with the PMDG J41 is because of something with how my system is set up... Mind you, I have done no tweaking at all, zilch, nada but on the other hand I never do any with FS9 either except for that radius=4.50000 tweak in the fs9.cfg. I guess the reason why I really haven't really put my heart and soul into tweaking FSX is simply because I am so satisfied with how FS9 works for me that I haven't felt the need. But with PMDG737 being my all time favourite and most used airplane in MSFS, I will buy whatever hardware it takes and learn tweaking in order to get a nicely working FSX & PMDG737NGX setup.On the topic of AI, I don't use any AI-add on in FSX, only the default, while in FS9 I use a mix of different freeware ones (had Ultimate Traffic but skipped it because of better freeware alternatives).

This post, is a typical example of the posts that are scaring the cr*p out me regarding the upgrade. This setup should drive FSX like crazy. Golli

Keep in mind, that You're reading posts from people based on what they have installed for their own addons. I currently run about 17 addons, but only a few ever running at the same time. Gex, Rex2, UTX, FSGenesis, FSPassnegers, ASA, PMDG MD-11 or 744, UT2 traffic (I have all of the traffic addons made for FSX if you have specific questions about them) are always running. Some have no performance hit at all, and some do. People have different tastes also. If you have lots of ground traffic selected then you will see an fps hit in my situation with my addons running. If I were to shut one down, then I would have more flexibility with the traffic. Same as water texture. Rex for FS9 made some awesome improvements to the water, as they did in FSX. But regardless of water texture you use, the water slider for me is set to 2. There isn't much missed and depending where I fly, I may max it, but again, the point is, someone with a lesser system of mine may say they have double the fps because they do not run 100% traffic, and may have other settings lowered. Most of mine are always maxxed with the exception of Autoregen and some small adjustments on others (Very small, but mostly maxxed).It runs fine with all of my addons at any airport I want, but the sliders do not have to be maxxed to experience a great experience.Lastly, you are reading topics in a forum also, a place most people present problems looking for solutions. Some threads may scare people because the ones that have 0 issue, may not drop what they're doing to come tell people how smoothly it's going ;-)

Question,I have i7-920, P6T Deluxe, 6GB RAM, GTX285, WD300 Raptor, Vista-Ultimate - 64. CPU is not overclocked (stock frequencies) and I do not have plans to do that, since I'm not a tech-guy and really afraid to fry CPU and MB.However, assuming the fact that OC is the only way to get good performance in FSX, what is the safe ceiling for i7-920 overclocking with stock cooling and sotck voltage?ThanksDmitriy.PS. I know that this is rahter hardware topic and if moderators will move it into correct place - that's fine

Question,I have i7-920, P6T Deluxe, 6GB RAM, GTX285, WD300 Raptor, Vista-Ultimate - 64. CPU is not overclocked (stock frequencies) and I do not have plans to do that, since I'm not a tech-guy and really afraid to fry CPU and MB.However, assuming the fact that OC is the only way to get good performance in FSX, what is the safe ceiling for i7-920 overclocking with stock cooling and sotck voltage?ThanksDmitriy.PS. I know that this is rahter hardware topic and if moderators will move it into correct place - that's fine

Hi Dmitriy, OC'ing isn't the only way to get good performance. You will get better performance, but in some cases can also open up a can of worms also. With things like artifacting dur to overheating, lock ups, blue screens etc...Of course you can also get a stable overclock and love it. I wouldn't recommend OC'ing, but will say your mobo has many protections from keeping it from accepting anything out of the norm. If you want I can list my exact settings for my overclock and you can try them out. Our systems are very comparable with one possible exception of your ram. What type is it?