Hello, I just would like a bit of advice on a new system for FSX. Here is what I have in mind:ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel M/B >> Good choice?Intel Core i7 I7-950 3.06 GHz >> Would a 920 be better?? EVGA Geforce GTX 285 1GB 512-bit GDDR3 CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB DDR3 3X2GB 1600 Power Supply Corsair TX 750W Case: Any suggestions? I have read that generally for FSX, I should look for an Intel CPU and an Nvidia GPU, is this true?Thanks, Alex

Hello, I just would like a bit of advice on a new system for FSX. Here is what I have in mind:ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel M/B >> Good choice?Intel Core i7 I7-950 3.06 GHz >> Would a 920 be better?? EVGA Geforce GTX 285 1GB 512-bit GDDR3 CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB DDR3 3X2GB 1600 Power Supply Corsair TX 750W Case: Any suggestions? I have read that generally for FSX, I should look for an Intel CPU and an Nvidia GPU, is this true?Thanks, Alex

Looks like a real good system. I would go for the i7 950!I assume that the Corsair memory has the timings CL7 ( 7-7-7-20) (product code CMG6GX3M3A1600C7).I have nu suggestion regarding a case. But I'm sure you'll get good advice from other simmers.

You seem to have a good setup as far as hardware is concerned. My only advice is to be sure to get a case that will fit a large cpu heatsink - I would recommend something with at least 160mm to 170mm of clearance over the cpu. I ordered a Scythe Zipang yesterday because I only have about 145mm of clearance over my cpu. It would have been nice to have the option of one of the high end tower coolers such as the Tuniq Tower 120 - would have allowed me to overclock a bit further, I'm sure.

I was also very much conteplating between the 920 and 950 - why I ordered the 920 is very simple reason: I can't justify buying the 950 for the double price of the 920, for the 400mhz and nothing else. The question is also, would you be able to reach stable 4.5ghz in comparison to 4.0 with the 920? And what would it bring FPS-wise? Surely not double FPS...My only hope is that I'll be able to keep the mobo for some time, and just upgrade to the faster CPU as the 1366 CPUs advance...I went with the very similar system, I ordered the Gigabyte X58-UD5, GTX285, same Corsair memory.I was also very much inbetween ASUS and Gigabyte, I went with GB because I heard it's easier to overclock and should be more stable at FSB200. I also read about the 200mhz lock for ASUS mainboard, whereas Gigabyte should go as high as 220mhz.I also went with the Gigabyte GTX285, purely financial reason, it's around 60

I was also very much conteplating between the 920 and 950 - why I ordered the 920 is very simple reason: I can't justify buying the 950 for the double price of the 920, for the 400mhz and nothing else. The question is also, would you be able to reach stable 4.5ghz in comparison to 4.0 with the 920? And what would it bring FPS-wise? Surely not double FPS...My only hope is that I'll be able to keep the mobo for some time, and just upgrade to the faster CPU as the 1366 CPUs advance...I went with the very similar system, I ordered the Gigabyte X58-UD5, GTX285, same Corsair memory.I was also very much inbetween ASUS and Gigabyte, I went with GB because I heard it's easier to overclock and should be more stable at FSB200. I also read about the 200mhz lock for ASUS mainboard, whereas Gigabyte should go as high as 220mhz.I also went with the Gigabyte GTX285, purely financial reason, it's around 60

Hello, I just would like a bit of advice on a new system for FSX. Here is what I have in mind:ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel M/B >> Good choice?Intel Core i7 I7-950 3.06 GHz >> Would a 920 be better?? EVGA Geforce GTX 285 1GB 512-bit GDDR3 CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB DDR3 3X2GB 1600 Power Supply Corsair TX 750W Case: Any suggestions? I have read that generally for FSX, I should look for an Intel CPU and an Nvidia GPU, is this true?Thanks, Alex

The above is pretty much what I have, the differences between the above and mine are:GPU - BFG Tech GTX 285OCFU,Memory - Mushkin Enhanced Redline #998691 6GB DDR3 PC3-12,800 1,600MHzPS - Corsair 850TXCase - Cooler Master HAF-932OS HD - C: / Data HD - E: - Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 - 750GB; 7,200 RPM; SATA2 3.0Gb/s w/32MB CacheFSX HD - D: - WD Velociraptor 300GB; 10,000 RPM; SATA2 3.0Gb/s w/16MB CacheHere is a link to the case:http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?product_id=2810My CPU cooler is a Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme 1366 RT, here is a link:http://www.acousticpc.com/thermalright_ult...cpu_cooler.htmlI tell you my machine runs FSX great. All my scenery tab sliders are maxed out except one, I am not at home so I do not recall which one it is, I can look and post later if you want to know. I could probably max the last one out, I just have not gotten around to trying it and seeing how FSX would work.Regarding the 920 vs. the 950, I went with the 950 because if you want to OC it will be easier to get a higher clock with the 950 vs. the 920. The choice is up to you if the 950 is worth the extra money.Rod

The above is pretty much what I have, the differences between the above and mine are:GPU - BFG Tech GTX 285OCFU,Memory - Mushkin Enhanced Redline #998691 6GB DDR3 PC3-12,800 1,600MHzPS - Corsair 850TXCase - Cooler Master HAF-932OS HD - C: / Data HD - E: - Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 - 750GB; 7,200 RPM; SATA2 3.0Gb/s w/32MB CacheFSX HD - D: - WD Velociraptor 300GB; 10,000 RPM; SATA2 3.0Gb/s w/16MB CacheHere is a link to the case:http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?product_id=2810My CPU cooler is a Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme 1366 RT, here is a link:http://www.acousticpc.com/thermalright_ult...cpu_cooler.htmlI tell you my machine runs FSX great. All my scenery tab sliders are maxed out except one, I am not at home so I do not recall which one it is, I can look and post later if you want to know. I could probably max the last one out, I just have not gotten around to trying it and seeing how FSX would work.Regarding the 920 vs. the 950, I went with the 950 because if you want to OC it will be easier to get a higher clock with the 950 vs. the 920. The choice is up to you if the 950 is worth the extra money.Rod

Rod, since you have the 950, could you test for us the FPS difference between any 400mhz clock? Would be very much interested into those results, since that might impact other's decisions!

Rod, since you have the 950, could you test for us the FPS difference between any 400mhz clock? Would be very much interested into those results, since that might impact other's decisions!

FSX is not about how many FPS you get it is about how smooth it runs.With that said my OC right now is at 3.61GHz. My frame rate is locked at 30 and FSX runs smooth as silk. My mesh slider is set at 10m and everything else as far as scenery in all tabs is maxed out. Weather tabs are set on low.I have never even ran this at unlimited to see how high it would go. I have had it locked at 72 FPS and it was hitting 72 pretty easy in the country side. Over NYC in the Aeorsoft F-16 at 500' and going 300 - 400 TAS the frame rates will hold in the low to mid 20's and that is with MegaSceneryEarth photo scenery, FSGenesis, MTX traffic @ 30% and FEX, plus no blurries! I also have UTX and GEXn installed, it just won't show up because of the MegaSceneryEarth Long Island and NYC tiles I have installed.The Win7 Ult 64b OS was set up per NickN's OS tweaks and using his Vista tweaks as a guide for Win7. FSX and the GTX 285 were also tweaked using Nick's FSX guides.It will probably be a week or two before I get the time to devote to a 4GHz clock and right know I really have to wonder if the effort will be worth the payback since FSX is running so great right now. Running at 3.61GHz my temps are down and nothing is stressed.Anyway, if I decide to go ahead and go for 4GHz I will let you know if I actually see any improvement to the above. I am really not interested in how high I can get my FPS to go, I am just interested in 30FPS with my scenery maxed out, flying something heavy FPS hitter like the Aerosoft F-16 or PMDG MD-11 with no blurries of anykind! and I can do that now at 3.61GHzRegards,Rod

What people seem not to understand that FPS ALWAYS matters.FS9 is much more dependant on high FPS than FSX, that we all know. In another words, FSX at 30fps feels much smoother than FS9 at 30fps.But if you would compare the clocks, say 3.2 and 3.6, it would be a definitive proof how much CPU clock change brings for FSX.For such tests, I usually set up a situation somewhere on the airport, set some normal cloud cover, and set the view to the spot view with the fixed position and then save the flight. I reload that same flight 2-3 times (take the middle result), both in lower clock and higher clock. And measure the FPS. Of course FPS at unlocked without VSync enabled.That is the easiest way to compare the performance vs. clock. There is noone who can tell me that there is "overall increase in smoothness" without any increase of general FPS. That's a load of crap and just nothing more than placebo effect.EDIT: Oh, and I just stumbled ove this:http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article/2009...y_cpu_scaling/7Notice how the QX9650 kicks the i7-920 in the stock speed test (30-26fps), but then notice how at 3.66/3.6 both have actually the very same performance. And now you still think FSX is not CPU dependable? This is the very reason why I think we MUST see a real world comparison.

Oh, and before you cash out the double money for the 950/960, check this out:http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showth...highlight=batchor direct:http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=trX...Mou4nt-tX_z3VNA

There is noone who can tell me that there is "overall increase in smoothness" without any increase of general FPS. That's a load of crap and just nothing more than placebo effect.

Go load FSX on a brand new PC and run FSX over NYC with with the frame rate set to unlimited, notice the average FPS and the smoothness of the sim. Next lock the FPS at the average you noted, repeat the flight and notice the smoothness of the sim. After that tweak the OS and FSX using NickN's tweak guides for both and do nothing else. After tweaking the OS and FSX with the frame rate still locked at the same FPS as before you will notice an increase in the smoothness of flight without an increase in FPS.Rod

That is the easiest way to compare the performance vs. clock. There is noone who can tell me that there is "overall increase in smoothness" without any increase of general FPS. That's a load of crap and just nothing more than placebo effect.

This is correct in general, however not in this context. MSFS does not have a real-time frame counter. It's sample rate is far too low to be truly useful as a way to measure performance. If we log the framerate in real-time with a 3rd party utility using the same system before and after an upgrade, there would be a quantifiable difference in performance. Using MSFS's built-in framerate utility may not show a difference.

This is correct in general, however not in this context. MSFS does not have a real-time frame counter. It's sample rate is far too low to be truly useful as a way to measure performance. If we log the framerate in real-time with a 3rd party utility using the same system before and after an upgrade, there would be a quantifiable difference in performance. Using MSFS's built-in framerate utility may not show a difference.

OK, that might be true. Measuring with an external FPS counter (Fraps comes in mind) is a good choice, and that is exactly what I would be interested in... how much in % compared to the % of the changed clock. I bet it wouldn't be 1:1...I am only convinced and trying to prove the paying double the money for the 950 doesn't give you a better choice. Only if you have some to throw away - in that case, send over here, I can put it to good use ;-)

Thanks for all the replies! I think I will indeed go for a 920 instead of a 950 and I plan to OC with a cooling system such as the Cooler Master V8. As for the case I have my eye on the HAC 932 and the Antec three hundred, any feedback on this case, is it good for cooling? And as for the power supply, is a 750 watt enough for some moderate overclocking?Thanks again for all the help, Alex

Thanks for all the replies! I think I will indeed go for a 920 instead of a 950 and I plan to OC with a cooling system such as the Cooler Master V8. As for the case I have my eye on the HAC 932 and the Antec three hundred, any feedback on this case, is it good for cooling? And as for the power supply, is a 750 watt enough for some moderate overclocking?Thanks again for all the help, Alex

I'm buying next week the Antec three hundred for a friend of mine (building him a machine), appears to be very solid cooling-wise.As for the PSU: I had some discussions recently about that, and some said to go for the best, PSU is like the heart of the machine. So I decided on the Corsair HX850W. But I think the Corsair HW750W would also be enough, the 20€ difference is not really a reason not to get the better one...(125€ vs 145€).Coolermaster V8 seems to be a good choice, just be careful how you mount it, air-stream-wise.