I'm going to buy XP3000 and radeon 9800pro. I just want to know which cpu is better FOR FS9 xp3000 or pentium 2.8?ThanksJacek

*bump*

Hello Jacek!The 2.8 with Hyper Threading technology is one of the fastest out there today, behind the 3.06. They both perform very well and quite close in performance, excepth that the 2.8 is 300 dollars cheaper.My 2 cents!Dennis D. Mullert

Thanks,Hm, so now I'm completely confused, should I get 2.8 w HT or XP 3000? hmmmmmmm..............and video card.... I will take 9800pro 128, but maybe I should get 256, maybe nvidia........ I have to decide today hmmmmmmmmmJacek

Jacek, if you intend on running anti-aliasing or anisotropic filtering in flight sim, DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT buy an Nvidia card! Nvidia has yet to get AA & AF right on their cards. AF looks fine but their AA still needs a lot of work and when both are enabled you will lose a whole lot of performance. As far as your CPU choices go, you could go either way on that one... They're both very good CPUs and very close in price. I found the P4 2.8C for $263 on Pricewatch whereas the AXP 3000+ goes for $242 (333MHz FSB) and $275 (400MHz FSB). I don't think you'll go wrong with any of those choices. You'll have more room to overclock on the P4 than with the AXP, if you're into that sort of thing (why not? extra performance for free, I'll take that any day, thank you very much!).No matter what CPU you decide on, be sure to get a high-end mobo with all the features you need from a reliable company as well as some good RAM to back it up.hope this helps,Max Cowgill

ok, Thanks so much guys!Jacek

Read some maximum PC reviews, the Athlon XP3000+ (BARTON) takes the cake.

>Jacek, if you intend on running anti-aliasing or anisotropic>filtering in flight sim, DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT buy an>Nvidia card! Nvidia has yet to get AA & AF right on their>cards. AF looks fine but their AA still needs a lot of work>and when both are enabled you will lose a whole lot of>performance.MAX!...Max! Are you off of your Rocker Max? OK, go stand in the corner! :)Since we are talking top of the line here:NV fx5900/ATI-9800If you have ever seen the two cards work side by side in game play you cant tell them apart from each other as far as AA goes, NV's 4xs AA is very good! Though you are correct not >as< good as ATI's but all together very good.In most any D3D benchmark at whatever res/AA/AF settings you want to choose the FX5900 is inches ahead of the ATI card so to say that- "and when both are enabled you will lose a whole lot ofperformance." -In comparison to the ATI card this is just not true in any way, as these cards are very close so to say that this card out does that card by some kind of great margin is way off.Additionally you might want to include the fact that the ATI card does not filter a few things that in FS might make a diff to some people, no Antialiasing of Alpha textures, tons of them in FS2k4, clouds/trees/objects/aircraft parts & panels etc. to some folks this is an eyesore and then to others they don't care.As well as the aniso of the scene is limited to just a few degrees of vertical and horizontal with the ATI cards, the NV cards AF the whole 360-degree area.Just something to think about. >As far as your CPU choices go, you could go either way on that>one... They're both very good CPUs and very close in price. >I found the P4 2.8C for $263 on Pricewatch whereas the AXP>3000+ goes for $242 (333MHz FSB) and $275 (400MHz FSB). I>don't think you'll go wrong with any of those choices. You'll>have more room to overclock on the P4 than with the AXP, if>you're into that sort of thing (why not? extra performance for>free, I'll take that any day, thank you very much!).>No matter what CPU you decide on, be sure to get a high-end>mobo with all the features you need from a reliable company as>well as some good RAM to back it up.Agree, but then again you can pick up an XP2500 Barton for less than $100 and it will do the same numbers as the XP3000 at the same voltage no sweat. Later Max

Thanks Paul,hm, I'm thinking that I will go for pentium and ati9800pro or nvidia 5900... I had many problems with athlon before, so.. I dont know.. anyway thanks for your help guys....Jacek

ok, I talked to my brother and we decided to....... order p4 3.2ghz with HT, and nvidia 5900 256.. It's expensive but I'm not going to buy digital camera now. FS should work good on this setup I think...?Jacek

"no Antialiasing of Alpha textures, tons of them in FS2k4, clouds/trees/objects/aircraft parts & panels etc. to some folks this is an eyesore and then to others they don't care."You will get this with Nvidia cards too!This is a technical limitation of Multisampling Anti Aliasing (MSAA). This method is used by ALL current NVIDIA cards (GF3, GF4, GF-FX). It's also used on Radeon 9500 through 9800. So, you will have this problem on both Nvidia and ATI hardware. The only way to avoid this is to use a card that does Supersampling FSAA, such as the Geforce2 or Radeon 8500, but who would want to do that?Right now, ATI has the edge in image quality. While Nvidia's FX5900U is slightly faster, it has to compromise some image quality by not implemenitng full Trilinear when using Anisotropic etc. to get there. Also, in DirectX9 shaders, the Geforce FX supports 16-bit precision in the shaders at the same speed as Radeon 9800 clock for clock, and 32-bit precision at HALF the speed of Radeon 9800, clock for clock. Radeon supports 16-bit and 24-bit precision, and it does 24-bit precision at the same performance level as the FX does 16-bit. This means that in future DX9 titles, the Radeon will perform better unless you go down to 16-bit precision with the FX.

>"no Antialiasing of Alpha textures, tons of them in FS2k4,>clouds/trees/objects/aircraft parts & panels etc. to some>folks this is an eyesore and then to others they don't care.">>You will get this with Nvidia cards too!>This is a technical limitation of Multisampling Anti Aliasing>(MSAA). This method is used by ALL current NVIDIA cards (GF3,>GF4, GF-FX). It's also used on Radeon 9500 through 9800. So,>you will have this problem on both Nvidia and ATI hardware.>The only way to avoid this is to use a card that does>Supersampling FSAA, such as the Geforce2 or Radeon 8500, but>who would want to do that?I believe you have got poor info from someone else who got poor...Not only do the GF3/4/FX cards AA alpha textures they do more than just the edges as others have misinformed (they AA inside as well).Here is a quick demo:Compressed images of stock tree textures in FS2k4 at 800x600 to exaggerate the effect:(Moderators please note that these images are linked to my site)No AA:http://www.frontiernet.net/~pleatzaw/images/alpha_noaa.jpg4xAA:http://www.frontiernet.net/~pleatzaw/images/alpha_4xaa.jpghere are some uncompressed close ups for you:No AA @ 200%:http://www.frontiernet.net/~pleatzaw/image...pha_noaa200.jpg4xAA @ 200%:http://www.frontiernet.net/~pleatzaw/image...pha_4xaa200.jpgThe point of this is not that you need smooth edges for your trees/parts/objects etc. (heh, psst I got "Smooth trees", not to worry the trees are not "smooth".) :)It is that if they are not AA filtered and you like to use the high quality image settings all the non AA filtered textures begin to shimmer and that is an eyesore, so If I am laying down cash for a new top of the line graphics card so that I can run at the max settings in the FS world I would not reccomend the ATI card.Same point as for the Aniso filtering.>Right now, ATI has the edge in image quality. While Nvidia's>FX5900U is slightly faster, it has to compromise some image>quality by not implemenitng full Trilinear when using>Anisotropic etc. to get there. I don

Wow, for a while there I almost thought you were that bloke who I argued with back in late 2002 and tried to explain to why the NV30 was not going to be three times faster than the 9700 Pro but luckily that wasn't you :-lolYou are indeed correct about the AA. The reason is that the Geforce FX line support 4xS and 8xS modes which are MSAA combined with supersampling. It's a special FSAA mode that Nvidia currently supports in Direct3D only. But this doesn't mean that the Radeon cards can not run FS2004 with high image quality settings. It's just a matter of tweaking the LOD-bias for the autogen textures. Also, the "xS" modes are quite a bit slower than true MSAA, so you're comparing apples to oranges here. If we brought in the Radeon 8500 as well into the comparison, you would notice it does even better AA on thee trees since it uses "true" supersampling.For Anisotropic filtering, I still prefer ATI. ATI does fewer angles, but it blends the stages correctly where as NVidia's method has come under fire recently for their "questionable" approach to image quality. ATI does not do "selective filtering". With Anisotropic configured properly, they do Trilinear between all stages, and take care of 90 as well as 45 degree angles."The Radeon does not support 32-bit precision (in the shader) so what are you trying to say?"With NV35 you have the option of:32-bit at half-speed16-bit at full-speedWith R350 you have:16-bit or 24-bit at full speedSince the image quality of 24-bit and 32-bit precision is very close, Radeon has a clear advantage in my eyes.Don't you see that the Radeon has an advantage here?"Look, while it is true that the ATI

>Wow, for a while there I almost thought you were that bloke>who I argued with back in late 2002 and tried to explain to>why the NV30 was not going to be three times faster than the>9700 Pro but luckily that wasn't you :-lolTry to fit your words into someone else mouth not mine.Your post read like you just ripped them from some site where they got free hardware, your story keeps changing.>You are indeed correct about the AA. Thanks. :)>The reason is that the>Geforce FX line support 4xS and 8xS modes which are MSAA>combined with supersampling. It's a special FSAA mode that>Nvidia currently supports in Direct3D only. I don