Hi there,I've just started thinking about building a new PC, not having really kept up with the hardware situation.As far as I understand it the idea behind multiple cores is that the processor is able to handle multiple processes similtaneously thus increasing processor performance. My question is whether flight sim would benefit from this, would it use all four cores of a quad core processor? Would it be better to get a dual core processor with a higher clock rate or a quad core?I am thinking of the AMD Phenom II X4 955 3.2Ghz My thinking being that even if FSX would not benefit from the extra 2 cores, at least I have something in my pocket for when the next generation software becomes available.Actually I noticed that most posters here have gone with Intel - not wishing to start another endless AMD vs Intel thread, I just wanted to check if there was something I am missing? I'm actually just looking at the price because I'm on a budget and the 955 is

You said that you are looking at that processor because

at least I have something in my pocket for when the next generation software becomes available.

the only processors that are future proof are the socket 1366 intel i7's. Also, I know you don't want to start AMD vs intel, but FSK will benefit slot more from an i7 than a quad core AMD.

flight sim will benfit more from an i7 than an amd for flightsim. 99 percent of other games it doesnt matter. flight sim will run better with a better cpu where the graphics card doesnt matter as much in other games. if your wanting to run fsx on high settings with good frames and lots of add ons., prob best for an i7. if you rly cant afford. the pmd 955 is still good. get the c3 version.

flight sim will benfit more from an i7 than an amd for flightsim. 99 percent of other games it doesnt matter. flight sim will run better with a better cpu where the graphics card doesnt matter as much in other games. if your wanting to run fsx on high settings with good frames and lots of add ons., prob best for an i7. if you rly cant afford. the pmd 955 is still good. get the c3 version.

Thanks for the replies. Thinking about it I really can't afford to go higher than that as I am really on a budget. The best I can come up with is:AMD Phenom II X4 955 3.2GhzGigabyte 890-GPH-UD3H mobo (AMD 890GX chipset)4Gb of Corsair XMS3 DDR3 PC3-10666 (1300Hhz)1Gb PowerColor Radeon HD5770 4800Mhz GDDR5, GPU 850MhzAnd thats pushing the purse strings!Do you think thats a fairly balanced set up though? Any bottlenecks?Thanks again;Richard

Hi Richard,I wouldnt advise the Radeon, Nvidia seems to be flavour of the moment. If money is tight the Geforce 8800 Ultra is excellent, although not as good as the later but more expensive Nvidia 285 GTX's or dare I say it the 480's.Not sure about AMD, I switched back to intel in 2007 and now I think intel are better than AMD, only my view point though.Can be expensive if you get it wrong, as I found out soem years ago!If you go the Radeon route I would make sure you can try FS9/FSX on it first.Best Regards,Chris EGBB

ok. im not sure which card runs better on flight sim but in the graphics dept AMD (ati) are ahead of nvidia. there cards are cheaper, they run cooler, the 5970 a dual gpu is a faster, same priced as the single gpu 480 and uses much less power.but that being said, i have heard FS runs better with a nvidia card than an amd card. i use an nvidia right now. a 8800 gtx. and if your only using your comp for FS, you dont need a dx11 card.in england the 8800 ultra is hard to come by and costs a bomb still. if money is tight a gtx260 can be found n ew and cheap and they are still good.also next year AMD will release bulldozer, its gonna be their next big cpu and hopefully should be quite a step forward but thats next year. what might be a good suggestion is to get fs9 and fsx. most products sold are usualy sold with both fs9/fsx versions. alot from aerosoft, pmdg i tihnk too. think about it :)