Hey gang. As planned, I have picked up a basic desktop for FS9. Based on my old computer's specs, this one should fit the bill. Here are my old vs new specs:Old:3Ghz P4 HT (Dell)2MB RAM256MB Radeon 9800XT cardWindows XPNew:2Ghz Athlon II 170u (Compaq)2MB RAM, soon to be upgraded to 4MB1Ghz Radeon 4350 HD cardUpgraded to a 400 watt PSWindows 7Here is my question. I noticed that the processor is running anywhere between 89-100% while FS9 is running (I realize that FS uses a lot of processor). RAM use is around 50%. I have tweaked a lot of settings with little reduction in CPU usage. The biggest change I saw was shutting off my Aero/themed desktop. However, it still likes to spike. I have set my FPS to 26 and with no addons, it'll hold at that in any scenery. It seems very stable and consistent. Dropping FPS limit does not seem to do anything. I am very pleased with the performance of FS9 on this system but, am worried about the processor running at 100%. Should I be? Any tricks? What happens when I wanna use SB4, FSNAV or Activesky?

Correction...I guess that 170u is a single core. Maybe that explains it!

yes, it's a single core CPU but I wouldn't worry too much. No addon like FSNAV, Activesky... will need much resources to run I'm pretty sure you'll be ok

Thanks for your reply Dario. I'd like to "bump" this thread. Anyone have experience with a dual core such as the Athlon II X2 2xx series? Since it's a dual core, it should show 1/2 the amount of processor use, right? I have the chance to trade this thing in.

Thanks for your reply Dario. I'd like to "bump" this thread. Anyone have experience with a dual core such as the Athlon II X2 2xx series? Since it's a dual core, it should show 1/2 the amount of processor use, right? I have the chance to trade this thing in.

Nah, FS9 on a dual core CPU will use one CPU to its fullest and 2nd not at all. Though in task manager it will show at 50%. Does it make sense? Not really if it's cost-intensive. You can though run those extra apps off the 2nd CPU, or even set FS9 to run on the 2nd, and everything else on the 1st. That is how I had it on my Intel Core2Duo.

Thanks Word Not Allowed. So, you're saying 1 core would still be raging near 100% on a dual? Same thing with a Quad? Would a higher Ghz processor show a lesser load?Based on your observations, there would be no big advantage to go from my 2Ghz, Ath II 170u to let's say a 2Ghz Dual Core? Should I shoot for a quad? Any clue how this new, 2Ghz 170u would compare to my old 3Ghz P4 HT?I wish I understood CPUs a bit more. They make too many!

Thanks Word Not Allowed. So, you're saying 1 core would still be raging near 100% on a dual? Same thing with a Quad? Would a higher Ghz processor show a lesser load?Based on your observations, there would be no big advantage to go from my 2Ghz, Ath II 170u to let's say a 2Ghz Dual Core? Should I shoot for a quad? Any clue how this new, 2Ghz 170u would compare to my old 3Ghz P4 HT?I wish I understood CPUs a bit more. They make too many!

It is the same thing with the quad. Well, look at it like this. If you have a CPU fast enough to chew through what you are hitting it with, then it would show 100% or less. It would depend, for example, on limiting your FPS. Lets say you are getting 40fps at unlimited, then limiting to 30fps would yield some 75% usage. In theory. Practically, CPU is doing much more than just drawing frames (actually GPU is doing that, but CPU is giving it instructions). FS9 is heavily CPU dependant, so higher the clock and at least dual core CPU are a must for FS9. My experience is, that Intel C2Ds are great for FS9. I saw no real improvement going to i7 in FS9. It was a bit faster due to CPU architecture, but measurable in something like 10%.I don't know the 170u CPUs, but you should shoot for a C2D system if you can "still" get your hands on one. Or get used one, probably much cheaper. And then overclock bejesus out of it. Go for something like 3.5-4.0Ghz. That will give you a really nice FS9 performance. I know - I had it.Some GPU like 9800GT or GTX275 is also totally enough. You will have a screamer machine for FS9, it chewing through almost anything you throw at it. Beware, also my monster-rig can get a slow-down in FS9 if I load everything with heavy clouds and high GPU IQ (AA/AF).

Great info Word Not Allowed! Thanks for your time!