What is the best CPU for fs2004?

[acmech 2]

This sim has been around for years and still to this day, do not know this answer maybe.IS it single core,dual core or whatever the cpu does anybody know?Please, anybody with AMD or intel even if you don't know the correct answer please share your knowledge about your own experience with the sim. Please give information on your current CPU.Please do not answer with comments like "I get 200 frames per second when looking at just the sky in a default sim setup". I want to know what is the best cpu for a maxed out(with all quality addons being used) fs9 set up.Example= FSDT KDFW will 100% traffic.It is so hard to find good information on what works for this sim. I hope this topic will help myself and many others out there that are ready to buy ,build or who are just wondering what is the truth.Thanks in adavnce! :(

[rpjkw11 0]

I have an OLD system consisting of an AMD 3200, 1 GB RAM, and an nVidea 7600GS (I think). If I get any FPS above 12, I'm happy as my machine runs smoothly enough then. I have FPS capped at 31 and use nHancer. FS9 sliders are all maxed out. My video card just died. Since the best I can find is a 6200, I'll upgrade. I've decided on an Intel i5-750 (1156), 8 GB of Corsair RAM, and a Geforce GTX-460 video card. I don't know if FSX will run nicely (and I don't care), but FS9 will really shine over what I have now. As I understand it, the CPU is the most important consideration, followed, of course, by sufficient RAM. I'm most ineterested in keeping the cost under $500. Bob

[scoob 18]

What is the best CPU for fs2004?

the fastest one you can afford.even though FS cannot use multi-core a dual core chip is faster than a single core chip of the same GHz. a quad is faster than the dual. this is because of internal architecture that makes the latest 4-core i-series Intel chips 'faster' than an older chip of the same GHz.--

[acmech 2]

the fastest one you can afford.even though FS cannot use multi-core a dual core chip is faster than a single core chip of the same GHz. a quad is faster than the dual. this is because of internal architecture that makes the never latest 4-core i-series Intel chips 'faster' than an older chip of the same GHz.--

So you are saying the i7 980x then? If money was not the issue...

[vector 7]

Just remember that FS2004 does not take advantage of multiple cores in a processor and Windows 7 32 bit will only recognise a maximum of 3gb RAM. You will need the 64 bit version to take advantage of more than 3gb.Hope this helps.David

[JSkorna 137]

+1

[NewWorldOrder 4]

Hi acmech,FS9 does not have that huge impact on CPU performance. Important is the amount of RAM and, even if it has been around for some time now, a (relatively) powerful graphics card. Why is this? FS, as well as most other "modern" programs, are not that CPU hungry but they wantto have enough recources available when it comes to RAM and video. You can run FS without any problems on an old say AMD Athlon64 3000+. But the problem is this: When you arrive at a major airport and you have AI traffic at 100%, you gonna see a bunch of planes on your screen.That is the image you get on arrival.Responsible for displaying those is the graphics card. To control all the AI traffic you need RAM. Why not the CPU? Because the controlling engine gets loaded into the RAM once you start your FS. The more RAM you have, the more of it is available for the system to allocate to FS. The result is, that the system will be able to handle more complex operations which of course require more recources. As a previous poster mentioned, you are not able to pack your old system full with RAM. Therefore you need a 64bit OS.It doesn't matter which one you choose. But if you want this 64bit OS to operate smoothly, you need a 64bit CPU as well. This would force you to buy a new CPU,RAM,most probably new Mainboard. That's only the base stuff as I do not want to go into details too much.But attaching let's say 8GB of RAM into a system running with a 32bit OS would not make you happy. It would crash all the time as the OS would not be able to control such an amount of RAM.A new CPU would mean a dual- or multicore CPU. Although FS does not support multi-CPU operation, it could take advantage of it. Example: If you install a dualcore CPU, you would be able to "tell" the operating system which programs and applications should run on what core.So you would be able to tell the OS to run all programs on core 1 while you force FS to run on core 2. That would mean that core 2 would have nothing to do but processing FS, which would have a noticeable effect on game performance.Th same is with the graphics card: FS does not support all those features modern graphics cards have. But a nVidia GTX260 has much more power than say a GeForce 6600. This leads to the fact, that the GTX260 simply has more reserves to display all the stuff in your FS. and that would lead to the fact that the sim is running more smoothly. I know, you do not wanna read specs and how great they are. But I want to give you an example of what I mean. First of all, I also have every imaginable Addon available and I am running on 100% AI traffic as well, as I want my sim as realistic as possible. An older system I used was: AMD X2 6000+ , 2GB of RAM, GeForce 8800GT running on Windows XP 32bit. The average framerates were at approx 40 to 50, droppping to 10 to 20 when on a major airport. That is not quite satisfying.That is the system I currently use: AMD Phenom X4 955 , 8GB RAM, nVidia GTX460, running on Windows Vista 64bit ( Windows7 for all non-FS programs ). Now the framerates do not drop below 75. Never. And this is although FS does neither support multicore CPUs nor all the features of the newer graphics card. It's just because the system has more reserves which it can allocate to FS. I hope this post gives you an idea of what I am trying to say.Hope this helps a bit.Greetings from EDDS Mike

[Glynn 405]

But attaching let's say 8GB of RAM into a system running with a 32bit OS would not make you happy. It would crash all the time as the OS would not be able to control such an amount of RAM.

HelloWhy would it do this?, XP32 will just ignore any Ram above 4GB minus any ram taken by devices but will not crash.

[NewWorldOrder 4]

Why would it do this?, XP32 will just ignore any Ram above 4GB minus any ram taken by devices but will not crash.

Hi,wrong. It has to do with how Windows XP ( for example ) is controlling the available amount of memory. When you switch on your system, you would see the 4GB of RAM as it should be. After the boot sequence is finished and Windows is running,Windows takes over control of the RAM. If you would open your general system information screen, you would only see 3.25GB attached. This is because Windows is then blocking some of the RAM for own internal drivers and modules as you mentioned. The BIOS however is still operating the correct amount of RAM. This leads to Read/Write errors because the memory controller has to handle two different informations, which leads to data being written into sections of the RAM, whichis blocked by Windows.There is a way to make Windows recognise the whole amount of RAM using a no-cache script which has to be implemented before Windows has booted. But from what I have seen with my own eyes ( I used to work in a computer store some yearsago before I changed to airfreight ), that solution is not the answer either. That was about the time when the first 64bit operating systems became available and customers wanted to have more than 4GB of RAM, but without upgrading to a 64bit OS.In both ways, the systems we tested with were running extremely unstable and we faced many system freezes and crashes. Searching through forums at that time confirmed that with Windows XP 32bit you won't be able to use more than 3GB ofRAM effectively and without stabilty issues.I hope I found the right words in English to explain what I had in mind.cheersMike

[Guest belga1]

Hello,Not this one (not yet :( )http://www.pcworld.com/article/218247/intel_finds_design_flaw_in_sandy_bridge_chipset.htmlRegards.Gus.

[scoob 18]

FS9 does not have that huge impact on CPU performance. Important is the amount of RAM and, even if it has been around for some time now, a (relatively) powerful graphics card. Why is this? FS, as well as most other "modern" programs, are not that CPU hungry

mike:this is simply incorrect and your information i didn't include is also incorrect.FS is not a modern game ... even FSX. the legacy code still relies on CPU for game performance. 'modern' games do off-load the graphic rendering to the GPU. FS just isn't designed to use the power of a GPU to render the GUI to any great extent.a GPU with more memory will help in graphic loading ... to a point.a GPU that is 'fast' will help and result in a small positive impact on framerates because the GPU is waiting for the CPU.FS is CPU bound.get the fastest CPU you can afford, period.--

[FLEX1978 373]

mike:this is simply incorrect and your information i didn't include is also incorrect.FS is not a modern game ... even FSX. the legacy code still relies on CPU for game performance. 'modern' games do off-load the graphic rendering to the GPU. FS just isn't designed to use the power of a GPU to render the GUI to any great extent.a GPU with more memory will help in graphic loading ... to a point.a GPU that is 'fast' will help and result in a small positive impact on framerates because the GPU is waiting for the CPU.FS is CPU bound.get the fastest CPU you can afford, period.--

Exactly, the most important factor in FS is raw CPU power, anyone who has been around FS long enough knows that.

[thea330flyer 1]

If you want to run flight simulator with the best settings and get the best results, get a quad core. not a dual core, not even Intel core 2 duo can give you 40+fps. also try some overclocking. if you really want value and performance, get the AMD six core cpu. it costs a small fraction of what an intel i5 quad core or i7 would cost.

[Guest belga1]

Hello,If you can find a 10Ghz CPU (one core suffice) .. buy it on the spot Results will be amazing Regards.Gus.

[acmech 2]

:( Thanks for all the replies Guys!Well, I have the i7 980x overclocked @3.9 Ghz with 6 gbs ddr3 ram on a windows 7 64 bit system os on a SSD hard drive. When I posted this topic my thoughts were thinking maybe I had the wrong cpu for fs9 from my bad experience with current system. Just yesterday, I found out two reasons why I had such low frame rates.What I did was install fs2004 from the cd then preformed the first start up then restarted my system then ran the update 9.1 from my desktop.In the past, I use to install fs2004 then before restarting the system running the update.In the past the update said it did install. I don't know if this was a real reason but, now my system runs so much more smooth.Also, I plan on backing up everything, so if I ever install something that slows the sim down I can pin point the issue.Now my sim is very smooth and such a joy to use. It is like having a new sim.Also,as others mendtioned fs2004 does not take advantage of new GPU's features.Which by accident I found out by testing 3d settings.Currently ,I own the ATI 6870 1gb card.Before, I use to set all the settings to max in the control panel .Although, this is another reason my system slowed down.Working a card harder when something is not even taking advantage of the power.After testing with lower settings I get better frame rates with the same image quality as setting everything to max.Now I have Anti-Aliasing set to 8x with filter set to standard, before 24x samples with filter set to edge-detectAnisotropic Filtering set to 16xCatalyst A.I set to Quality before is was set to high Quality with enable surface format optimization cheked.Wait for vertical refresh set to 3/4 Quality before 100%Anti-Aliasing mode set 100%Open GL settingschecked to enableI was using windows xp 32 bit before now I notice even when opening textures or scenery folders things appear faster.There are so many factors that make a sim run well but one thing is for sure when you get that baby working right its like a whole new experience .So when ever you do get your system going right back up everything so when problems start to occur you will not be scratching your head. :(