Well, that the programm freezes (your talking of FSX or?) isn´t really related to the CPU.

FSX is one of the most CPU intensive games ever made, it's ridiculous how much rendering it does in the CPU before using the GPU for final shading and display

FSX is one of the most CPU intensive games ever made, it's ridiculous how much rendering it does in the CPU before using the GPU for final shading and display

Does this mean that the grafic card isn´t that important than in other games?

I think it's the constant streaming of data that makes it CPU intensive... I'm sure you've noticed at 30,000 feet with nothing to stream into the GPU, you get 60FPS easy on just about any machine.

Does this mean that the grafic card isn´t that important than in other games?

This information can be found all over the internet! Start reading! :Big Grin: As for the statements about "saving money" by going AMD and using that saved money on add ons... I can't enjoy my add ons with sub-par performance. The fact is Intel's high ends are more suited for the FSX environment. When AMD releases the next big leap in CPUs, I may buy it. Until then, it's Intel. I'm 95% FSX/FS9 and 5% internet browsing/facebook/homework so the extra cash I spend brings me the best FSX experience.There's no argument. It's fact! AMD is a great company, but I wish they would step their 'game' up!

I don't think there's anything wrong with being #2... especially when the rest of the pack are so far behind. The high end market is so small and highly competitive it doesn't make much sense to take on the risk especially when Intel will outspend you everytime. Instead might as well be in it for the long haul, neither AMD/ATI are going away anytime soon.