But compared to my old, there well be a pretty good improvement, given i7 processor and 2GB of graphics memory?

A stock I7 2600 / I5 2500 performs more or less like a 4GHz Nehalem (I5 7xx, I7 8xx, I7 9xx). Not bad at all for sure, but missing out on the 40% overclock is a shame.the 2GB of VRAM is a non factor. At large resolutions and high AA where lots of VRAM is used, the card is going to lack raw power anyway. That card and any other one.

I've ordered the new Sandy Bridge iMac as well, but with the Quadcore i5 3,1 Ghz CPU. I plan to use it for FSX as well, and I guess it will be sufficient if you don't need to crank all sliders up... Apart from Flight Simulator, I don't have any other use for Windows, and I'm not buying a second PC just for FSX. And yes, BootCamp is native, no virtual machine required any more as Macs run on Intel processors now for a few years already.

But compared to my old, there well be a pretty good improvement, given i7 processor and 2GB of graphics memory?

Simple answer, No.

While away from my desktop rig I regularly use my Early 2011 i7 Mac Book Pro to develop the liveries for our NGX. The NGX runs just fine using 64bit Windows 7 via Boot Camp. The latest iMac is supposed to run 10% faster than my Mac Book Pro so I'd say, if you're going to buy the iMac anyway, running FSX should not be a problem. BTW, I'm also running UT2 and getting nice frame rates with I think about 80%+ traffic, and no, I'm not at liberty to discuss what that frame rate is that I'm getting ;-)Pete Mac PaintPMDG Graphic Designer

There's an interesting article in this month's PCUser (Australian mag) about the PC v Mac divide.

"Only avid Apple fans would seriously recommend shelling out for a Mac, then either buying virtualisation software (and a copy of Windows) or mucking around with Apple's Boot Camp to dual boot with Windows when you can buy a cheaper PC with Windows bundled, which will run Windows apps - and especially games - without any fuss

On the other hand, just about every Windows user I know who has switched to Mac has never regretted it. The choice is yours. But please do us a favour: if you do make the switch to Mac, don't try to convince the rest of us that Macs are better value than PCs.

"

There is also an issue with driver support will make your Windows install on the iMac run slower that it should. Some drivers are only obtainable through Apple. For running windows 7 on, let's say the Macbook Air your SSD rating and speed will be limited by Apple's drivers and the video and chipset drivers cannot use the part supplier's Windows 7 drivers. They will need to come from Apple, and those drivers are again not as good as the native ones for some reason. The iMac looks like premium hardware, but it might not be a premium FSX machine.I'd say avoid the hassle and headaches you will get and just spend the same money into a custom PC for FSX.

There is also an issue with driver support will make your Windows install on the iMac run slower that it should. Some drivers are only obtainable through Apple. For running windows 7 on, let's say the Macbook Air your SSD rating and speed will be limited by Apple's drivers and the video and chipset drivers cannot use the part supplier's Windows 7 drivers. They will need to come from Apple, and those drivers are again not as good as the native ones for some reason. The iMac looks like premium hardware, but it might not be a premium FSX machine.I'd say avoid the hassle and headaches you will get and just spend the same money into a custom PC for FSX.

The drivers for the mobo chipset and resources aren't Apple's, they're Intel's - you can update the video, chipset, sound etc drivers just fine as long as you know what you actually have in the machine - I do it all the time with my Macbook's bootcamp partition.

Finally, obviously a notebook isn't going to run FSX well. It's all mobile technology which is severely anemic for such demanding programs. For instance the 6970"M" for "mobile". And the processor which will throttle considerably when it heats up. If FSX is important to you, take Markus's advice.

Pretty sure the iMac is essentially exactly the same hardware as the Macbook Pro. I don't think they have the desktop version of the i5/i7 - those are only in the Mac Pro. GPU is the same deal.A current iMac or MBP absolutely can run FSX decently - the question is really about whether that's the best use of how much those machines cost. (and I say it isn't)

I'm currently looking at review of a PC built by a small company here in Oz: It's $AUD1,499For that you get an i5-2500K overclocked to 4.5GHz with an aftermarket cooler - the processor and mobo are included in the warranty, even with the ocGTX570MSI P67A-C43 B3 with 6Gbps SATA2 x 2TB Seagate HDD4GB 1333 RAM750W PSU23 inch widescreen monitorDigital TV tunerWireless networkingWin 7 HP 64-bitetc, etcI know that they're things of beauty and work right out of the box, but I just can't see the value in a Mac for someone like me who just wants a box that does MS Office, FSX and BFBC2jeff hunter

Pretty sure the iMac is essentially exactly the same hardware as the Macbook Pro. I don't think they have the desktop version of the i5/i7 - those are only in the Mac Pro. GPU is the same deal.

I don't think they're using the mobile CPUs for the iMac, given the power consumption under load. But as you said, they do use mobile graphic cards, although the one in the largest model (6970M) should be sufficient for FSX. Heck, this GPU can run Crysis 2 very well, which is a completely different beast (graphics-wise).One problem is the very high resolution of the 27" display, probably you can't run FSX in native resolution with this GPU.

A current iMac or MBP absolutely can run FSX decently - the question is really about whether that's the best use of how much those machines cost. (and I say it isn't)

Oh no, certainly not. If you're buying a machine mostly for flight simulaton, don't get a Mac. For me it's the other way round, I need a Mac for iOS development and other things, and I need windows ONLY for FSX.Maybe I'll get a separate gaming rig later, but for now I don't want to invest that kind of money for FSX alone.I'll let you know how the iMac works in the coming weeks, I'll get it on Monday.

I'll let you know how the iMac works in the coming weeks, I'll get it on Monday.

Nice! Thanks. How big is the difference between SSD and traditional hard drive? Big performance difference in FSX, anyone know?/Carl

Pretty sure the iMac is essentially exactly the same hardware as the Macbook Pro. I don't think they have the desktop version of the i5/i7 - those are only in the Mac Pro. GPU is the same deal.

This is my point. Desktop hardware is obviously always much faster!

A current iMac or MBP absolutely can run FSX decently - the question is really about whether that's the best use of how much those machines cost. (and I say it isn't)

Define "decently" (don't, just an expression :( ). It wouldn't run to my standards :( I'm not a Mac hater, I just like getting what I pay for. The lack of upgrade options, performance per buck, and general snootiness of even the Mac OS keeps me at bay. Not to mention the lack of software support anyway. If I were given a Mac Book Pro, I would so use it, though. Those things are classy looking.

I wonder if FSX could theoretically run on Linux?

As others have said, if you're going to buy a computer for gaming, don't even consider a mac. It's not that they fall short in terms of hardware, it's that you can expect to pay at least $500 more for identical hardware. And that's before you buy a copy of Windows 7 to install. Buying a mac for gaming is the rough equivalent of buying an alienware PC. It might get the job done, but your wallet will be needlessly lighter.

As others have said, if you're going to buy a computer for gaming, don't even consider a mac. It's not that they fall short in terms of hardware, it's that you can expect to pay at least $500 more for identical hardware. And that's before you buy a copy of Windows 7 to install. Buying a mac for gaming is the rough equivalent of buying an alienware PC. It might get the job done, but your wallet will be needlessly lighter.

Remember these iMacs use mobile parts. So they do fall short in terms of hardware compared to most other "real" desktops. Besides, there's no overclocking :(