A couple of days ago, it got warm out. I had just ordered new memory, but I noticed my system had hung all by itself with the old memory. I upgraded (512 meg to 2 gig) and started. It ran for a while, but then came down. Since then, it's been unreliable, and most of the time it won't even boot. However, it will boot and come up in the morning, when it's cool (68F) but not in the afternoon at 75F.Another thing - I noticed the CPU fan was not running. I think I must have pinched a wire. I repaired that and the fan is running again, but could I have done permanent damage?This is an old 1.8 GHz Pentium 4. Is this something I could reasonably attribute to overheating?Thinking ahead - I can pick up a 2.6 GHz P4 for under $20. I really don't feel like getting a whole new machine, but am I just trying to keep this thing on life support?

Pull the plug my friend, that computer just isn't dated, it's super dated. Just save some money every week, buy (or build) yourself a decent machine, and enjoy, it will be worth it.As far as overheating, I have some personal experience with that. When a processor starts to run really hot, it begins to slow itself down as self-preservation. I've noticed this on my friends computer when his heatsink wasn't seated right. he was getting choppy graphics performance (in another game) and slow loading times. The freeware utility showed his temps in the red at 86 celsius. I went to the store picked him up a new stock heatsink (with fan) and put it on, his temps when down to the 40s and stayed there, and it instantly elminated the chop and slow loading times we were experiencing.

I guess I hate the idea of having to move to Windows 7, and possibly lose my gameport as well. (I've got an old gameport yoke and pedals.) Maybe I'll try one of those USB-gameport converters.I was looking briefly last night, and it looked like I might pick up a decent (not super, but much better than what I've got) system for around $600. I looked at an HP. Is that a reasonable number, outrageiously overpriced or am I fooling myself to think I'd be happy with anything that cheap? FS9 is the most demanding thing I do with the computer.

Depends on the specs. For FS9 I think in most cases a $600 HP should be able to handle it. My last computer was my FS9 computer (homebuilt), and could run any recent game just fine, like Starcraft 2 and Rift for example.My last computer was:Conroe E6600 (core2duo) at 2.4 each core, easily overclockable.3 Gigs of RAM250 WD caviar blueNvidia 8800GTStock coolingWindows Xp SP3Like I said, it ran FS9 great, PMDG 747, Manhattan, Ultimate Traffic, AS6.5, all that stuff, nice and smooth.So anything better than what I just listed will get knock your socks off with FS9 considering what you have now.Check out some of these from ibuypower (much better than HP as these are designed for gaming)http://www.ibuypower.com/IbpPages/PricePage.aspxThe first one listed would be great for FS9 easily, but make sure you upgrade the video card, which you should be able to do via clicking on it and selecting your options.

Check out some of these from ibuypower (much better than HP as these are designed for gaming)http://www.ibuypower.../PricePage.aspxThe first one listed would be great for FS9 easily, but make sure you upgrade the video card, which you should be able to do via clicking on it and selecting your options.

Seems reasonable. How much of a video card upgrade is wothwhile? The first step up is a Radeon 6450. Is that enough, or does FS9 really benefit from more? I'm not super-fussy, and I don't care about arcade shoot-em-up games.

You will probably have much less hassle with an nVidia card. I would recommend a GTX560 or better.

You will probably have much less hassle with an nVidia card. I would recommend a GTX560 or better.

From other threads, I get the impression that FS is mostly driven by the speed of the system's CPU. What does the 560 get me that I wouldn't get with a lower-end model like the 520?

Sorry, here is the correct linkhttp://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Intel_H67_Core_i5_i7_Configuratorclick "customize"When you get to the video card sectionYou can upgrade to the GTX550TI for $159. I'm no expert, but I believe that would be as much card as FS9 would use. Like I was saying my good old 8800GT ran FS9 like a dream, and even kept up with today's games. (Fallout, SC2, Rift, etc.)I don't own an IbuyPower computer, but they are geared towards gamers, everything is all set up for you, they all have liquid cooling systems. you really can't do better if you're someone who wants to buy a fully built computer thats already set up and ready to go "out of the box."

Oh yeah, and that case looks pretty sweet, and also if you really wanted to go nice, I noticed that you can upgrade your processor to an i5-2500k for another 40 bucks, might be worth it, and at that point you could run FSX nicely (and maybe MS Flight, who knows) if you wanted to.PS you don't have to put Windows 7 on it, infact this computer doesn't come with it, if you bought XP, I believe you can use it when you upgrade.

From other threads, I get the impression that FS is mostly driven by the speed of the system's CPU. What does the 560 get me that I wouldn't get with a lower-end model like the 520?

FSX is CPU driven to a point. Give it enough CPU power and the GPU eventually becomes very important. My system for example, would see an approximate frame rate increase of 25% if I would just upgrade the GPU. However, I'm stubbornly waiting for nVidia to release their Kepler GPUs at the end of this year.Decide on your computer first, and then come back and discuss GPUs. The 520 is an entry level GPU (much worse even than my GTS250) - not what you want for flight sim. Too weak of a GPU result in bad performance and autogen spikes. I forget that you're only planning to run FS9 in which case the GTX550 will probably be just fine.

PS you don't have to put Windows 7 on it, infact this computer doesn't come with it, if you bought XP, I believe you can use it when you upgrade.

Thanks for pointing that out. My XP systems both came with OEM disks, so they're explicit to those machines and probably can't be transferred. As much as I hate to, it's probably better to go Windows 7. MS will likely completely drop support for XP before I wear this machine out, and 3rd-party vendors will stop supporting it, too.

I forget that you're only planning to run FS9 in which case the GTX550 will probably be just fine.

Thanks. If I were to go with the GTX550 for "only FS9," what would I be shutting myself out of? FSX, or rather the more intense combat-type games?

And make sure you pick a proper PSU like the Corsair TX650. The default 450W is most likely utter crap.For the CPU I'd pick an I5 2500. For just $25 more that's a fastest quad that will have you futureproofed for years. No need for the 2500K since it can't be OCed in that mobo anywayFor a GPU, get a GTX460. Better than the 550 and just $8 more. That will run modern titles just fine, and FSX extraordinarily well

And make sure you pick a proper PSU like the Corsair TX650. The default 450W is most likely utter crap.For the CPU I'd pick an I5 2500. For just $25 more that's a fastest quad that will have you futureproofed for years. No need for the 2500K since it can't be OCed in that mobo anywayFor a GPU, get a GTX460. Better than the 550 and just $8 more. That will run modern titles just fine, and FSX extraordinarily well

Yeah on the PSU, infact the PSU that comes with it is too small if you were to get the 460 or 550, you'd probably have to get a 550W or 600W at the very least, but the website will tell you how much wattage you need. Unfortunately, you're pushing your budget a little when you upgrade the PSU and buy Windows 7, but the $25 upgrade to the i5-2500 is a no-brainer.

Straw man time. Using the IBUYPOWER machine as an example, I came up with $939 for this:i5-2500 3.3 Ghz processor4 GB memoryNVIDIA GTX 460 graphics cardCorsair 650 Power SupplyWindows 7Everything else standardNow, what can I cut back on without losing much, and what can I add for a small cost that will give me significant improvement?I did a quick price check with HP and Dell for comparison, and they are already higher with stock machines with entry-level graphics, so the vendor is at least reasonable in price.