Will This Computer Run FS9?

[VOI014 0]

Hello, I'm new to the forums. I just want to know before I buy this computer if it is going to be able to run fs9 at high settings: MEMORY: 8GB DDR3 SDRAM at 1333MHz - 4 DIMMs HARD DRIVE: 1TB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB CacheOPTICAL DRIVE: Single Drive: 16X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability VIDEO CARD: AMD Radeon™ HD 6670 1GB DDR5 SOUND CARD: THX® TruStudio PC™PROCESSOR: Intel® Core™ i7-2600 processor(8MB Cache, 3.4GHz)OS: Windows 7Total Cost: 880$ I Want to be able to run this computer for fs9 only and some scenery programs.

[VirginAus737 0]

with a small GPU upgrade that thing would run FSX quite well. Its overkill for FS9.

[Deltalpha 3]

You can murder FS9 with that machine. Try FSX!

[NGX 1]

Yep. Max settings.

[VOI014 0]

thanks everyone! ya'll awesome!

[Humpty 751]

Overkill overkill.

[clum 2]

Going against the crowd, I don't think it will necessarily run FS9 all that well once you add in a serious amount of addons, if that's what you plan on doing. FS9 will only use one of the 2600 cores to run, and at 3,4GHz it may still struggle a little. The GPU is fairly low end as well so you'll likely have problems in dense clouds. FS9 is still a huge resource hog, even with good hardware, if you really want to juice it up and get it looking extreme. My recommendation would be to look for a system with the 2600K or 2500K processor, as this will allow you to overclock to the speeds which will tear FS9 a new one, as well as giving you the option on having a system that will also make a great job of running FSX should you choose to do so in the future.

[Guest simmer9304]

I ran FS9 maxed out on a 2.5ghz S478 P4 with 1GB DDR RAM and a GeForce 6800. The 2600 using one core can Turbo Boost up to 3.8ghz, all in all I wouldn't be too worried about how FS9 performs. I can see maybe with all sliders maxed, poor weather, approaching Heathrow, addon scenery, addon traffic, complex aircraft frames would begin to dip but in every day flying probably not

[NGX 1]

I ran FS9 maxed out on a 2.5ghz S478 P4 with 1GB DDR RAM and a GeForce 6800. The 2600 using one core can Turbo Boost up to 3.8ghz, all in all I wouldn't be too worried about how FS9 performs. I can see maybe with all sliders maxed, poor weather, approaching Heathrow, addon scenery, addon traffic, complex aircraft frames would begin to dip but in every day flying probably not

+1. I used to have a 3GHz Pentium 4, 1GB ram 7200GS graphics and I ran it maxed out

[clum 2]

It's not a case of being "maxed out", as obviously moderate hardware will run it well, if all you're doing is pushing the sliders right. The problem comes when you start tweaking the sim to really push it's limits. I'm talking about cfg edits to go above and beyond the default autogen, draw distance, cloud layer limits, texture size, top end payware aircraft/scenery, max AI/online, running multiple background programs ect. In those situations a 2600 on a single core, even at 3.8 coupled with that gpu, WON'T run FS9 at or above 30fps. An E8600@4.6GHz and a GTX 280 would still see the mid teens in some extreme situations, and that was about the best possible build for FS9. I don't know whether or not that's the sort of extent the OP wants to take his FS9 installation to or not. If he just wants to max the sliders and run a couple of addons, flying into medium sized airports, then sure, he'll be fine. Either way, the advice on the 2600-2600K still stands. There's only a marginal price difference, and the extra scope the unlocked multi will afford him is well worth it for the future of his simming on the rig.

[VOI014 0]

@clumI just want to run flight simulator with at least 50fps. The only addons I will put is AES, Wilco FeeepThere, Mega Scenery, and some airport sceneries. I might sound stupid, but can you pleas explain more about the 2500K? I really don't know what it is. I'm not sure what to do because 5 people said it will overkill FS9.

[VOI014 0]

Also @clum is this what you mean? http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-2000/hd-2600/Pages/ati-radeon-hd-2600-overview.aspx

[Kosta 122]

My current machine was still dropping below 60fps in some situations, and I could bring FPS below 40 if I really tried - lots of AI, highest settings, VC of some aircraft like iFly 737, busy airport, high-res textures, lots of clouds... In general, its a good machine to run FS9, but depending how many addons you throw on it, it's gonna run great or it's gonna choke. I stopped using FS9 since NGX came out, out of simple low quality compared to FSX. Couldn't see it any more. Can't stand FSX's bad engine either, so I'm kind of between worlds. But I like good looking sim, so I'm managing FSX the best I can.

[Humpty 751]

It will run Fs9 well but don't expect it to use all cores. it will only work on single core . that machine is an overkill for fs9 in fact your machine is ready for fsx , if you have it then use it.

[clum 2]

@clumI just want to run flight simulator with at least 50fps. The only addons I will put is AES, Wilco FeeepThere, Mega Scenery, and some airport sceneries. I might sound stupid, but can you pleas explain more about the 2500K? I really don't know what it is. I'm not sure what to do because 5 people said it will overkill FS9.

5 people are making a lot of assumptions. The 2500/2600s are processors, which are the primary component that gives you the "fps" in flightsim. The versions with the K (2500K/2600K) have unlocked multipliers, which allow you to overclock to potentially 5Ghz or even beyond in some cases.These are the ones to go for as with a very simple overclock, you can significantly improve your FS performance, essentially for free. The K versions usually run only a trivial amount more expensive than the non K versions. There's nothing wrong with the machine you've chosen there, but let's say you're in the wilco 737 on approach to FSDT JFK in a severe thunderstorm with many cloud layers; in this scenario, you're not going to get 50fps, simple as that. Go with the K version and overclock it to 4.5GHz+, and you will be much closer to that performance figure.

Also @clum is this what you mean? http://www.amd.com/u...0-overview.aspx

No that's a graphics card....nothing to do with what we're taking about here. This is the 2500K -http://ark.intel.com/products/52210 In short the two processors you should be looking to choose between are the i5 2500K, or the i7 2600K. The former is the better choice for most people solely running flight simulator, as it runs considerably cheaper, and affords effectively the same performance as the latter in FS. The only other thing I'll advise is that the graphics card which is part of that build is severely mismatched to a processor like the 25/2600 series. It will be a considerable bottleneck, even in something like FS9. If you're buying new then I'd recommend a NVIDIA GTX 460 as a minimum for your system, while ideally you can choose one of the GTX 560ti/570/580 as appropriate for your budget.