Ouch, that hurts, i can barely even get it to load..

[IAmThWlfMan 0]

Just got it in the mail today.. Spent more than an hour and a half loading it.. Did the updates so we are all good.. Launch the sim and within a matter of minutes thats all she wrote..Of course, i AM running WinXP, 2gb Ram, 6600 Intel Dual core, and a pair of 8800 GTX cards.. Could that be a problem? ;-)Just gotta convince the wife it is time to buy a new computer..Would XPX really benifit from 16GB Memory vs 8GB, And i am looking at one of the 8 core AMD's.. Would it actually use that? Or is it overkill?? And if they ever can get the 680's in stock i figure i would use that also.. Any ideas??Thank you..

[MdMax 233]

Would XPX really benifit from 16GB Memory vs 8GB

No, for now it's 32-bit software. In future updates they'll switch to 64-bit and then you'll be able to use more RAM.Default sceneries are sometimes a resource hog compared to photo-sceneries and OSM2XP add-on sceneries. Your GPU is better than mine, so you should be able to use it with better settings and a better operating system.http://developer.x-plane.com/2011/12/tips-for-better-frame-rates-pt-1/http://forum.avsim.net/forum/438-x-plane-tips-and-tricks/Happy flying ! :(

[Humpty 752]

On 32

Would XPX really benifit from 16GB Memory vs 8GB, And i am looking at one of the 8 core AMD's.. Would it actually use that? Or is it overkill?? And if they ever can get the 680's in stock i figure i would use that also.. Any ideas??Thank you..

you are using a 32 bit OS which would limit your mem below 4 GB, the AMD FX 8 core series are not up to par , though they do perform somewhere and I guess no ones has tried a FX 8xxx series chip in XPX but yes a member here has tried the FX 8xxx in FSX and he just went back and returned it. And IMO the FX 8xxx core is not worth the price till they come out with the new revision of the BD or the Piledriver, at that price I would go i5 / i7 way. I was going to purchase the FX 4100 + mobo but I just got the 960t to fit on my current board and it rocks.As stated by Laminar XPX is more GPU intensive but it uses CPU if you enable car traffic. They have also stated to get a GFX card which 2000 passmarks. The 680 I hear is hot :) But you are looking at more of a budget card than HD 6850 / 6870 / or a 560ti.

[IAmThWlfMan 0]

On 32you are using a 32 bit OS which would limit your mem below 4 GB, the AMD FX 8 core series are not up to par , though they do perform somewhere and I guess no ones has tried a FX 8xxx series chip in XPX but yes a member here has tried the FX 8xxx in FSX and he just went back and returned it. And IMO the FX 8xxx core is not worth the price till they come out with the new revision of the BD or the Piledriver, at that price I would go i5 / i7 way. I was going to purchase the FX 4100 + mobo but I just got the 960t to fit on my current board and it rocks.As stated by Laminar XPX is more GPU intensive but it uses CPU if you enable car traffic. They have also stated to get a GFX card which 2000 passmarks. The 680 I hear is hot :) But you are looking at more of a budget card than HD 6850 / 6870 / or a 560ti.

Thanks for the advice.. I am leaning back towards an I7 after reading some benchmarks and other resources about the AMD.. Although the cost of the AMD setup is only about 2/3rd the cost of Intel, i beleive the intel would be a better deal in the long run.. Windows 7 64bit would address the full amount of RAM i am looking at.. And after Windows 8 has been out for a while since it is supposed to handle Multi-core better i might even consider upgrading..I think what i will do is get all new hardware aside from the video cards.. Just stick with the 8800's only for a month or two and when the 680's are a little easier to get ahold of swp them out for one of those.. I know the 8800's will be the weakest (by far) link, but it should get me by for a little while..

[Humpty 752]

Yep that would be a good decision. I am anyway planning on getting the FX 4100 for my Linux so may fiddle with XPX in linux on that machine. enjoy the flight.

[swantee 0]

Do find the AMD Phenom Black x8 core really smoothed things out a bit when I upgraded from the AMD Phenom Black x4 core (Which was really good too)--Well pleased with the ASUS Twin Fan nVidia GTX 570 and Asus Crosshair/Extreme MB's'Looking forward to X-Plane going 64bit

[tf51d 284]

On 32you are using a 32 bit OS which would limit your mem below 4 GB, the AMD FX 8 core series are not up to par , though they do perform somewhere and I guess no ones has tried a FX 8xxx series chip in XPX but yes a member here has tried the FX 8xxx in FSX and he just went back and returned it. And IMO the FX 8xxx core is not worth the price till they come out with the new revision of the BD or the Piledriver, at that price I would go i5 / i7 way. I was going to purchase the FX 4100 + mobo but I just got the 960t to fit on my current board and it rocks.As stated by Laminar XPX is more GPU intensive but it uses CPU if you enable car traffic. They have also stated to get a GFX card which 2000 passmarks. The 680 I hear is hot :) But you are looking at more of a budget card than HD 6850 / 6870 / or a 560ti.

Your confusing memory for address space. 32bit limits you to 4GB Virtual address space not memory. If you have a system with greater than 4GB Physical memory, the extra memory would be used for paging. This could make the APP run smoother, since you wouldn't have to use your on disk virtual memory to do it. (or at least less of it)

[Humpty 752]

Do find the AMD Phenom Black x8 core really smoothed things out a bit when I upgraded from the AMD Phenom Black x4 core (Which was really good too)

are you using a Bulldozer with XPX ? how is the performance ?

Your confusing memory for address space.

yep my mistake :)

[swantee 0]

Yes it's the Bulldozer and I'm very happy with her with X-Plane and basically in every aspect. I have taken her beyond the limits at times. I had a few Blue screen crashes with the Phenom x4 core (Not a lot) but never once with the Bulldozer.

[lightplane 0]

Thanks for the advice.. I am leaning back towards an I7 after reading some benchmarks and other resources about the AMD.. Although the cost of the AMD setup is only about 2/3rd the cost of Intel, i beleive the intel would be a better deal in the long run.. Windows 7 64bit would address the full amount of RAM i am looking at.. And after Windows 8 has been out for a while since it is supposed to handle Multi-core better i might even consider upgrading..I think what i will do is get all new hardware aside from the video cards.. Just stick with the 8800's only for a month or two and when the 680's are a little easier to get ahold of swp them out for one of those.. I know the 8800's will be the weakest (by far) link, but it should get me by for a little while..

I'd recommend 64 bit OS and go with an i5 processor - hyper-threading is wasted on Xplane - it will take all the cores you can give it. But you won't see any advantage with hyper-threaded cores. The i5 2500 is a good choice as is the older i5 750 (fantastic overclock ability). Really soild processors. Put in as much RAM as you can afford - Xplane won't use more the 4gb (yet, anyway) but your OS can sure use it to run other programs in the background - allowing oyu to easily switch out to them when on a long trans-atlantic flight. Have fun.

[Humpty 752]

Yes it's the Bulldozer and I'm very happy with her with X-Plane and basically in every aspect. I have taken her beyond the limits at times. I had a few Blue screen crashes with the Phenom x4 core (Not a lot) but never once with the Bulldozer.

You mean you pulling good fps with everything on MAX ? please do let me know so than I will go and buy the 6100, but keep in mind that XPX is more GPU based , could you try FSX on the 8150 and let me know the performance ?