I am just about to buy a new PC. I created a list of all parts, which looks like this right now:

 

1 x Western Digital Caviar Black 1500GB, SATA 6Gb/s (WD1502FAEX)

1 x Crucial m4 SSD 256GB, 2.5", SATA 6Gb/s (CT256M4SSD2)

1 x Intel Core i5-2500K, 4x 3.30GHz, boxed (BX80623I52500K)

1 x Kingston ValueRAM DIMM Kit 8GB PC3-10667U CL9 (DDR3-1333) (KVR1333D3N9K2/8G)

1 x Sapphire Radeon HD 7870 OC, 2GB GDDR5, DVI, HDMI, 2x mini DisplayPort, lite retail (11199-03-20G)

1 x ASRock Z77 Extreme4, Z77 (dual PC3-12800U DDR3)

1 x LG Electronics BH10LS38 schwarz, SATA, bulk

1 x Thermalright HR-02 Macho (Sockel 775/1155/1156/1366/AM2/AM3/AM3+/FM1)

1 x Cooler Master CM 690 II Advanced Black & White Edition (RC-692A-KKN5-BW)

1 x be quiet! Straight Power E9 CM 480W ATX 2.3 (E9-CM-480W/BN197)

1 x Microsoft: Windows 7 Home Premium 64Bit inkl. Service Pack 1, DSP/SB, 1er Pack (deutsch) (PC) (GFC-02054)

1 x Microsoft: Office 2010 Home and Student (deutsch) (PC) (79G-01904)

 

I want to be able to play the newest games on my 24" 1920x1200 screen, which I will keep. In addition, I desperately want to play FSX with high details and high FPS. Right now, on my existing computer, i reach 6fps when on final to EHAM (Mega Airport Amsterdam), which is unbearable.

 

I was almost about to buy my new components as listed above, when (in another forum) a user told me not to buy an AMD GPU because FSX was programmed to run on NVidia! Can anyone confirm this? Would there be any issue with the HD 7870 OC? Or is this an "issue from the past"? What would you recommend?

 

Thanks for any reply!

Nuke

Hello

Nvidia is the way to go for FSX, just works much better in heavy clouds than ATI.

 

Be aware that PSU is way too small, get at least 700W and preferably a decent brand such as Seasonic.

The Memory is not ideal either, too slow for that rig, get 1600mhz at a minimum, lowest timings you can find

Thanks a lot, mad dog, these are valuable answers.

- Would you suggest to go for "the big deal" and take a GTX 680 or aim a little lower?

- The PSU was considered ok by other "experts" but I was also thinking about a stronger one. Can't do any harm.

- I wanted to buy 1600 MHz RAM if I would by an Ivy Bridge CPU since Sandy Bridges only support 1333 MHz. But, as for the PSU, bigger can't do any harm.

Actually that's a good PSU and is ok for that system, but a little more headroom won't hurt.

I think I'll switch to the 580W PSU and take 1600 MHz RAMs.

 

But regarding the GPU: Would you suggest to buy a GTX 580 instead of a HD 7xxx? The 680 is still a bit expensive, but that's the case for almost any decent video card...

since Sandy Bridges only support 1333 MHz.

 

Hello

Who told you that story ?

Strange that most here are running 1600mhz and much higher with SB.

My 1600mhz Corsair Vengeance seem happy enough with this i52500k

Maybe also one of these myths... They said that a SB does't have any issue with a 1600MHz RAM, it just doesnt support full rate.

But since I am also buying 1600MHz RAMS now all will be fine, whichever CPU I will take. The Z77 board supports them all...

 

Now I just have to increase my budget for a decent custom GTX 580 or 680 instead of the HD 7870...

Nuke74,

 

Having 2 identical FSX computers at home, except for the GPU, I may comment on using an AMD7870 OC 2048MB vs Nvidia GTX 570 1536MB. Both have a i5 2500K at stock speed, 8GB DDR3-1600 MHz RAM, running Windows 7 64-bit Home Edition. Both have a Corsair TX 850 V2 PSU.

 

I find the 7870 to be a very good GPU with an image quality almost as good as the GTX 570 in most cases, but it losses more FPS than the GTX570 when a lot of clouds must be rendered. Also, I find that NVidia renders Anti-Alliassing a tad better than AMD (image quality).

 

The only reason that one of my computers has an AMD instead of an NVidia GPU is to support 3 displays (Eyefinity setup), which I find easier than going the Matrox TH2Go route and is more economical than buying 2 NVidia GPUs.

 

So, based on my own experience with both GPUs, I would suggest:

- Buy AMD 7870 OC if you plan on using multiple displays (for setup peace of mind), or

- Buy GTX580 or 680 if using only one display (for image quality and performance on high settings).

 

BTW, I've been using both NVidia (6800, 7800GTX, 8800GTX, GTX570) and AMD (5850 and 7870 OC) video cards with FSX over the years and heavy cloud impact on AMD GPUs have been observed on the 2 models I tried.

 

Despite this, I am very satisfied with my 7870 OC, since I rarely fly in heavy cloud situations.

 

Best regards,

 

Normand

NBouc,

 

Wow, thanks a lot for this detailed post. It exactly sums up what I face now, the only difference is that you own both systems and I have to decide which one to get since I have none now ;-)

Right now I have a Intel Dual Core E2160 @ 1.80 MHz running together with a GeForce 8600 GTS. I always favored 3dfx/Nvidia over ATI/AMD and therefore would like to do the same now.

 

I will most likely choose a GTX 580 or 680 since I have only space for one screen. I'll just wait for some of the GTX 680 custom designs (and price development). I still got some time since I will most likely wait for the i5-3570K and buy this CPU instead of the i5-2500K (if it's not toooo overpriced...)

 

By the way: What about this issue with DX10 I read about? Does FSX have any issues with DX higher than 9?

FSX requires DX9. Microsoft included an option in FSX to run in "DX10 Preview Mode" that is available if your OS has DX10 or better (introduced with Windows Vista if I recall well). But MS implementation of this DX10 mode is not optimized (read beta build) and can cause problem for some users, specially with 3rd party addons. Some users like it, some don't. I personaly don't use DX10 preview mode.

 

It is not related to the version of DirectX that comes with your OS. It is simply an option in FSX that you can select. When not selected, FSX runs with the DX9 modules of whatever DirectX version is installed (as long as it is DX9 or better).

 

If you wait for the i5 3570K, let's hope that the new architecture will really make it better than the 2500K, since their clock speed is almost identical. Either of those CPU will give you a big increase in performance compared to your actual system.

 

Take care,

 

Normand