I would build one yourself:  you have maximum control and flexibility as to what goes in it.  Also satisfying.

 

The prebuilt ones from Jetline or others are not good boxes in that FSX does not need (nor will it use) a 600 series GPU nor do you need more than 6-8 GB of RAM (and Jetline and others puts 16GB in).  Waste of money.  Better to direct the $$ towards better flight controller gear or a higher end CPU.  What's odd though, is any company professing to build a FSX optimized pc ought to know better.

I built my very first computer just 2 months ago and OC'd to 4.5 GHz. I do not consider myself tech saavy, but after reading countless threads and watching video after video on Newegg, I felt very confident when I started my build. Computer booted with no problem. Oveclocking was a breeze too. The layout of current BIOS software makes it so. Of course, the new Ivy Bridge chips are solid overclockers.

 

My advice is to read, read, read. Also, watch the Newegg videos on how to build a computer, and then watch again. Google 'Word Not Allowed Blog', and you'll get some good advice on hardware and software for FSX/P3D - it's a great resource. I found his blog extremely helpful. Have fun! I sure did.

 

Todd

I would build one yourself:  you have maximum control and flexibility as to what goes in it.  Also satisfying.

 

The prebuilt ones from Jetline or others are not good boxes in that FSX does not need (nor will it use) a 600 series GPU nor do you need more than 6-8 GB of RAM (and Jetline and others puts 16GB in).  Waste of money.  Better to direct the $$ towards better flight controller gear or a higher end CPU.  What's odd though, is any company professing to build a FSX optimized pc ought to know better.

I second the advice to build it yourself. There is a big misconception out there that says that the GPU is not important for Fsx. In most situations a 580 VS a high end 600 series card nets almost no gain in FPS. However, the GPU  becomes very important when employing a very graphics intensive add on like REX or PMDG NGX  and running at high AA settings (anti-aliasing). Running these programs along with other scenery payware at extreme resolutions, especially if using multiple monitors, will hammer any GPU. You'll have to balance your hardware choices with how you plan on running Fsx.

However, the GPU  becomes very important when employing a very graphics intensive add on like REX or PMDG NGX  and running at high AA settings (anti-aliasing). Running these programs along with other scenery payware at extreme resolutions, especially if using multiple monitors, will hammer any GPU.

 

I cant see how this would be so when it all still runs on (or within) the base FSX platform, and FSX was never coded to properly leverage the GPU.  With FSX running, my GPU usage never exceeds 40%, o/c GTX470.

 

Can anyone add to this?

 

Thanks.

 

 

I second the advice to build it yourself.

I agree that building your own computer is a rewarding and satisfying pastime. I have built many computers and still get a buzz out of the completed product. It's not rocket science. If it was, I wouldn't be doing it. Just be absolutely aware of the pitfalls, though. These pitfalls manifest themselves in faulty hardware, mainly. The pitfall here is if you return to your store with a faulty piece of hardware, it generally needs to go back to the manufacturer before it can be replaced. Thus, let's say its a motherboard. This will delay your build by 2-3 weeks unless you want to ante-up for another one immediately. Down the track you'll have a spare motherboard even if you don't want one. I have had many brand new, matched memory sticks that are doa and for a newcomer to the computer building arena, it can be a frustration. I'm not a nay sayer just a realist. Today marks the day I spec'd and paid for my new computer build at my local store. I'm having their people build it because the Warranty is on the completed box which will be ready for pick-up early Tuesday. Any configuration problems can be rectified by them and if a component is faulty, they replace it immediately because they have a store full of components. When you're unloading $3000+ on a high-end box, IMHO, having the store build it is advisable both for peace of mind and fewer warranty worries.

 

Jon

Its important to note that for NVIDIA cards, first number in the series denotes the generation (580 vs 680). Second number denotes the performance class (560 vs 580) Thus, the 580 is superior to a 660ti for example. There are tweaks that can be made to the config file that will shift more of the rendering burden to the GPU. Many people think only about FPS, in terms of Fsx performance. There are also other considerations, however like shimmering, microstutters, etc that are more subjective and harder to quantify. For 95% of Fsx users who don't employ tweaks and high graphics settings, a mid range graphics card is  plenty. Employing quality scenery payware like ORBX and using other payware like PMDG and REX is known to cause OOM's (out of memory errors) This can be helped using a high end graphics card 2gb or better such as the 670FTW 2gb for example. regards

WOW!! Really???. Your system specs are impressive but is this at max graphics settings at a busy airport like EGLL or KJFK? Please elaborate.

 

Yep. Here are a few examples regarding the frame-rates.

 

Cairns

 

 

Brisbane

 

 

Melbourne

 

With respect DetCord, Brisbane or Cairns isn't London Heathrow or New York JFK. Could you post a couple of shots of those airports please and advise what % of Ai is set.

 

Thanks.

Screenshots are nice but more detail regarding settings, software used, etc needed. Is that ORBX scenery? I can also see that you have a payware traffic utility. Also, cockpit VC view hits my the framerates harder. Maybe a screenshot in a PMDG aircraft on short final or on the runway in VC mode into KORD,KJFK,EGLL. Would love to get more info on settings if you're getting those kind of numbers in that kind of senario. Not meaning to be too harsh just really curious. Regards

@ Ray

 

True, however, Melbourne and Brisbane are still both incredibly resource intensive. Brisbane and Melbourne alone include over 60km2 of enhanced terrain and buildings on top of the existing Orbx Oz SP4. I could post a few of Heathrow, but as I'm not using the specified airport addon, I don't see that as being a good test and or relevant.

 

@ Adam

 

Current settings are here - http://forum.avsim.net/topic/401665-considering-an-upgrade/#entry2613570

 

It's all Orbx scenery (England, Wales, Oz SP4, with Melbourne, Cairns, Canberra, and Brisbane airports). Also running a few other non-Orbx terrains, REX E+ OD, Traffic 360, of course payware aircraft. I'll see what I can do with regards to other screens when my unit decides to hold formation, and I head for the house.

@ Ray

 

True, however, Melbourne and Brisbane are still both incredibly resource intensive. Brisbane and Melbourne alone include over 60km2 of enhanced terrain and buildings on top of the existing Orbx Oz SP4. I could post a few of Heathrow, but as I'm not using the specified airport addon, I don't see that as being a good test and or relevant.

 

There's no doubt the ORBX scenery is very impressive but I've always considered the toughest test for any system to be inbound to a major airport with overcast conditions and rain. Ai is extremely heavy on frame rates and may well push the CPU harder than high resolutions ground textures.

 

 

I appreciate you need a 3rd party airport to show us the performance so my request will have to wait.

 

WOW!! Really???. Your system specs are impressive but is this at max graphics settings at a busy airport like EGLL or KJFK? Please elaborate.

 

 

Yep. Here are a few examples regarding the frame-rates.

 

Cairns

 

 

 

Brisbane

 

 

 

Melbourne

 

 

Awesome!! Which add ons are you using for scenarios ground textures and airports and traffic? Is there an order which to install first?

@ Ray

 

The Orbx airports are addons. They don't come with the scenery and include their own external settings launchers, I'm sure you know that. The commercial AI slider is all the way to the right (includes T360), and the general avation slider is at 50. Didn't see much of a point in keeping it at 100.

 

@  Jose

 

Everything is Orbx minus Fly Tampa's St. Maarten and Grenadines. Obrx goes first in the scenery list as always, and the rest of the information you're looking for is several posts up.

 

PMDG's 737 as requested.

 

 

 

 

My FPS generally range from the upper 40's to over 70 when in high cruise in The PMDG NGX. I'm usually around 35 to 40 at almost any default Fsx airport unless I go into an extremely busy one like KORD, KJFK, or EGLL. I'm always over 20 though, in every situation I've encountered so I'm satisfied with that. I routinely fly into KMDW (Chicago Midway)using Fly Tampa airport scenery and Aerosoft Chicago X. I don't use Fraps though. I know enabling triple buffering can affect how the FPS is reported but not sure how. Your reported CPU clock speed is very close to mine but I realize that there are infinite variables with hardware configurations, Fsx graphics settings, GPU graphics settings, config file settings, etc. Fsx seems like a never ending exercise  in experimentation  and testing LOL. Perhaps there is some setting outside of Fsx, maybe NVIDIA inspector, that's allowing you to enjoy performance like you're posting. If so, I would love to know what it is. Regards

 

 

Everything is Orbx minus Fly Tampa's St. Maarten and Grenadines. Obrx goes first in the scenery list as always, and the rest of the information you're looking for is several posts up.

The shot at YBBN. Was this with all options ticked in the YBBN control panel?

 

Jon