Is MS FSX the Best AVSIM Software For a Beginner?

[FloG 148]

I think most of the important things have been said. However, I didn't see anyone mention that a joystick (doesn't have to be an expensive one) makes steering much easier and more comfortable, and most importantmore precise than using the keys.

Besides that, starting out with the FSX missions can be fun, and it sure helps to learn the basics of flying in the sim.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

I second that: A non-expensive joystick will do for the start (that yoke, or even control-column is no 'must-have').

 

Same is true for the rudder pedals: No need to squeeze your wallet so early in the "game": You can steer ("yaw") your plane with the joystick, too (auto-coordination in the sim settings).

 

FS9 never looks as good as FSX - but it can save you larger expenses on hardware. You have the hardware already (except for that nvidia card) - go for FSX/Prepar3D: new  addons for FS9 become less likely every day ...

 

There are strong recommendations around for a sound card and a sub-woofer: I use a cheap sub-woofer with onboard sound; sounds good enough for me ...

[ryanbatc 13,112]

Ha if you asked this question in the x plane forum they'd say xplane.

 

And I don't know what you mean by "Avsim software."

[Dean_EGTC 57]

Ditto Ryan.

 

I'm still trying to decipher the question.

[Andydigital 93]

AVSIM, Aviation Simulator.

[FloG 148]

AVSIM, Aviation Simulator.

Would've been my guess too, but then again it seems a bit unhandy to me. Maybe it means "recommended by Avsim" instead?

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

I guess he's regarding AVSIM as a flightsim software portal rather than a community forum. After all he's completely new to flightsimming.

 

Not a big deal, right?

[Bert Pieke 7,599]

VIDEO: I don't have a separate GPU at this time, but I'm prepared to spend about $200 for an ATI one.

 

Suggest you look at a Nvidia GTX 660.

[Trans_27 Pilot Chase 59]

This is really an easy choice: FSX

 

FSX is expandable as you develop skill and proficiency.

 

Don't believe the hype that FS9 can look just as good as FSX, it will never happen. All you need to do is download the ORBX PNW demo and see the picture quality for yourself.

 

Take the advice from the experienced users, buy a 600 series Nvidia card. If you need any help, there are many great members here to assist.

Hype? That's not hype at all.

[ryanbatc 13,112]

Suggest you look at a Nvidia GTX 660.

Agreed!

[Marcielli 42]

Which is why I would start with fs9. Unless he has a fairly powerful system, he will most likely encounter poor performance with fsx or such low detail in order to make it run decent that he won't be interested

 

 

False, in most cases, if the user wants to add on some scenery, (most likely he will want to), if the scenery is FSX native, it will run FASTER in FSX. Because FSX will take advantage of his system better than FS9 will ever do.

 

Of coarse, if you just "fire and forget" your settings to high, than yes FSX will run slow.

 

FS9 is still very capable and has plenty of third party software to make it interesting. FS9 will probably remain my primary sim when my new system arrives on Monday.

 

 

Capable on a system that came out in 2003. FS9 does so much less than FSX, sooner or later if he really started with FS9, he WILL switch to FSX.

 

FSX looks great, but I'll take the better performance of the older sim that can look nearly or just as good as the newer one. That's just my two cents.

 

 

If you *really* think FS9 looks as good as FSX, maybe something is wrong with your monitor... or the person looking at the monitor.

 

FS9 is only faster because it does LESS.

[TomBrooklyn 1]

Definitely go with an NVIDIA card, they seem to handle FS9 and FSX better than ATI. What Aentwis said about RAM banks is true and not just of the Core I7 CPU. Many older generation motherboards are more stable and faster with two modules of RAM rather than four modules,

I like ATI (AMD now) for a couple of reasons. I think it works particularly well with CAD software, which I will also be using; and because my motherboard supports AMD Crossfire, but not Nvidia SLI. So going with AMD would allow me the option of adding a second GPU if it seemed warranted sometime in the future.

 

After taking a look at what GPUs are out now, I like the AMD 7850 at under $200. It seems to hit a sweet spot for power and value.

 

As for my RAM, I have 4x4GB. There's no changing that now. 4x4GB was far less expensive when I bought it in Dec 2012 than 2x8GB.

[Don t moderate me this way 882]

I've heard there has been a "FS9-ers vs. FSX-ers" thread on AVSIM before.

 

Rumour has it that AVSIM doesn't encourage this battle taking place over and over again.

 

This is TomBrooklyn's topic. His system is capable of running FSX from the start. Now the conclusion is up to him.

 

'Nuff said.

[Bert Pieke 7,599]

I like ATI (AMD now) for a couple of reasons. I think it works particularly well with CAD software, which I will also be using; and because my motherboard supports AMD Crossfire, but not Nvidia SLI. So going with AMD would allow me the option of adding a second GPU if it seemed warranted sometime in the future.

 

After taking a look at what GPUs are out now, I like the AMD 7850 at under $200. It seems to hit a sweet spot for power and value.

 

As for my RAM, I have 4x4GB. There's no changing that now. 4x4GB was far less expensive when I bought it in Dec 2012 than 2x8GB.

 

A buddy has a new ATI 7950 and FSX and loves it..

 

Depends on whether you want to spend $200 or $300...

 

I've got a hunch that the 7850 will do the job as well.. maybe someone with a 7850 installed can jump in..

[Kaboki 441]

Hmmm, I don't see MS Flight getting mentioned