This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


Trying to max out FS9 on Win XP 32

Recommended Posts

Dear fellow simmers,

I have a configuration which I would like to upgrade, but within limits:


- I would like to keep FS9. In understand FSX can do more, but I just have many add-ons for FS9 and prefer to invest in hardware.


- Would also like to keep Win XP 32, as I am deeply in love with Flight1's Piper Meridian.


- Drives, Case, Power Supply are all very nice & high quality, would like to keep them.


What I want to avoid is to spend a lot of money on hardware that is too "strong" or too "modern" for FS9 - in other words, that offers features which are useless looking at FS9s relatively old programming structure.


I wonder if I can get some advice here on a processor which in this sense could be a solution. I would be glad to look into the used market.


I will have made a similar posting in the video card section (


Kind regards,





P.S.: These are the details for my configuration:




Windows XP Professional 32-bit

2.40 gigahertz Intel Core 2 Duo
64 kilobyte primary memory cache
4096 kilobyte secondary memory cache
64-bit ready
Multi-core (2 total)
Not hyper-threaded

Main Circuit Board
ASUSTeK Computer INC. P5B-Deluxe Rev 1.xx
Bus Clock: 266 megahertz
BIOS: American Megatrends Inc. 1238 09/30/2008


4 Drives

1 x Radeon X1950 Series

1 x Radeon X1900 Series

Running three monitors, two of them HP L2105tm (but due to XP limitations, only one working as touch screen).

Drives, Case, Power Supply are all very nice & high quality, would like to keep them.

Looking into upgrading the CPU, but that would probably also require a new MB.

Not sure if the Radeons are already max or if I could do better.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Here is why almost nobody can answer your questions..

You are running FS9 on windows XP 32bit, with Dual Core processor and very old graphics card running 3 monitors!

Without spending good amount of money on new hardware and software, I doubt that you can get any better performance out of your PC..

Sorry that I couldn't help you more!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites



I see your are in Bahrain, you may be in luck. I have a bunch of old sim hardware doing nothing in a spare room. Send me a pm



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear aviator8,

thank you very much for your reply. This was exactly the kind of information I was hoping for. I am absolutely willing to make an investment for more performance.


However, what I am afraid of is to chose a hardware architecture that is on on use for the relatively old programming structure of FS9. For example, I guess that lots of more RAM will not help much as FS9 cannot access them anyway.


So what should I go for? Higher clock speed? High number of cores? Is there such a thing as "the" processor for FS9?


My only "condition" is to keep FS9. I might even part with XP 32.


Best regards,


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

As another committed FS9 user, I too have the Meridan. I swapped out the supplied 530 for the newer 530 WAAS and a couple of Jetline 2 gauges from RXP (and some Flightline T and N gauges, but they wren't really necessary, just looked more betterer) and now have the Meridan running on a 3570K in Win 7 x64. Bit of mucking about, but it can be done. I think the original HSI was the only thing the new WAAS 530 couldn't drive, hence the Jetline 2 retrofit.


Cheers, SLuggy

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the main thing your new build should focus on is higher bandwidth and I/O.


In other words, even though FS9 is old, it's greatest strength is it is "pure" unlike FSX that is a jumbled mess of old and new, half-finished features (DX 10; Multithreading). So, your main hardware upgrades should focus on speed and improved through put above all else.


1) I recommend getting a used (or new) Intel E8500 (3.0 GHZ) / E8600 (3.30 GHZ) Core2Duo CPU.


2) DDR2 RAM that runs at 800 MHz vs. your current 266 MHz RAM.


3) Nvidia GPU of your choice.


Even something like a 9800 GTX is more than enough for FS9. It's no myth Nvidia performs better with both Intel CPUs / mobos and FSX. It's proven fact. If you want to run three monitors off one card I would suggest the most recent Nvidia offerings like the GTX 600, 700 series. You may have a technical bottleneck with a Wolfdale CPU + 600/700 series GPU, but you are running a program that is nearly 10 years old and built on inefficient FS2000-era code. So, any bottleneck will be purely "technical" and probably not noticeable in the sim.


For reference, I used to run FS9 on a Core2Duo E5800 (O.C. to 3.7 GHZ) with a GTX 260 at it was nearly maxed outwith this humble setup four years ago.


4) Make the switch to at least Windows 7 x64-bit to take advantage of more than 3 GBs of RAM.


I know Windows XP is the "gamers" choice, but a lot of so-called gamers don't know how to optimize their systems on a regular basis, either. So, they think any new OS is "bloated" and "slow" when that is just not the case. I can understand skipping Vista and Windows 8 because of the Metro GUI, but choosing not to be on at least Windows 7 in 2013 doesn't make any sense to me from a technological stand point.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites