I have tweaked my fsx config to push my PC though, so that's worth considering. Most sliders are near max, with some (LOD Radius for example) taken "off the scale" in the config.

I don't recommend autogen more than sparse or road/sea traffic, it really is a frame killer..

 

Yes the main reason for the 760 is for the AA, it really is essential for good looks in fsx.

 

All I want, is 30fps smooth and constant, while recording, in the ngx at airports like UK2000 Gatwick xtreme with lots of vatsim traffic. Then I'll be a happy bunny.

 

If only there was a patch for fsx and new computers. Surely fsx is easier to run than things like battlefield and COD. It has always puzzled me why MS dropped flight sim.

 

Ah well, that's life I guess!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Also to add if you're not confident manually tweaking the config file, fsdreamteam's addon manager has a built in tool for doing most of the tweaks that are widely used.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I plan to get the 2600.

Hmm, sandy bridge is a little old now, can you afford the 3570K (ivy bridge) ? I've heard it's a good performer in fsx.

Personally i don't see the point in the i7 chips. They're basically i5s with hyperthreading.

 

A

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I agree go ivy or haswell. Pcie 3.0, USB 3.0. Sandy is old. When you upgrade, you should UPGRADE

Thanks for the info.  I ran my cfg through the Bojote automatic tweaking site.  Definite improvement there, but I'm too scared to manually tweak them.

The only thing I mess with is texture max load and hide info text.

 

I don't have any FSDT add ons yet, but great to hear they include a tool for cfg settings.  I'll have to give that a shot when I get one of their scenery.

 

We probably have to wait for the next version of P3D to see how it runs on modern 64 bit machines.  I wonder how smooth they'll be able to make it.

 

Forgot about the hyperthreading thing, so I'll look into i5's.  Reason I'm thinking Sandy Bridge is because I really don't want to spend more than $1000 for the whole system and that's around the price of an Intel 2500 or 2600 based system today if I buy pre-made.  I'll be transferring my current SSD into the new PC to save $.  I'm either going to have it built by a shop, or buy a pre-made unit.  My skills for putting a system together is minimal and I have no OC'ing skill.  So I will probably get a non-K version unless I can fully trust the shop on overclocking.  I don't want to run into ctd's or bsod's.

 

 

Does anyone know if there is much performance increase if fsx has it's own SSD rather than sharing with windows?

 

I opted for one 500Gb SATA III SSD in order to make backups/clones simple.  You should experience little to no difference between this approach in terms of file loading pre & post starting your flight in FSX compared to putting OS & FSX on separates drives.  This was a good strategy when we were using HDD's but not so w/ SSDs.  I gleaned this from those more expert in this topic than I on this forum.

http://www.simforums.com/forums/the-fsx-computer-system-the-bible-by-nickn_topic46211.html

 

A rather explanatory guide can be found here - if nothing else, there is an opinion on everything, and this will be my guide the next time I upgrade.

 

Mas

I agree go ivy or haswell. Pcie 3.0, USB 3.0. Sandy is old. When you upgrade, you should UPGRADE

Hmm, I think nearly every new mobo runs at least one PCIe 3 lane now anyways, along with USB 3. But I wouldn't say USB 3 is essential, there are very few things using it to my knowledge.

 

As far as tweaking the .cfg goes, it's really quite simple! If you mess it up, simply delete it and fsx creates a new one Also, the fsdt tweaker can be used for free, if you download the standalone addon manager from their site.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Alex.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

This is a good guide for tweaks:

 

http://#####.wordpress.com/fsx-software-and-hardware-guide/

 

A

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Intel will beat AMD hands down with FSX generally, but that does not mean you cant use AMD. I have a 6300 @ 4.6 GHz and it seems to be the sweet spot.  Took a while to get is stable here, but it is on air and Im happy. My frames ay PHNL and YPPH have gone up quiet a bit, but I must do my few test flights around YSSY to see what happens there it is usually quiet slow as I run lots of ai. Best thing whe nfiddling is to save a couple of test flights with static weather and fly them and see if any mods you do change anything. It is the only way to see if its real or not.

Intel will beat AMD hands down with FSX generally

 

I think in this argument I've pretty much made my mind up. I agree with mjrheath.

I think, simply because of money, I'll have to go with the 660 instead of the 760. I can always upgrade in the future!

 

Anyone have any opinions on this?:

 

thanks again,

 

Alex.

 

Case: Corsair Carbide Air 540

Power supply: Corsair CX750M (hybrid modular)

Motherboard: MSI Z87-G45 Gaming

CPU: Intel i5-4670K

CPU cooler: Noctua NH-D14

GPU: Gigabyte GTX 660 OC

RAM: Corsair Vengeance Blue 2x4GB

Boot drive: SanDisk Pulse 128GB

Storage drive: Western Digital Caviar Blue 500GB

P.S. yes I do plan to overclock as far as I can while remaining safely cool and stable.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free