Hey Brian, check out usedvictoria.com for local options (this is where I picked up my 680 for a steal)  ^_^

Well, to be honest your system as a whole is just fine... if you upgrade your video card your system will be decent for another 5yrs or so.  Your thoughts regarding entire system replacement are a bit overboard, in my opinion.  I really don't think you need that.

 

Well exactly, if it ain't broke don't fix it.  My computer works great for the two biggest heavy uses, fsx and my home movie business (video conversion from analog to digital). 

Bryan, I too will be waiting on the sidelines for awhile. My computer is four years old with a gtx 285 video card. When I saw what the minimum requirements were back in october for p3d versoon 2.0 were I begain planning my new build. So far I have the new case with all the components for water cooling. I will order more parts in december and then the final components in january. The new rig will cost me about $3700.00 so it will be february before I finally get to enjoy versoon 2.0. Even though I could buy a newer card now I'm not sure I would get all the benefits of the new card cause my cpu is an old one. My understanding is that the cpu and gpu are dependent on one another. Anyway by febriary orbx will have vector and open lc for north america and I'm sure developers will work out their installers to be compatible with version two.

 

I generally have upgraded my computer every three or four year, and often it was driven by Flightsim upgrades.  However, I am now retired with half the cashflow so major upgrades like you are fortunate to be able to undertake are just not possible for me anymore.  Sounds like you will have fun with the new rig.

 

Hey Brian, check out usedvictoria.com for local options (this is where I picked up my 680 for a steal)  ^_^

 

I will do that thanks.  As I say perhaps just a video card upgrade will do the trick, say for $100 I can swing that.

Darn shame, but I'm not buying a new card nor upgrading my computer at this time.

I said the same thing myself a couple weeks ago. That card can still handle almost anything out there if you don't mind turning down the settings and lower framerates.

 

...But then last week I gave in and ordered a new card. Including P3D, there are now 3 titles I'll own that either don't run at all on my old card or aren't supported on older hardware. I was hoping to hold off on an upgrade until next year, but I didn't quite make it. I think developers are finally starting to leave those of us with classic hardware behind, so it's probably worth it to pick up a modern card if you can swing it.

The big change with P3D 2.0 is DX11. If you want to use DX9, there's FSX and P3D 1.4. FSX and P3D 1.4 are not able to take advantage of multiple cores or newer high-end GPUs. P3D 2.0 is designed to take advantage of modern systems and as such requires a modern system.

 

I guess we will find out in the next few weeks just how much the new sim will demand of our GPUs. It's quite possible it will run just fine with a $100 - $150 video card, as long as it supports DX11.

Prepare3D V2.0 is a new release which requires both  Windows 7 (or better) and DirectX 11.

 

Why constrain it by using yesterday's technology?

 

Because you want to reach as many people as possible? Already some people have said they will be holding off on P3D, even though their PCs aren't that old. Many games support previous DX versions. One game, I think it was Half-Life 2, had something like 6 different rendering paths to support DX 7, 8 and 9 on both Nvidia and AMD GPUs. Granted they had a larger budget and target market, so it was likely worth it.

 

In this case I do think it's a good thing to push the sim forward, but it does depend on the market. 

LOL...now I feel really bad..."a very old card"...gees, a three year old computer and it's now antiquated.  The card works super with my FSX, and I get great 3D performance with my Samsung monitor. 

 

 

 

LOL ... No offence meant Bryan. Most hardware is "old" the day it is released. Guess this hobby really does have us held by the short and curlies.

Because you want to reach as many people as possible? Already some people have said they will be holding off on P3D, even though their PCs aren't that old. Many games support previous DX versions. One game, I think it was Half-Life 2, had something like 6 different rendering paths to support DX 7, 8 and 9 on both Nvidia and AMD GPUs. Granted they had a larger budget and target market, so it was likely worth it.

 

In this case I do think it's a good thing to push the sim forward, but it does depend on the market. 

 

well, i think that's the thing though. is reaching as many people as possible is really lockheed's goal here? it's not microsoft and fs11 anymore trying to 'bring casual users in' (we saw how well that worked with flight, heh)

 

LM already know they have an enthusiast base, somebody who will drop up to $200 on a sim or a yoke/throttle setup can't be that concerned about upgrading to a videocard that's newer than 3 years old. and the 'pro' customers that are getting the $2300 license probably don't care either. 

 

halflife 2 is a good example of why compatibility is good for a mass audience, definitely. even then, according to steam's hardware stats something like 63% of their users have dx11 support already, and that's a mass market install base that is orders of magnitude bigger than the number people who are simming..

 

anyway cheers

-andy crosby

 

 

well, i think that's the thing though. is reaching as many people as possible is really lockheed's goal here?

 

I agree. Lockheed Martin's objectives are much wider than the interests of a relatively small number of flight simulation enthusiasts who don't have Windows 7 or a DirectX 11 card. Would the additional revenue from those  justify the additional cost to Lockheed Martin?

The big change with P3D 2.0 is DX11. If you want to use DX9, there's FSX and P3D 1.4. FSX and P3D 1.4 are not able to take advantage of multiple cores or newer high-end GPUs. P3D 2.0 is designed to take advantage of modern systems and as such requires a modern system.

 

I guess we will find out in the next few weeks just how much the new sim will demand of our GPUs. It's quite possible it will run just fine with a $100 - $150 video card, as long as it supports DX11.

 

Agreed except DX11 has nothing to do with P3D being able to take advantage of multi-core CPUs.

I agree. Lockheed Martin's objectives are much wider than the interests of a relatively small number of flight simulation enthusiasts who don't have Windows 7 or a DirectX 11 card. Would the additional revenue from those  justify the additional cost to Lockheed Martin?

Indeed so, Gerry! I should expect that L-M's government and corporate volume license customers who buy huge quantities at a time would have their focused attention... :Whistle:

Well I couldnt stand the thought of sitting on the sidelines monday while everyone was enjoying p3d version 2.0. So I gave in to temptation and bought a nvidia geforce gtx 760. So come monday I get to play too. DX 11 here I come.