Thinking of buying and SSD, but what would I put on it?

[Flyer10 31]

I guess there is nothing wrong with being satisfied with what you have. Certainly many, many flight simmers are not. But the suggestion that you can just stick your OS and FSX install anywhere on any old HDD and just turning off UAC and get anymore than completely inferior performance when compared to latest hardware setup in strict accordance with say for example NickN's FSX Bible on Simforums is just plan wrong!

[JHolst 2]

@flyer10: Is the Seagate Momentus X Hybrid an old HDD?

 

I got off the "crazy wild update wagon" years ago, I use the sliders in FSX adjusting to my taste of smooth, stutterfree flying. Autogen is just a pain in the eyes, down to normal with that, plus several other tricks like reducing trees and ugly houses etc.

 

I have awesome respect for NickN, but IMO he´s just turned sour, bitter and angry, and still want to keep an audience by making FSX install and tuning a kind of rocket science. It´s not, just adjust the settings to the capacity of your hardware, it´s very easy, they (Aces) made them sliders for a reason, right?

[martin-w 3,235]

I guess there is nothing wrong with being satisfied with what you have. Certainly many, many flight simmers are not. But the suggestion that you can just stick your OS and FSX install anywhere on any old HDD and just turning off UAC and get anymore than completely inferior performance when compared to latest hardware setup in strict accordance with say for example NickN's FSX Bible on Simforums is just plan wrong!

 

 

Now ask me why I'm satisfied with what I have!

 

I'm satisfied with what I have because it would be damn hard, if not impossible to better it with current hardware.

 

Now ask me how I know.

 

I know because I have been flight simming since Clive Sinclair's first machines, have built many PC's, installed an OS many times, and guess what... not only have I NOT followed the ultimate bibles, but I also HAVE followed  the ultimate bibles as well.

 

What does my experience tell me? That I achieve just as good results by not following every single intricate detail, of the over the top bibles. Just a few important considerations, and a dose of common sense.

 

Same for the so called miracle of fancy third party defrag utilities. Yes, I have tried them, yes to the letter of the law... result, no definitive improvement compared to a standard windows defrag. I have two friends who did the same, same result for them, no improvement.

 

Comply with your super strict, highly intricate bibles if you like. And then show me DEFINITIVE results that confirm a significant advantage compared with a few simple considerations, and common sense. Guess work, or simply believing what you read, doesn't count. We are too easily fooled by the placebo effect for that. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I have utmost respect for those that go to the trouble of formulating their exhaustive and highly detailed flight sim guidelines, some of these individuals have made a great contribution to our hobby, and I thank them kindly, there is much of value to be gleaned form such endeavours... but don't for a second think you MUST follow EVERY suggestion to the letter, that's simply not true.

[Flyer10 31]

Well ditto pertaining to FS experience and multiple builds over several years both overclocked and not. Following guides and not following guides and my conclusion is exactly the opposite of your.

 

You can benchmark a FSX machine quite accurately using FutureMark 3DMark 06. I recall correctly several years ago when my first build using a Core 2 duo X6800, an Asus Striker Extreme with an Nvidia Chipset back then, and a 8800GTX, singles HDD I believe that system scored about 7,000 to 8,000 on that benchmark.

 

My previous system: i7 920, on a gigabyth GA-UD9-X58A (I believe it was called) with GTX580 and 2 WD Vraptor (one for OS and the other for FSX) and DRAM 1600Mhz CL9 scored 32000 at 4.6 ghz built following NickN's old guide.

 

My current system i7 4770K based system at 4.8ghz scores just under 42000 built following NickN's new guide.

 

That puts in at about 20 on the Futuremark 3DMARK06 Hall of Fame.

 

But I don't need the benchmark to tell me that this system is way superior to my previous one and the one before that. I can see that with my own eye in the most complex of addon FSX scenery in the NGX flying in lousy weather provided by REX and ASN locked to 30fps with nearly all the slider al the way to the right!

 

But as I said there is nothing wrong with being satisfied with what you have but I don't think its right to tell others that there is nothing to be gained by using the latest high end hardware and following a tried and testest guide that thousand of Flight simmers swear by :biggrin:

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

Just about as definitive as it gets  . I think though that I've decided to hold off for now, but I'll probably opt for a system drive first and then another for FSX when funds present themselves. I just like the idea of turning on my computer and being on the desktop in a few seconds and load times have never been that much of an issue for me with FSX.

 

I understand... but if you have an existing system, it is a lot less disruptive to install FSX on the new SSD (and less expensive, since FSX is happy with a Samsung 840, whereas a systems drive deserves an 840 PRO).

 

I power up my PC once a day, but fuss with FSX for hours on end (mostly development - and then some flying).

 

So it depends on what you are trying to accomplish B)

[JHolst 2]

Flyer10 wrote:

 

"You can benchmark a FSX machine quite accurately using FutureMark 3DMark 06. I recall correctly several years ago when my first build using a Core 2 duo X6800, an Asus Striker Extreme with an Nvidia Chipset back then, and a 8800GTX, singles HDD I believe that system scored about 7,000 to 8,000 on that benchmark."

 

 

I don´t use or care about benchmarks with regards to FSX, it´s useless, only OCD people find some fun in that.

 

How is the actual performance in FSX when you have loaded a flight and hit that start button, that´s the key, the secret, but people don´t want that apparently...

[martin-w 3,235]

 but I don't think its right to tell others that there is nothing to be gained by using the latest high end hardware

 

 

I didn't say that, you are misquoting me. I said nothing of the sort!

 

 

and following a tried and testest guide

 

 

 

I didn't say that, you are misquoting me. I said nothing about NOT following a self proclaimed, or user proclaimed, experts guide. Feel free.

 

I have no problem with you following your "tried and tested guide". Only with your insistence it must be  followed to the letter of the law, complying with every intricate detail.

 

You will find advice in these guides that is simply not necessary, you will find advice that is subjective opinion, not always objective fact, and advice that applies to some but not all. You will also find advice that is very useful, extract what you need, reject what you don't.

 

Take your chosen "FSX bible". Do some research and you will find elements of that guide that other experts disagree with. Who is right, your hero, or the expert with the opposing view?

 

Think for yourself, don't follow blindly. We don't all have the same systems, we don't all have the same needs, one size fits all doesn't apply.

 

If I still followed blindly, I wouldn't be running with no limiter at all, and experiencing fantastic frame rate and no stutters.

 

Now and again, test conventional wisdom, there will come a time when you are glad you did.

[Flyer10 31]

Sorry you have lost me! I don't see any quotes in any of my post?

[martin-w 3,235]

Well ditto pertaining to FS experience and multiple builds over several years both overclocked and not. Following guides and not following guides and my conclusion is exactly the opposite of your.

 

You can benchmark a FSX machine quite accurately using FutureMark 3DMark 06. I recall correctly several years ago when my first build using a Core 2 duo X6800, an Asus Striker Extreme with an Nvidia Chipset back then, and a 8800GTX, singles HDD I believe that system scored about 7,000 to 8,000 on that benchmark.

 

My previous system: i7 920, on a gigabyth GA-UD9-X58A (I believe it was called) with GTX580 and 2 WD Vraptor (one for OS and the other for FSX) and DRAM 1600Mhz CL9 scored 32000 at 4.6 ghz built following NickN's old guide.

 

My current system i7 4770K based system at 4.8ghz scores just under 42000 built following NickN's new guide.

 

That puts in at about 20 on the Futuremark 3DMARK06 Hall of Fame.

 

But I don't need the benchmark to tell me that this system is way superior to my previous one and the one before that. I can see that with my own eye in the most complex of addon FSX scenery in the NGX flying in lousy weather provided by REX and ASN locked to 30fps with nearly all the slider al the way to the right!

 

But as I said there is nothing wrong with being satisfied with what you have but I don't think its right to tell others that there is nothing to be gained by using the latest high end hardware and following a tried and testest guide that thousand of Flight simmers swear by :biggrin:

 

 

If you weren't referring to me, fair enough.