Hi Guys, 

 

I'll try to keep it short. Basically I would like to upgrade my current PC instead of building a new one from scratch to cut down on cost but I need some help with choosing the right components. The main reason for the upgrade is to improve my FSX performance. I don't play anything else, so please keep that in mind. 

 

Here's what I have: 

 

Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

mobo: ASUSTek CM5570

CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 3.00Ghz

RAM: 8.00Gb DDR2 @ 400MHz

Graphics: NVIDIA Quatro FX 580 512Mb

SSD 55GB (with FSX on it)

HDD 596Gb

HDD 465GB

 

What new CPU and/or Motherboard or even GPU would you guys suggest to improve my FSX? Is there one specific component I could change that would give me an immediate upgrade? Like I said, keep in mind I don't need the best of the best as FSX is the only game I play. 

 

Thanks a lot for your help

 

You need to replace the guts of your PC..

 

i7 6700K, Asus Z170-A, 2 X 4 GB G-Skill memory, GTX 970 would be a good setup for FSX.

 

See the many other posts in this forum..

Oh man that's an old system.  And I thought my Sandy Bridge 2500K was an old system hehe.

 

I'm with Bert, you need a rebuild.  

 

On a "budget" (because you'll need to spend a decent bit of money to build a decent FSX rig)?

 

i5 6600K

Z170A mobo

8GB DDR3 ram

GTX 960

 

Otherwise go with what Bert said

i might suggest a 4790k and a z97 motherboard, i say this because the 4790k is faster than the 6700k as far as single thread performance,the parts are cheaper and ddr3 is cheaper than ddr4 and the timings on the ram are much lower and feel snappier.now people can call me crazy but i downgraded from a 6700k rig to a 4790k system and bought a gtx 1070 for flight sim and my planet coaster game.i plan on holding onto the 4790k for at least 3 years now unless a 6 core mainsteam comes out.i am not talking enthusiast boards, i mean actual mainsteam.the 4790k systems still support a max of 32 gb of ram, thats plenty for a few years.  so i am suggesting a 4790k,z97 motherboard and 16gb of ddr3.all under 500 bucks

Thanks a lot for your input guys, it definitely helps! I'll do a bit more research and report back here with any questions

Oh man that's an old system.  And I thought my Sandy Bridge 2500K was an old system hehe.

 

I'm with Bert, you need a rebuild.  

 

On a "budget" (because you'll need to spend a decent bit of money to build a decent FSX rig)?

 

i5 6600K

Z170A mobo

8GB DDR3 ram

GTX 960

 

Otherwise go with what Bert said

 

 

DDR4 don't forget Ryan, not 3.

i might suggest a 4790k and a z97 motherboard, i say this because the 4790k is faster than the 6700k as far as single thread performance,the parts are cheaper and ddr3 is cheaper than ddr4 and the timings on the ram are much lower and feel snappier.now people can call me crazy but i downgraded from a 6700k rig to a 4790k system and bought a gtx 1070 for flight sim and my planet coaster game.i plan on holding onto the 4790k for at least 3 years now unless a 6 core mainsteam comes out.i am not talking enthusiast boards, i mean actual mainsteam.the 4790k systems still support a max of 32 gb of ram, thats plenty for a few years.  so i am suggesting a 4790k,z97 motherboard and 16gb of ddr3.all under 500 bucks

 

 

 

No!

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-4790K/3502vs2384

 

 

The Core i7-6700K is Intel's latest "Skylake" flagship processor. It replaces the hugely successful i7-4790K and takes the crown as the fastest mainstream consumer CPU available. Comparing performance and specs between the 4790K and 6700K shows that the configuration is largely unchanged (same base clocks, cores, threads) but the improved manufacturing process (14nm) brings a small reduction in TDP and a performance improvement of 8%; 

 

Everyone is calling for expansive i5 or i7 CPU's while in fact FSX only uses one single core.... So, get the latest Intel Core DUO G3258. This is an inexpensive chip (less then $75) and with proper after market cooling you might get it up to 4.5Ghz. If you invest more in cooling then 5Ghz is perhaps possible. People have done it with that chip and in the VA I fly for some guys gave it a try and they love this CPU for simming. 

 

For video, get a GTX 970 or 980 as prices will drop significantly over the coming months.

cpu boss has the 4790k faster than the 6700k, i realize the z170 chipset will support kabylake , i was giving my opinion.

 

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-4790K

cpu boss has the 4790k faster than the 6700k, i realize the z170 chipset will support kabylake , i was giving my opinion.

 

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-4790K

 

 

CPU boss is wrong, it's a bug.

Everyone is calling for expansive i5 or i7 CPU's while in fact FSX only uses one single core.... So, get the latest Intel Core DUO G3258. This is an inexpensive chip (less then $75) and with proper after market cooling you might get it up to 4.5Ghz. If you invest more in cooling then 5Ghz is perhaps possible. People have done it with that chip and in the VA I fly for some guys gave it a try and they love this CPU for simming. 

 

For video, get a GTX 970 or 980 as prices will drop significantly over the coming months.

 

 

 

Not true, FSX does not use only one core. Unless of course you haven't bothered to install the service packs!

 

From Phil Taylors blog...

 

 

We *are* rebuilding the binaries from scratch. Thats not trying to patch the old binaries, its replacing them with new files, many of which have quite a bit of new code. The multi-core work, for instance, went thru the terrain code stack from top to bottom. Thats one reason why SP1 took so long. The multi-core infrastructure is solid, will use up to 256 cores if available, and will continue to be used as we migrate systems to it as it makes sense. Terrain and autogen are it for now, we’ll be evaluating when to do more.

 

 

 

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ptaylor/2007/05/15/fsx-sp1performance-work/

fsx uses 2 by what i understand, i have been using cpu and gpu boss for years.i have the 4790k at 4.8ghz.most 6700k's won't go over 4.5-4.6ghz, everyone is entitled to there opinion,i respect yours as well.

Phil Taylor was the man that knew. After all, he was the head of the development team, namely Aces. If he told us that FSX can use more than one, or as you say two cores, we should listen. It's his teams software. What may be fooling you is the inconsistent nature in which it does so, it's mostly terrain and autogen. When it does, it's not extensively, not a game changer, but the fact remains that FSX was multi-core capable after SP2 and that theoretically FSX can utilize up to 256 cores. Unless you wish to disagree with the head of the team that wrote the software?
 
 
As before...

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-4790K/3502vs2384

 

UserBench have single core performance 5% higher for Skylake and overclocked multi-core performance 7% higher. But of course you are free to favor CPU Boss if you so desire.

 

 

most 6700k's won't go over 4.5-4.6ghz, everyone is entitled to there opinion,i respect yours as well.

 
 
I respect your "right to an opinion" but you should respect my right to tell you when your opinion is contrary to fact.
 
Not true! Skylake has been out for a while now, and what's notable is that overclocking is pretty consistent. Most are achieving between 4.6 and 4.8 GHZ. A much narrower band than we have seen from some previous architectures.

 

Asus for exanmple tested hundreds of 6700K CPU's both before and after release, and confirmed 4.6-4.8 as the achievable for most CPU's. Their own TPU 1 and TPU 2 auto rules are based around that.

 

You should also understand that Skylake has a higher IPC than Haswell. Not to mention the latest chipset and all the features that brings to the table.

Skylake is to prefer agree with Martin.

The 6700k have better IPC and a better Overclocker , Its fact.

Cinebench R11.5 and R15 ia a hard bench for the CPU did some tests with H110 cooled ambient 24C.

Easy 5.0ghz not many 4790k do that with that type of cooling

https://i.imgur.com/Ksf2MP1.png

fsx uses 2 by what i understand, i have been using cpu and gpu boss for years.i have the 4790k at 4.8ghz.most 6700k's won't go over 4.5-4.6ghz, everyone is entitled to there opinion,i respect yours as well.

 

You understand incorrectly.

Phil Taylor was the man that knew. After all, he was the head of the development team, namely Aces. If he told us that FSX can use more than one, or as you say two cores, we should listen. It's his teams software. What may be fooling you is the inconsistent nature in which it does so, it's mostly terrain and autogen. When it does, it's not extensively, not a game changer, but the fact remains that FSX was multi-core capable after SP2 and that theoretically FSX can utilize up to 256 cores. Unless you wish to disagree with the head of the team that wrote the software?

 

 

As before...

 

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-4790K/3502vs2384

 

UserBench have single core performance 5% higher for Skylake and overclocked multi-core performance 7% higher. But of course you are free to favor CPU Boss if you so desire.

 

 

 

 

I respect your "right to an opinion" but you should respect my right to tell you when your opinion is contrary to fact.

 

Not true! Skylake has been out for a while now, and what's notable is that overclocking is pretty consistent. Most are achieving between 4.6 and 4.8 GHZ. A much narrower band than we have seen from some previous architectures.

 

Asus for exanmple tested hundreds of 6700K CPU's both before and after release, and confirmed 4.6-4.8 as the achievable for most CPU's. Their own TPU 1 and TPU 2 auto rules are based around that.

 

You should also understand that Skylake has a higher IPC than Haswell. Not to mention the latest chipset and all the features that brings to the table.

i think skylake is garbage along with broadwell-e, maybe you need to get on newegg and amazon and read all the dead x-99 boards after a few months,a few people put a stock 6700k in in a z170 gigabyte gaming 7 and pushed the voltage to 1.5v out of the box and ruined it.i don't care what your sources say, i go by cpu boss and the 4790k is faster than the 6700k in single core apps,it's a fact.you can get high and mighty but you are wrong.

 

Think what you want, garbage or not the 6700k is faster in single or multitread in all thats fact.

Do your homework man , you only spread garbage anyway.