hi...still undecided about fs x after owning it for a few days...ive done All the tweaks as found on here and http://www.fox-fam.com/wordpress/?page_id=41 (forkboy2 deserves an avsim gold award i reckon)i have a sim were i can set the frame slider to 21 fps and it nearly always holds that in the areas im flying at the moment...ie north west of england.but if i then go to the capitol..london i get frames of around 15-18 still ok i know but i now get the stutters as fs x starts to load buildings in such as sky scrapers.so with that in mind i set up on the active at KJFK,,,oops big mistake,,,frames down to 1 or 2 barely ever getting above 10 and really big pauses with alot of loading and disk access going on.,,this then becomes disheartening...why should i have to fly out of town to keep the sim okmy system AMD 4000,,,,with 1 gig ram and an nvidia 6800GTnot edge cutting i know but not crumby either.i had cleared it with my wife that i may need a system upgrade for my hobby...she agrees...so i read post after post on here...flightsim and fs2004 for tips advise on a better system..but it seems most people are struggling...i have priced a cpu,,m/board,,ram and graphics card...somethings on the lines ofcore2duo 6600,,,2 gig ram,,,nvidia 7950GTX which will set me back around

if i was you i would not upgrade...yet. your machine is near top of the range. you would get an improvement but i dont think it would be much. i would wait a year.

Thanks for the reply san h......good advise i think...but is it right i will have to leave the sim for a year or so in the hope some hardware does apppear that can handle this game...hehe yeah a year down the line and rumours will start of the new flight simAndrew

hehe..i know the feelingI have an Athlon XP3200+ and have all the sliders at half way and get around 11FPS around the cities which is where i mainly fly (as i use the airliners). I am thinking of getting a new PC but some of the people here are reporting 15-16fps in the cities on their spanking new E6400 pc and it makes me wonder if its worth upgrading just for a handful of FPS. I would imagine you can get quite good performance out of your PC with the current spec with a little fine tuning.The big fear is you upgrade now and and still cant run FSX with everything on. Then a couple of years from now FS11 turns up and you have to upgrade again :)

Your current system, a high clocked single core processor is at the moment generaly considered one of the best options for FS-X. 1 core of a Core2Duo might be a little beter because it is a bit more efficient but don't expect the Core2Duo to do much beter then the AMD 4000. Maybe if you're sloppy and keep runing a lot of processes while siming you wil see a benefit from the extra core but if you're carefull with the services you run while playing FS-X you have one of the best setups for this game.Maybe make it 2 Gigs of ram and possibly get a graphicscard with more memory as an intrim update would be my suggestion. Wait with the real upgrade until the DX10 patch is out.

try some of the replacement files here:you dont notice any drop in quality but the frame rate increases are noticable :)http://www.fox-fam.com/wordpress/?page_id=41

The system where i get the best performance is, as of now:fx-57 cpu with 2 gb ram ( not overclocked yet will try on thursday)geforce 7950 gx2 over clocked 1 gb ddr3 memoryA8N SLI Deluxe motherboard 939 socketrest pretty much standard, SATA etcBasically single core fast CPU gives better performance thats what i noticed after trying out 4 different configs.Gives me 24 fps all through out more or less with only the cloud replacement fix. 1900x1200 res with 4x AA and 8x AF on HP 24"LCD. Dont know what will happen with addon aircrafts!!It cost me about $4500 entire set up and thats really a lot of money in my country though it may not be such a high amount in your country, so be careful before you decide to spend.

Hi Andrew; I upgraded a day or two before it came out, just knowing what was going to happen. . I spent the weekend doing circuits at San Diego, playing with settings and adding the odd recommended line into the FSX.cfg file. Below are my purchase links to my now current system, and I'm getting some 28 - 30 fps with quite spectacular graphics of San Diego. I spent a week down there some four or five years ago - at the Marriott hotel and the convention centre on the bay: it is stunning. Lindberg Intl isn't as good as the FS9 Fly Tampa, but it's not to shabby, either. MS have done fairly well in this respect, considering the number of airports in the package. I have imported (cut 'n' pasted) the Long Island Classics Christen Eagle into the "airplane" folder, and - with the exception oif the tun/slip indicator - it works very well - as per FS9. The upgrade (me building) cost me $1700 Can, so I'm also fairly happy. (As a bonus - FS9 now will hit over 60 fps)gpu:http://www.infonec.com/site/main.php?module=detail&id=187312cpu:http://www.infonec.com/site/main.php?module=detail&id=129605ram:http://www.infonec.com/site/main.php?module=detail&id=16452mobo:http://www.infonec.com/site/main.php?module=detail&id=129713p/s:http://www.infonec.com/site/main.php?module=detail&id=10693http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2009328,00.aspInfonec is local supplier in Toronto: good prices, good warranty.The cpu comes with ASUS AI Smart, and allows point and click overclocking to about 4 gig (reported). I'm running at 2.8 trouble free.I will send you the DirectX and fsx.cfg if your interested.Regards,

I'd wait for DX10 and vista to come out before upgrading... because any upgrade you do now isn't going to give you as good as results as a system that is DX10 and vista ready...

although you will have to wait a while after DX10 graphics cards come out unless you want to pay the inevitable sky high prices they are sure to be.

hi all and 1st a real big thanks for the replies.can i reply to a few of the points 1 at a timeive now added ALL the tweaks at http://www.fox-fam.com/wordpress/?page_id=41 and ive said before but say again a massive thanks to that lad for all he is doing for fs xi say all ive just added his latest ones the buildings and water textures.the small down side to my system is its a socket 939 board but agp...so a new board if i wanted to go to pci `e because i dont think it would be worth while getting a newer agp card,,,pci `e is the way to go.ive just flown for an hour or 2 in my native region...the north west of england...fps set at 22 and solid at 22...liverpool...manchester...blackpool up over the lake distict but 1 big note is theres no real big scenery towns/cities in that lot...the flight was great using the baron.i then switched to london....frames down to 15 and the stutters as buildings appear...so it seems i need to stay away big time from cities hehe.i just tried the usa again at kjfk heheh thats 1 place that makes my computer cough and splutter....it doesnt stutter there it freezes for a few seconds at a time it looses all the graphics ie clouds show as big squares and diamonds ground shows as 1 colour and as i try to get out of the sim there it takes minutes for the menus to reappear...luckily im quite cool about it and just sit back. the system i have was put together a while back as a dedicated flight machine,,,i use a laptop for everthing else so other processes running arnt an issue for me.i even have gone as far to edit the cfg to dampen down the trees and buildings to 300 in each of the lines for autogen and in the sim i still have the autogen to sparse....im 1 of those dont need it i fly up in the air types LOL.Now as im typing this ive seen the info from paulj THANKS..if you look at the 1st post of mine,,,thats very similar to the system im looking at.out of interest paul could you send me your fsx cfg i`ll take a look but im pretty confident i aint got sliders at stupid places and such.oops forgot my email [email protected] again a big thanks to allAndrew