MSFS Required Specs

[Anthracite 131]

1 hour ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

There have been several conflicting rumours recently, but what's almost definite is that AMD will be releasing the 12- and 16-core Zen 3 variants in the autumn, while 6- and 8-core variants are coming in late 2020 or early 2021. Probably because they have no reason to compete in the mainstream market until Rocket Lake, and Matisse Refresh might take care of Comet Lake nicely (that should be coming along with the B550 motherboards).

Yeah I heard this, wasn’t too happy with Matisse refresh, I want to see a 4000 series cpu that can tackle intel in the gaming space. That 3300x basically annihilates anything below a 10600/9600 in gaming at half the cost of a 9600. 
 

All that’s left for amd to do now that they’re dominating everything outside of gaming is to dominate gaming. Eitherway I’m happy to sit on my 3600 until that happens.

[Dominique_K 10,133]

I read here and there in this thread the advocacy of the best bang for your buck approach to justify going to the Intel or Nvidia 70 or 60 series as opposed to the 90 (Intel) or 80 (Nvidia). 

I think it is fairly justified if you build your computer to last,  say,  three or four years. You get the best ratio for today or tomorrow games.

I prefer to build for a longer period for about 7/8 years and go to the upper specs to be sure that the they will still be relevant then.

I don't say it is the way to go, it is the way I go. 

 

[canadiantree 233]

I kind of run on the same train of thought as you Dominique, I also factor in cost to performance. If I'm spending 200$ to get 5 extra FPS, I'll save that money & buy a new GPU 2 years later. I built my current system in 2015 so I'm excited to replace it early next year.

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

2 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

I prefer to build for a longer period for about 7/8 years and go to the upper specs to be sure that the they will still be relevant then.

Might not be possible anymore. For years, CPU architectures only brought in very incremental gains, and it was all that was needed because the developers were extremely limited by the massively underpowered CPU in the Xbox One and PlayStation 4. This is why architectures like Sandy Bridge, or Haswell per the system in your signature, remained relevant for so long. Now not only are the consoles getting a CPU that's four times faster, but also hardware decompressors and more efficient APIs that will further reduce CPU overhead. Without these enhancements, it is possible that even 8- and 12-core CPUs from today will start to struggle as developers take advantage of the available headroom. As a result, trying to build a future-proof system today is a lot more prone to failure, and probably not worth it at all.

AMD have expressed interest in bringing higher core counts to the mainstream as soon possible. Probably with Zen 4 and the massive density improvements that 5nm nodes will bring. If that's the case, then today's $500 CPUs will be budget-oriented in less than two years from now.

[Jonnoxx 53]

1 hour ago, ChaoticBeauty said:

As a result, trying to build a future-proof system today is a lot more prone to failure, and probably not worth it at all.

AMD have expressed interest in bringing higher core counts to the mainstream as soon possible. ... If that's the case, then today's $500 CPUs will be budget-oriented in less than two years from now.

Agree 1000%!

Increases in Computing Power have been very incremental in the last decade. 

Now I smell change - REAL CHANGE - coming!  At long last.

There is a TECTONIC shift in computing power about to break loose by end this year, next year.  And immediately beyond!

My simple "Rule-of-Thumb" for upgrading is based on getting value ONLY out of a "SIGNIFICANT" improvement - where "significant" = at LEAST >2x improvement , AND at MUCH reduced cost.

Whatever system you have, upgrading for a mere 10% "improvement" seems just an inefficient waste of effort and expense (imho). 

Go Big. Or go Home!

But NOT at any price.

I think the very top tier of new stuff seldom represents the best "bang-for-the-buck" value.  Top tier = Price gouging imo.

Edited June 2, 2020 by Jonnoxx

[Anthracite 131]

On 6/2/2020 at 11:01 AM, Dominique_K said:

I read here and there in this thread the advocacy of the best bang for your buck approach to justify going to the Intel or Nvidia 70 or 60 series as opposed to the 90 (Intel) or 80 (Nvidia). 

I think it is fairly justified if you build your computer to last,  say,  three or four years. You get the best ratio for today or tomorrow games.

I prefer to build for a longer period for about 7/8 years and go to the upper specs to be sure that the they will still be relevant then.

I don't say it is the way to go, it is the way I go. 

 

I appreciate this stance and if you can afford it, why not?

I buy whatever offers a reasonable delta between performance and price, I had the i5 2500k, bought it new and it only started struggling recently. That’s a good 8 or so years. The alternative at the time was the 2600k. Barely an improvement in gaming. 

that’s true now too, a 9900k or 10900k is barely an improvement over a 9600k or 10600k once the chip is over Clocked. 
 

that’s also true of amd- in gaming there isn’t much benefit of even going higher than the 3300x now. I’m on the 3600 because the 9600k was £100 more but ultimately the performance delta isn’t really there - as long as your Cpu can keep up with your gpu you’re golden. Perhaps if I won the lottery I’d buy a xx80 ti but even then it would leave a foul taste in my mouth.

as another poster aptly put, its price gouging at that point. 

I feel like if I buy something that I consider over priced, even if I can afford it, I’m giving them permission to keep overpricing stuff.

 

[Kpeters 42]

On 6/2/2020 at 4:01 AM, Dominique_K said:

I read here and there in this thread the advocacy of the best bang for your buck approach to justify going to the Intel or Nvidia 70 or 60 series as opposed to the 90 (Intel) or 80 (Nvidia). 

I think it is fairly justified if you build your computer to last,  say,  three or four years. You get the best ratio for today or tomorrow games.

I prefer to build for a longer period for about 7/8 years and go to the upper specs to be sure that the they will still be relevant then.

I don't say it is the way to go, it is the way I go. 

 

I made my PC in 2011 I think, it's an i5 2500k. Initially had 8GB ram and a Radeon 4850 vid card.

With time I overclocked to 4.4Ghz, added Hyper 212 Evo to keep it cool, a Radeon RX480 8Gb and upped ram to 16GB and it has kept very current. It's no lightning fast but surprisingly fast.

[Superdelphinus 718]

My broadband just got upgraded today to 1gbps. Unfortunately it was already 100 mbps so I’m not sure it will make any difference to msfs, so really this post is just about me bragging, thinking about it. 

[Wanderkroete 31]

3 hours ago, Superdelphinus said:

My broadband just got upgraded today to 1gbps. Unfortunately it was already 100 mbps so I’m not sure it will make any difference to msfs, so really this post is just about me bragging, thinking about it. 

You could buy 20 additional computers and fly simultaneously on them 😉 on that one connection.

[CallsignDE 37]

What is the difference between the i7 9800x and the new i7 10700k cause the new generation is like 200 dollars cheaper?
In the benchmarks you can find online the new 10700k wins by far.

[fmloyola 43]

On 5/30/2020 at 6:00 AM, Noooch said:

@109Sqn

This is the PC I just ordered for MSFS thanks to the help of an AVSIM member for the same budget

Ryzen 5 3600

MSI Tomahawk Max: next AMD CPU Gen will be compatible

32Gb RAM 3200Mhz GSkill Ripjaws 5

Crucial MX500 500Go for Windows and MSFS (loading times will be much improved)

Seasonic Core GC 650W Gold (found a good deal)

RTX 2060 (went to Nvidia because the AMD video card can cause crashes based on your luck and I don't have nerves for that- imagine your PC crashes on final after a" 3hour flight)

Corsair 275R Airflow case

I hope I will be able to maintain 45FPS in 1080p constantly with ultra settings. Also this build will let me probably improve for a next gen CPU in some years thanks to the MOBO and a new GPU thanks to the PSU. Finally an M.2 slot will remain available for when NVME SSDs will be cheaper.

Hi!

How was your experience with your new PC? Please tell us when do you have your impressions.

 

best regards.

[jlund 380]

In the Specs requirement they write 150GB HDD (SSD) space. I assume that's for the core program? I just found a 250GB M2 SSD in my drawer, and as I already have a M2 SSD installed on my motherboard, I bought an external case for the extra one. Will it be OK to install MSFS on the external one, and will the 250GB be enough, if I want to always play online, meaning let the Internet connection get the data, instead of caching areas or playing offline. 

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

5 minutes ago, jlund said:

In the Specs requirement they write 150GB HDD (SSD) space. I assume that's for the core program? I just found a 250GB M2 SSD in my drawer, and as I already have a M2 SSD installed on my motherboard, I bought an external case for the extra one. Will it be OK to install MSFS on the external one, and will the 250GB be enough, if I want to always play online, meaning let the Internet connection get the data, instead of caching areas or playing offline. 

I don't have the exact numbers in here right now, but I believe the main application takes 3GB of space, and the rest is content like the aircraft and the offline scenery which can be placed on a different drive. And then there is the dynamic cache for online scenery which can also be placed on a different drive. So your 250GB SSD will be enough for the application and offline content, but using it as the online scenery cache might be pushing it, as SSDs can slow down massively as they're getting full. The amount of the slowdown depends on the quality of the SSD's flash, controller and cache design though, so if it's a high-end one you might be able to allocate some space for online cache as well. In that case, you'll also want to connect the enclosure to the fastest USB port available.

[Huascar 179]

It’s been about 10 years since I purchased my Alienware computer. With FS 2020, decided to upgrade to the latest model. Any thoughts on the specs below?

 

 

Aurora R11

$2,590.09 1 $2,590.09

 

10th Gen Intel Core i7-10700K (8-Core,16MB Cache,up to 5.1GHz with

Intel Turbo Boost Technology)

338-BWMP

Windows 10 Home 64bit English 619-ANOK - 1 -

 

Liquid Cooled NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER 8GB GDDR6 (OC

Ready)490-BFZW

 

Lunar Light 320-BCXS - 1 -

 

32GB Dual Channel HyperX(FM) FURY DDR4 XMP at 3200MHz 370-AELS - 1 -

 

1TB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD 400-BHPV - 1 -

Lunar Light chassis with High-Performance

 

CPU Liquid Cooling and

1000W Power Supply

321-BFSC

 

 

Dell Wireless DW1810 (1x1) 802.11ac with Wi-Fi, Wireless LAN,

Bluetooth 5.0

555-BFMW

-

1 -

Wired Multimedia Keyboard (English) 580-AHTI - 1 -

Optical Mouse MS116AW 570-AATJ - 1 -

Custom Configuration 817-BBBB - 1 -

Alienware Aurora R11 210-AWOQ - 1 -

Driver Software 555-BGBC - 1 -

US Power Cord 450-AAGO - 1 -

Safety/Environment and Regulatory Guide (English/French Multi-

language)

340-AGIK

 

Premium Support, 3 Years 803-2413 - 1 -

Dell Limited Hardware Warranty Extended Year(s) 975-3461 - 1 -

Microsoft(R) Office 30 Days Trial

Edited June 24, 2020 by Huascar

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

11 hours ago, Huascar said:

It’s been about 10 years since I purchased my Alienware computer. With FS 2020, decided to upgrade to the latest model. Any thoughts on the specs below?

Your new system exceeds the ideal specifications for the simulator, and is almost top of the line anyway. You will be good.