1 hour ago, fppilot said:

I as well am preparing to build a new system this Fall but want to wait for newer GPU's as well.  My current concern is that  the minimum spec is Windows 10 version 18362.0 or higher. 

My current system is stuck on Windows 10 version 17763.437 (1809) and refuses to update.  Windows Update fails with Error 0x80070005.  I have on multiple occasions exhausted every suggested fix for that error I can find.  Even Microsoft's Windows 10 Update Repair Tool fails to correct the error.  So I have no idea what influence that will have on MSFS 2020.

I've read that it requires Windows 10 v. 1909 (Nov 2019 build).

2 hours ago, KenG said:

It is easy now to sit back and criticize the team for making the wrong call and saying they should have known better

Well with that company being that size I would have thought that they would have had their finger on what was going on in the real world with processers. To me it was a clear show of arrogant on their behalf.  Jmho

4 hours ago, Chock said:

Nah, you can take pretty much any half decent work PC, throw a 500 quid GPU in it and it will wipe the floor with any console you care to name, and you will always be able to do this.

With the previous generation of consoles coming with rather underpowered CPUs for their time this has held quite true, but as developers start pushing the seven Zen 2 cores at their disposal, this could change abruptly. And then there's the SSD...

2 hours ago, shawty1984 said:

What you fail to realise with the 1500 and 500 comment is while it might cost you 500 for a gpu, it won't cost Microsoft close to that considering they will have a contract with the supplier to supply millions of that gpu. 

Nope, I already noted this factor when I mentioned 'economy of scale' when commenting about that on this thread in the very same post which you are cherry picking my comment concerning those figures from. If you read the entire post with those fairly arbitrary number in, you will see that is the case.

Edited July 28, 20205 yr by Chock

3 minutes ago, Chock said:

Nope, I already noted this factor when I mentioned 'economy of scale' when commenting about that on this thread in the very same post which you are cherry picking my comment concerning those figures from.

If that's the case, why are you comparing a 1500 retail price to a consumer to the price of a gpu that a company is under contract to supply millions to. It doesn't work. 

9 minutes ago, jpc55 said:

Well with that company being that size I would have thought that they would have had their finger on what was going on in the real world with processers. To me it was a clear show of arrogant on their behalf.  Jmho

In regards to FSX, ACES indicated they did talk to Intel about their CPU roadmap when they started the project in 2004. At that time Intel was still talking about single processors for home computers with speeds eventually reaching 10GHz, so this is what ACES went with. However, this was all thrown out the window a year or two later when it became apparent that it was not possible. However, it was too late for FSX, and a number of other games too, and we were stuck with a sim built for a CPU world that never materialized.

30 minutes ago, March Hare said:

I've read that it requires Windows 10 v. 1909 (Nov 2019 build).

18362.0 is what I saw this morning on the MSFS site under system requirements.  It was a May 2019 build.  Here is a partial screenie from that page. Go the Pre-Order, select any one of the three versions, then click on System Requirements:

 

Edited July 28, 20205 yr by fppilot

9 minutes ago, shawty1984 said:

If that's the case, why are you comparing a 1500 retail price to a consumer to the price of a gpu that a company is under contract to supply millions to. It doesn't work. 

I was doing that because the comment was in relation to the topic at hand, which was that a five year old PC which had cost 1500 quid, five years on, is not of anywhere near 1500 quid in current value, and could probably be had for a mere fraction of that cost. Thus the comment was not in relation to a 1500 quid computer today, which is a very different proposition. You need to read comments in relation to the threads which precede them, since this is what they reference and this is the main thrust of the entire topic.

In any case, much of this stuff is speculative in nature; we will doubtless see if it holds any water in approximately three weeks.

Edited July 28, 20205 yr by Chock

15 minutes ago, goates said:

However, it was too late for FSX, and a number of other games too, and we were stuck with a sim built for a CPU world that never materialized.

Seems like a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on. 🙂 

Microsoft made a decision based on best available current information, and that decision turned out to be a bad one.  It happens.

Hook

3 hours ago, FlyBaby said:

In other words, a 4 core vs 6 core wouldn't matter if the sim only uses 2 cores for processing.

In one of the interviews with the developers (can't remember but it might have been with a German gaming site or at the X019 event) they said the sim can handle "as many cores as you can throw at it". I think they were the exact (possibly translated) words. Someone here can probably dig out the quote. In addition, the following has been posted somewhere on the Internet and is supposedly for one of the alpha builds whilst flying over central London.

 

Having posted what I did above, I also remember an interview with the developers that said the GPU handles most things, including all the weather modelling, and so it left little for the CPU to do.

4 minutes ago, Bottle said:

Having posted what I did above, I also remember an interview with the developers that said the GPU handles most things, including all the weather modelling, and so it left little for the CPU to do.

Well in that case, the CPU should stop being so lazy and make us all a nice cup of tea. We'll have no slackers around here!

Let's be honest. No one but Asobo has played the release build yet Things can changes. There isn't an NVIDIA driver yet for MSFS 2020. I would wait until the retail version is out before we start making assumption on how the game will perform.

23 minutes ago, Chock said:

I was doing that because the comment was in relation to the topic at hand, which was that a five year old PC which had cost 1500 quid, five years on, is not of anywhere near 1500 quid in current value, and could probably be had for a mere fraction of that cost. Thus the comment was not in relation to a 1500 quid computer today, which is a very different proposition. You need to read comments in relation to the threads which precede them, since this is what they reference and this is the main thrust of the entire topic.

In any case, much of this stuff is speculative in nature; we will doubtless see if it holds any water in approximately three weeks.

You stated - 

"but they aren't magic, you can't put 1500 quid's worth of components into a box, then sell it for 500 quid."

You're directly comparing the two? 

4 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

There isn't an NVIDIA driver yet for MSFS 2020.

This is so very true. Unless things have greatly changed since I was last concerned about drivers and game performance, this can have a very significant effect on performance. Hopefully Asobo have coordinated with Nvidia and AMD to get optimized drivers released on or soon after release.