Is there someone running FS9 & RC4 in a dual core computer?

[Guest cirurgiao]

HiJust bought an Asus A8N-SLI-Premium mb and the processor will be AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400 (would prefer a 4800 but had to give some priority) with an Asus GeForce7900GTX gd. Of course all this power is just for one reason.I started MSFS as hobby, but one wants bigger things, so I started to get some add-ons, to participate avsim foruns and suddenly I was really involved in becoming better. From RC3 to RC4, from FS weather to AS6. WHAT A HUGE STEP!!!In real life I'm a Trauma Surgeon. Now I use FS9 with RC4 & AS6 as what it really is: a Flight Simulator, not a game!Why this upgrade? Because I just don't want a low fps.But I'm wondering if I have done the right thing. This is my first AMD processor (I had Intel all my life) and a dual core! Wouldn't like to come to RC forum and cry for help just to discover that a dual core is just a bad thing to run FS9 & RC4.Since I still have a mb with an Intel chipset which allows for an upgrade in the processor(let's say a P4 3.4GHz) plus HT, my questions are:Do I use a single or a dual core as my main FS9 & RC4 computer?Is there a way to improve them (like CPU 0 to one & CPU 1 to other?)Thanks from an entusiastic fan (What a terrific job you people from RC have done!!!)Eduardo

[jd 57]

you bought the machine for fs, use the dual corelet the os handle which processor get's what tasks. like the old commercial said, "don't fool mother nature"i have a dual core, hyper threaded machine. i notice fs9 usually maxes out one "cpu". active sky and rc will run, and use what ever is needed of the other 3 "cpus"i hope you have a sound card on this rig, and not using onboard soundjd

[Guest KemoF15]

I've got a dual core HT Athlon AMD FX-60 CPU and am running the same software as the good doctor. I went with the ATI Radeon X1900XTX--512MB card baselined at or above the 7800(7900?)GTX...I purchased the system from ALienware and they overclock the video card from 500Mhz to 648Mhz which in terms of graphics processing, is faster than the Nvidia 7800GTX. I let the system figure out what processor to use/when. The biggest issue with the "high end" rigs is heat. My ATI has a temperature monitor and at steady state it runs 50 degrees celsius...and when it's cranking high FPS at maxed out resolution, temp goes up by 10-15 degrees celsius. I can sustain 50-60FPS over dense/urban scenery with no problem...so I set my FPS to 52. Over terrain like the Nevada desert (Nellis Ranges), I can run unlimited and the overall qaulity is amazing and seamless.As a real world fast jet pilot, I enjoy the realism that can be achieved with the great add-on software (BEV, ultimate terrain, FSgenesis terrain mesh, ASv6, RC4.01, etc etc). KemoF15

[Guest cirurgiao]

Nope. Really didn

[Guest cirurgiao]

Just to get heat out of the equation I

[camaflight 0]

>i hope you have a sound card on this rig, and not using>onboard sound>>jdWhat "exactly" is the benefit of a separate soundcard. Does it give a better fps, more options for sound settings aditional programs, better sound - I know so little about sound cards......

[jd 57]

a sound card does the sound processing for you, instead of the motherboard cpu.jd

[jd 57]

you can set the frame rate target on the display options, hardware tab, i believejd

[Guest cirurgiao]

Since mb has its own sound, how do I disable it to allow the sound card work? Sorry if this question is dumb but it's the first time I think about replacing the mb internal sound for a sound card.Eduardo

[camaflight 0]

Thanks, I soon will buy some more RAM as I initially thought I wouldn't have the use for more than 1 GB RAM. Now I understand I should add a soundcard as well to my shopping list. I'll make a search for a good one. But if someone has a good card to recommend, I would appreciate to hear about it.For your info I have following spec.:

[jd 57]

when windows sees two sound devices, you have to specify which one it's going to use by default. you choose the sound card, not the motherboard sound devicejd

[jd 57]

it really depends on how "hi-fi" you want to be. whether you 5.1, or just 2.1 sound.i've had a turtle beach card, it was ok, always seemed to need a new driver. i've had several soundblaster cards, none were problematic.again, don't spend a lot of money on one, if you can't hear the difference between stereo and surround sound, or you only have 2 speakersthe goal is to offload the sound processing from the mother board, onto the sound card.similarly, offload the video off the motherboard, and on to the video cardand get the network interface off the motherboard, and onto the network card (though, these days, this is a minimal issue)jd

[ronzie 21]

. . . or . . .Usually in the BIOS setup there is a section called integrated peripherals or devices. If the on-board sound device is listed you should have the option of disabling it, saving the setup, and booting the computer. This should release some ram for other uses. Your card will then be the only sound device. This avoids having to make any choices.

[camaflight 0]

GOT IT !!:-wave

[Guest cirurgiao]

Thanks, RonOne small question:is onboard sound always present in BIOS? if so to put a sound card in a PCI slot while disabling the onboard sound will be all to be done?ThanksEduardo