 |
|
|
|
|
That PC was my first chance to run FSX, as the old Dell Dimension 8300 that I actually own is too slow, though it runs FS2004 just fine. The one drawback to the Vertigo X10 though is the price. Though not as expensive as one might imagine for a top of the line system it's still beyond some budgets. So after their success with that series, Jetline took up the challenge of creating a lower priced series of computers that could still provide the power to run FSX. The xJETT series is the result, and the topic of this review. As in the Vertigo X10 review, throughout this one I have scattered screen shots that I took while testing, each showing a different plane and widely different flying locations. Many are in similar locations and situations to the ones I used in the previous review. I've highlighted the frame rate. As you surely know, frame rates do jump around while flying, but the captured images show rates that were typical for the situation shown. 
About Jetline SystemsThere are a couple big names in PC's that everyone has heard of, but Jetline Systems probably isn't one of them. However, this is a name that flightsimmers need to become familiar with as Jetline is designing computer systems specifically for gaming and flightsim use (note the "Jet" part of their name). To quote their own design goals: We engineer each high performance PC system specifically for flight simulation games. Each system is designed to run flight simulation programs with smooth graphics and high frame rates. Only the best performance proven components make it into our systems. We don't hold back when it comes to performance parts. 
These people are flightsimmers just like we are, and know what we need in a flightsim computer. How well a computer is able to run Flight Simulator, and what frame rates it achieves, depends on a number of computer components: Processor: xJETT systems use either AMD Athlon X2 6000 or Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 processors. Graphics: Good flightsimming is all about frame rates, and a lot of the image processing actually takes place in the graphics card. Jetline uses a version of the high end nVidia GeForce 8800 GTX card; more on this later. Memory: For the processor to run fast, it must be able to access memory fast. Jetline uses Corsair XMS2 memory. Disk Storage: No doubt you've noticed how much disk space the new highly detailed scenery and aircraft add-ons take. Much of that is images that must be quickly transferred from storage to screen, and the speed of the disk drive system plays a large part in how well that works. The baseline drive, and the one in my test unit, is a 320 GB SATA II with 16 MB cache running at 7200 RPM. Bigger and faster drives are available as options, so when reading the review consider that I was running the lowest performance option available. 
Let's Go FlyingSo combining all that together, done properly, and you have a nice fast PC suitable for flightsimming. For review purposes I was sent just the PC itself and I supplied the monitors, keyboard, mouse, speakers, etc. The computer is a simple black cube--no fancy "jet engines" here like those of the Vertigo X10 case. But all the important pieces are here and plugging everything in was simple and quick and in no time I was up and running. I got some very good feedback from the Vertigo X10 review, with most people appreciating the approach I took to evaluating the computer so I took the same approach again. While some reviewers would probably delve into performance charts, create graphs of speeds running test applications and so on, I can't really say I have the background for doing that and frankly I haven't found that sort of review all that useful. So instead, I jumped in and started flying. First I had to install FSX which of course takes a while but went without a hitch. This time I also installed Service Pack 1 and found that downloading it from Microsoft's web site and installing it also was quite easy. I should mention, though, that I did fly the system briefly before installing SP1 and then tried the same flights after and the difference is impressive. It appeared that I was getting as much as a 50% increase in frame rates after SP1 was installed. So all I can say is if you've been putting off installing it, do it as the improvement is well worth it. 
Now I knew this xJETT system did not have quite the computing power of the Vertigo X10 so I was not expecting quite as much, but as it turns out installing SP1 more than made up for the difference. I tried most of the default aircraft and tried flying at places all around the world. I tried to duplicate some of the flights I did in the previous review and if anything, the results were better (I now wish I'd tried the X10 with SP1 installed...). I ended up locking the frames at 30 and found that at altitude in most situations the speed stayed locked at 30 much of the time--impressive. Of course, high altitude flight is not what pushes the performance limits. Densely packed cities and large, busy airports with AI traffic are the real test. I ended up concentrating much of my flying in areas like that, and by looking at the various screen shots you can see the results. 
As in the previous review, I found that what plane you used did not matter all that much, though again this is just using the default aircraft and I'm sure some third party planes do push the limits much harder. What does matter is some of the setup options. "Light bloom" for example, if turned on, causes a considerable slowdown. How much AI traffic you have (and with FSX you have various types of traffic too...) makes quite a difference, as tracking all those other vehicles is hard work. Still, I was able to set AI traffic levels quite high; most of my flying was done with the two AI aircraft sliders set to 50% and that did not cause a problem and created enough activity to make the airports interesting. In all the flying I did frame rates were mostly in the 20's, which is good enough for a smooth flight. On occasion they would drop into the teens but even so the view remained smooth with no pauses or jerks or the "slide show" effect you get when frame rates are really low. I tried to find a place that would really push the limits and thought I had found it when I flew over Tokyo, as I started to get really, really slow frame rates. I went back the next day, though, and flying in the same area got rates in the 20's, like I was getting most places. I think what happened is Windows decided to download an update of something while I was flying and that was the cause of the big slowdown. So, just something to be aware of--if things seem to be going wrong the cause may be something other than what you expect. 
xJETT vs Vertigo X10So, just what did Jetline Systems do to make a lower priced system, one that's almost 50% cheaper but is close in performance to the higher priced system? Well, obviously some compromises had to be made and lower cost components used. But Jetline was very clever at how they went about this. If money is no object you simply put together a system with the best components and be done with it. With the xJETT series, though, Jetline Systems carefully examined each component as described earlier, and came up with a balanced combination where each can work to its full capacity. Using the best component may not always buy you as much as you think, as the software you are running may not be able to fully utilize it or something else with be a bottleneck. One prime example of clever design is in the video card. The GeForce 8800 GTS graphics card comes in several varieties. The top end has 768 MB of memory, but Jetline found that the cheaper version with 320 MB of memory could be used instead since when used by FSX the speed difference was minimal. This is the advantage of a computer that designed with flight simulation in mind. 
ConclusionsHaving had my hands on the xJETT system for a while now I've really been enjoying using it to fly FSX. It's definitely fast enough to use any of the default aircraft in even the most dense default scenery with effects and AI turned up high enough that FSX shows what it can do. Though I did mostly stick with default aircraft, I did try the Golden Age Pitcairn PCA-2 Autogiro also, as it just really struck my fancy (guess I'm not really the jetliner type) and it was such fun getting down really close into the scenery. It performed as well as the default planes and was great fun to fly and even just to look at. While there still is no system available at any price that can run FSX to its limits, if you're on a budget and want to run FSX now, I'd have to say the xJETT is a great choice. I've had a lot of fun flying with it and I'm sure you would too. Of course, if you're on less of a budget the Vertigo X10 system I reviewed previously is an even better choice. 
Test System Specs
Nels Anderson  Copyright © 2007 by FlightSim.Com. All Rights Reserved. |
s we all know by
now, finding a PC that runs Microsoft Flight Simulator X well is a
challenge. The system I was using at the time FSX was released simply
was not up to the task. In the time since FSX was released PC's have,
as usual, gotten faster and as a result more suitable systems have
become available. A few months back I had the chance to try one of
them, the top of the line Jetline Systems Vertigo X10. You
can read my review