Cool Preview on FS.com BUT

[RyanbATC]

So much mention of Intel this, Intel that....why is everyone so against AMD? It is clear (if you are a regular reader of these forums, especially the hardware forum), that more and more FS users are converting from Intel to AMD...

I understand Intel + Microsoft = yeeehhhaaaa! But AMD is quality too...hope the FS.com editors do not forget that too ;)

Take Care,

[JSkorna]

Hi Ryan,

Let them! We know what we use to get the most out of FS04. For anyone right now, a 4000+ will still run circles around anything else.

Hope this helps,
Jim
http://www.hifisim.com

http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-downloa...evelopment.jpg http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-downloa...nner-proud.jpg http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-downloa...anner-beta.jpg

[RyanbATC]

I didn't want to get into an Intel vs. AMD debate, because they both a great processors at times. I just want to give AMD some recognition, especially for those "newbie" readers who just browse the FS.com main pages....

Oh, and I agree with you ;)

[Tony G]

2nd that. I have recently converted to AMD, and am very happy with the performance. I think a lot of the coverage has to do with Mr. Gates announcing a partnership with Intel.

That man does like to lock of all the angles...

[IanH]

hi All

I have both intel based and AMD based pc's and I like both.

I use the AMD for flying the Intel for everything else.

ITs just my preference that matters to me, but on saying that.

In my short time on this planet, I have noted that intel and MS are akin to hand and glove.

But when it comes down to the wire, when FSX hits the shelf I will stick it on both and make up my own mind, which one, for me, feels right.

[erict]

For gaming AMD has Intel beat hands down. AMD Dual core CPUs run circles around the Intel dual core.

It's the same story with the single core CPUs. The AMD FX-57 beats the Pentium Extreme Edition and the AMD is cheaper to boot. So it's not necesarily true that most users are going from Intel to AMD but most gamers are moving that way.

I don't agree with the articles assesment that the 7800 will be overkill by the time FSx hit's the store shelves.

By that time we'll see many more dual GPU graphics cards (not SLI! GPUs on the same card, one slot solution). I'm sure FSx will use every ounce of GPU horsepower.

This year we'll see if new Physics Accelerator cards from Ageia will finally hit store shelves. The Unreal engine is supposed to be able to support this new technology. It's a real shame that FSx probably won't support this techology even though FLIGHT SIMULATOR would be the perfect piece of software to show off this technology. Physics, aerodynamics, atmospherics, etc.

oh well...

[mg386]

I guess i should have checked to see if this subject had been covered, but I was quick to respond with my own post. I agree that the original posters should have considered a little research. I already posted a new thread on the main FSX forum...

[tbmavengerstuka]

Couldn't have said it better myself. I guess great minds really do think alike.

[bjpilot]

Hey ErickT, I see you're from my hometown. I have always used AMD, since I built my first FS machine with a 2600+. Now I have an Athlon 64 3700.

Brandon Jones
Simairline.net, "Virtual Airlines of Choice"
Western Michigan University College of Aviation

[stabilep]

I have noticed for a while that the writers on this site have been heavily biased towards Intel. When AMD 64's first came out they claimed 64bit processors like AMD's actually hinder performance (When in fact it is really only an issue for the Intel Itaniums) or how wonderfully use(less)ful Hyper Threading is. Even intel admitted it was a lost cause and agrees that the future is simply just Dual Cores and I heard will be dumping HT soon. Check out their old Alienware review:

http://www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/review/alien.htm

Yeah apparently the AMD solution was so bad that Intel needed to copy it.


Oh and surprisingly PCI Express is not limited to just Intel