Minimum system needed to have a well-endowed FS experience

[deepblueskyy]

Hey folks,

Longtime simmer and real-world pilot here - looking to build a dedicated computer for flight sim on a budget.

This computer will only have the minimum operating systems and the FS program.
I'd like to add quite a bit of add-ons for scenery, traffic and payware aircraft - but not going overboard. I'd like to have a fairly realistic looking sim experience but I want the performance to be top notch. No stutters and low FPS -any of the stuff that would kill you when trying to shoot an ILS in bad weather at LAX.

I have been reading the posts for weeks now but I haven't seen anything that kind of breaks down what the minimum requirements to run FS "well upgraded" and still maintain optimum performance.

Just a few thing I've looked at closely:
AMD 64 3400+ socket 939(about as fast as I can afford)
2GB DDR400 RAM
ATI Radeon ???? graphics

Any suggestions?

THANK YOU and HAVE A SAFE FLIGHT!

~Sam

[deepblueskyy]

Geez - sorry this message posted so many times! Gotta little trigger happy with the send button i guess. :-/

[FlyingColin]

Hey,

With add-on planes/scenery flying into a big airport will really boil down to AI traffic numbers and weather. For anything about 70% traffic and some cumulus clouds, you're gonna see a big hit. All depends on how conservative (or not) you are with the sliders. I'd say an AMD 3400 s939, 2 GB of fast ram, and a 9800 Pro 256MB would be just fine! Believe me, some ppl will say you need better than a 9800 Pro to run FS9 well. You don't really, pour as many bucks into that processor as you can, hands down. I'd buy a 4 GHz processor if they had one, so I'd go with at least an AMD 4000. Some guys Chuck and Paul both got one and as far as I know they're very happy with it.

So...bottom line: it's mostly all about the processor. Get a fast one coupled with those 2 gigs of fast ram, and throw a 9800 Pro in there or a 6600 GT.

[loki]

If you're on a budget, you drop to 1GB of RAM. As long as you aren't running sveral other programs in the background, you will be okay. Put the money towards a faster processor.

loki

[deepblueskyy]

I found this computer for around $500 US.

AMD 64 bit 3200+ cpu, socket939, 512Mb ram, 800Mhz FSB, Sata2 10000 Rpm 8Mb cache HD, 3D nVidia card w 128Mb ram

Of course I would add RAM but do you think this would be an adequate processor?

How about AMD 64 3400+?
I think the 4000 may be too rich for my budget.


Thank you guys for taking time to share your expertise!

[baddadnv]

" 3D nVidia card w 128Mb ram "


That sounds like an on board video card? If so, that's pretty much useless for FS9.

Can't emphasize enough on Processor power needed to run FS9, but you still need a 'descent video card.


You won't be buying a PC that meets your requirements (original post) for $500.


Randy Burton

[JSkorna]

Hi,

Nope, not for what you want. Even my 64 3400+ is beginning to show it's age. No reason you need to jump to a 4000 though.

Hope this helps,
Jim
ActiveSky Sales and Support
http://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_dev_team.jpg http://www.hifisim.com/images/asv_proud_supporter.jpg

[Kimber]

We have a Sony VAIO

P4 3.0ghz
2gb 400 ram
ATI 9600XT 256
SoundBlaster something Pro
3X160 HDs
Duel DVD/CD/RW

This is the way it came from Sony!!

It was a special order custom that the customer refused!!

We gave $1100 for it a year ago, tower only, at BestBuy!!

It will run FS9 flat out 100% maxed with FPS well over 100
99% of the time!!

The tech at BestBuy removed all the un-needed programs as
we were going to use it for FS only!!

It has 10 running processes!!

It will not do anything but FS!!

It will burn a DVD/CD

We use an external HD to move stuff from our internet computor
to the FS Computor!!

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/8427/process5kj.jpg

Note there are 8 AIs in this shot and 4 of them are moving!!

http://img385.imageshack.us/img385/311/kickout0nt.jpg

[navav2004]

Hey...Just my .02cents worth...I agree with every statement thus far...

You can also save a couple of bucks if your buying Window's XP and go with the Home version (Usually Cheeper)...Like Kimber stated..You ultimatley want to cut down on the running services anyway...Hers is trimmed nicely for a dedicated FS machine...Mine looks the same...

Get 1gb of "Good" Ram now...wait till later and get a second gig if you feel the need...

I'm not sure you will get your desired results with the 3200+ (I had one)...I would consider the 3400+ or Better if you can...

Good luck

[deepblueskyy]

Good Lord! How is she getting over 100 FPS? I've never seen a figure that high.


Um, here's the rig I ended up with: (not too shabby - built for $1300)

Athlon 64 4000+ San Diego
Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
1024MB Kingston Hyper PC3200 DDR400
Dual 160GB Maxtor SATA 16MB Cache Hard Drives(RAID 0 configured)
ATI Radeon PCI Express 256MB X300SE
21" CRT (for better refresh rates) @ 1360x1024 res.
Win XP Pro SP2 -trimmed to minium running processes
CH yoke & pedals

Now- so far I am all factory default FS9 (except for update). I haven't added any add-ons yet. I am getting 27-30 FPS (locked @ 30) with most of the sliders maxed, 100% traffic over LAX and normal "real weather". It goes down to about 14-18 FPS when I fly that same area in heaviest storms with the clouds set at 80%.

I know this system will do better than that - especially when I commonly see banter about 50+ FPS on systems similar to mine. (and the person who posted that screenshot with 100+ frames - I don't know what kind of crack that system is smoking!)

What would be the next logical steps to take before I start blowing money on add-on scenery, AI aircraft programs and other things that like to eat performance but are "must haves"?

Thanks again to everyone who replies to these!

Have a safe flight,
~Sam