jezzc100 Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 Hi there, I am looking to upgrade my machine in order to hopefully run FSX better, and wondered whether anyone could kindly give me opinions regarding the following machine I have seen at a good price in my local store: - AMD X4 860K High Spec Blue LED, Home, Family, Multimedia Desktop Gaming Computer Powerful AMD Quad Core 3.7GHz CPU NVIDIA GTX 750Ti 2GB DDR5 Graphics Card 1TB Hard Drive 8GB DDR3 Memory HDMI 1080p USB 3.0, WiFi, Blue LED CiT Vantage Gaming Case I realise that it is not particularly high end, given where technology has progressed to, but wondered whether it has enough "power under the bonnet" to run FSX at decent settings, with some of the latest add-ons, e.g. PMDG 777, 737NGX, Aerosoft Airbus etc. and maybe some scenery for UK2000 and maybe Ultimate Terrain? Many thanks in advance for any opinions. :) J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSkorna Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 Hi, Not with those add-ons. You need an Intel CPU and Nvidia GPU. http://www.air-source.us/images/sigs/000219_195_jimskorna.png Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezzc100 Posted May 1, 2016 Author Share Posted May 1, 2016 Oh really, what is wrong with AMD - quad cores sounded good to me!? :rolleyes: Are Intel chips generally better performance? Many thanks for your reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alaskancrab Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 Oh really, what is wrong with AMD - quad cores sounded good to me!? :rolleyes: Are Intel chips generally better performance? Many thanks for your reply. The i5, and i7s contain an extra layer of cache. And i5 should do you well for gaming purposes, where as the i7 has extra capabilities more suited for workstation/professionals. The i3s are generally comparable to the AMDs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSkorna Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 Most if not all chips are multicore these days, and FSX uses the extra cores very little. Performance is better with Intel and you need to be around 4.0 GHz. http://www.air-source.us/images/sigs/000219_195_jimskorna.png Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezzc100 Posted May 1, 2016 Author Share Posted May 1, 2016 Ahhh, perfect thanks for the pointer... ;) I will look at some i5 machines then. Also, what about solid state harddrives, do they make much of a different to performance / frame rates in the sim, or do they simply expedite program loading times etc.? Cheers, J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alaskancrab Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 Ahhh, perfect thanks for the pointer... ;) I will look at some i5 machines then. Also, what about solid state harddrives, do they make much of a different to performance / frame rates in the sim, or do they simply expedite program loading times etc.? Cheers, J The latter, storage doesn't really have an effect on performance, even memory storage doesn't need to be all that fast, anything above 1600mhz is a waste. But in general I can't live without SSDs anymore. I have them on all my machines except the Mac Mini... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel.T Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 I agree with Alaskancrab for Intel + NVidia. I did re-install FSX on his dedicated SSD, last christmas and notice a big increase in loading of "fine" add-on textures(ex:Orbx). And, if you intend to go online and/or use your PC as a server, get a system with a good modem with ethernet connection. A lot more stable than WiFi for FSX. i7-4790K @4400 on Gigabyte Z97X (16gb), GeForce GTX 970 OC, Corsair Spec case Win7 Ult(64) on Samsung850 SSD(256), FSX+Accell on Samsung850 SSD(256), Track IR5 Saitek yoke/rudder radio/multi/switch panels, Logitech G13, GMap on Samsung tab Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.