CPU to run FSX maxed out.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
W

winningfreak

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
73
0
18,630
alright, I have about $220 to spend on a cpu to run FSX maxed out ( hopefully ) I need ideas.

Current setup:

Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3P LGA 775 Intel P45 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
GPU: 2x Sapphire ATI 4870 Crossfire (1GB)
RAM: 6GB G.Skill PC 8500 ram ( 1066 MHz )
CPU: Intel core 2 extreme x6800 (overclocked to 3.2GHz and its idle at 45c ) ( looking to upgrade )
case: NZXT Tempest
PSU: OCz StealthXtreme 600w



with this set up I would like to know where I need to go ( other than an I7 ) to get to running on highest or near highest settings ) I know I probably will also need a better CPU cooler for over clocking suggestions on that would also be great.

Thanks in advance :)
 
According to this here are your CPU options
http://www.gigabyte-usa.com/Support/Motherboard/CPUSupport_Model.aspx?ProductID=3139
If you have the 2.93GHz Core™ 2 Extreme X6800 Conroe XE (Dual Core) rather than the 2.93GHz Core™ 2 Extreme QX6800 Kentsfield (Quad Core) you could indeed benefit from a quad core CPU on your motherboard as FSX is one of the few titles optimized very well for multi core CPU's especially quad core ones.I did noticed that you chose just a slight overclock rather than a large one on your Core 2 extreme x6800 CPU so that's probably why it lasted so long.

The Core 2 Quad Q9550 would be a good choice for you as an incremental upgrade.At $220 ($10 off) at newegg free shipping http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115041

You will probably want to flash your BIOS too for new CPU support if you decide to get the 9550
http://www.gigabyte-usa.com/Support/Motherboard/BIOS_Model.aspx?ProductID=3139#anchor_os

If you had about twice the money for an upgrade the Core i5's are about to be released very soon and they should show even better improvement to run FSX at very high settings.
Of course you would need a new motherboard and DDR3 RAM for that.
It might be a consideration just to keep you current system and build a new Core i5 based one.
You could put your newer ATI graphics cards into a new system and use your older graphics card (you probably still have your older one) for your current Core 2 Duo system.


 
winningfreak,

There is no CPU / GPU configuration yet available that will run FSX "maxed out" at frame rates higher than a single digit. My previous FSX rig was a Q9650 overclocked to 4.2 Ghz with a single nVidia 8800 GTS 512.

Since FSX is the most CPU bound title that you can run, it does not benefit from any multiple GPU configurations, and in fact will actually run with slower frame rates on CF or SLI. 🙁 FSX runs best with a single main-stream nVidia card at stock settings. See Tom's Hardware : Performance Charts Microsoft Flight Simulator X SP2 - http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-X-SP2,783.html


+1 for the Q9550 at it's price point, however, with it's 8.5 multiplier, it's more FSB limited in terms of overclocking potential compared to the Q9650, which has a 9 multiplier. Regardless, you'll need to achieve the highest possible overclock in order to reach the highest frame rate, since FSX frame rate scales with CPU clock rate.

To keep an overclocked Quad Core cool, you'll need a Sunbeam Core Contact Freezer - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835207004

Comp :sol:
 
^ Thanks for the reply but the first review says this:

Cons: Will not fit on the gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P board. This is why I gave it one egg.


same board I have...
 
I built a new rig specifically for FSX. You really need to get the CPU speed up to 4GHz to see a noticeable improvement. My E8400 stock 3.0GHz at 1920x1200 and sliders about 80% ran about 26fps at low level in New York City (you always want to test at low level in dense scenery - anyone can have high frame rates at 35,000 ft. with no clouds). Moving up to 4.0GHz overclock upped that number on the same flight to 36fps. Then moving up to 4.6Ghz for a quick test on the same flight upped it to 40fps.

One thing that is not mentioned, and I learned this when I bought an HD 4870, is that Nvidia cards run a LOT better than ATI cards on FSX. I jumped an immediate 7-8fps just by moving from the 4870 to a GTX 275. Toms has a comparo here somewhere that shows how FSX reacts better to Nvidia. It's not the one that is linked right above this post - I'll repost it when I get home tonight - I've got the link on that machine. In fact, FSX is so CPU bound that you can run a GTS 250 just as well as a GTX 275 with no noticeable performance drop.

Finally, there is a very nice guide out there explaining how to set up and tune FSX for maximum performance. That also increased my frames by a considerable amount over me just messing around with sliders. Think of this (linked below) as your FSX Bible. :) And for anyone who cares, I have similar performance to a guy with an i7 overclocked to 4.0GHz. So even on quad cores, it's not that much better in performance from a raw FPS perspective. But if you run multiple windows and other tasks in the background like some hard core simmers I know that do, you'd be better off with i7/or Core 2 quad.

http://www.simforums.com/forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=29041
 
Check the following Tom's articles:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4870,1964-6.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-geforce-comparison,2007-18.html
 
I find that thoes are not very acurate, one I play on a lower resolution ( 1360 x 768 ) and my friend who has an I7 (overclocked ) with a 4870 (1GB ) can run FSX with about 33 FPS ( average ) on ultra high..
 
What resolution is your friend running? What AA level? Also, where is he testing his frame rates? As I stated, flying around Phoenix is one thing. Flying around New York City at low level for sight seeing is another. Also, FSX is very complicated (and frustrating) to set up to squeeze out every last bit of performance. There are a lot of settings to play around with, and each combination can make, or break, performance. Bottom line here is that my increased FPS going from the 4870 to the GTX 275 yielded about the same increases that CompuTronix linked that Toms found.

Finally, if you are playing at such a low resolution, you should have just bought FS2004.
 
I think the OP appeasrs to be somewhat less than pleased to learn that FSX does not offer the best FPS with ATI graphics solutions. From his perspective, perhaps FSX is simply just one of many "gaming" titles that he runs, and is understandably not interested in down-grading his graphics subsystem to accomodate FSX. If this is the case, then the best he can achieve, even with a highly overclocked Q9550, is to strike a balance between compromised FSX frame rates, while slightly improving the overall performance in his GPU bound gaming titles.
 
*If* your primary goal is to flight sim, then you will be better off with an Nvidia card. I could have gotten by with a GTS 250 to replace the 4870, but I also do shooters on the main machine, so felt the extra hundred was worth it. And it was, especially with aftermarket Rivatuner software for video card overclocking (does not help in FSX). Also, dual cards are useless in FSX and even degrade the performance. It's a shame, because I wanted to go 4870 Crossfire in the original build plan.

But anyway, it's about balancing your gaming system with what you spend the majority of your time playing. For me, 75% of gaming is FSX, so it was a no brainer.
 
Hi I'm actually looking for a specially build computer for using FSX in the best condition. I've already read lots of posts and I'm actually thinking of a i920 that I will overclock to 4Ghz.
I don't know if 6Go of RAM instead of 4 could be noticeable in fsx smoothness.
Your discussion about the graphic card is really usefull for me : I'm thinking of a GTX275 which is I think a good middle class Graphic Card (about 200€ in France) and seems to be sufficient for FSX.
My ultimate goal is to buy the Nvidia 3d vision glasses and a 120Hz LCD and enjoy 3d depth of field.

My question is mainly about 3d :
First of all do you think that my hypothetical configuration will run properly FSX with good graphics (not especially the Ultra one I don't want to have micro stutters)? about 30fps (no 3d enabled) between the new york skyscrapers?
Does anyone own 3d vision glasses or have already tried it in FSX? It seems that the graphic card need to create 2 separate images instead of one, so maybe it will only affect the GPU? Do you think that a GTX275 will be enough?
I've just installed the new nvidia drivers which includes the 3d vision drivers do you think one of you can try to run it in the 3d vision or if it's not possible in the Red/cyan 3d vision to show me what kind of framerate loss i can expect?

thanks a lot for your answer and already thanks for your previous one and the link that have been posted below.
 
could someone point me to the latest and greatest optimum processor, mb, video combo for running fsx and using a large screen lcd tv monitor....?
 


I appreciate your feedback. I was stationed at Moffett Field from 84-87, VP-31. Before the Navy I also had a private pilot license. I am always researching how to get the most from FSX. I have a 52" Samsung LCD and am looking for how best build a machine to get the most from that. I like the G-Max P-3. The T.I.T. Guages are pretty realistic and the ladder coming down the way it does puts a smile on my face. The only thing I have yet to be able to do is make the Bomb bay doors open. Maybe you know of a fix for that within FSX. My first tour was VP-44 and I am from Maine so I spend alot of time flying the northeast. I bought meagascenery for the northeast but I don't have a robust enough of a tower to use that well. If you could update your findings for present day in regards to Processor, MB, RAM, Video given the use of a Large Screen TV I would appreciate it. Thanks for your input.
 
HI everyone.. I am looking to build a box and connect it to my 57" dlp tv. I have one now and fsx it turned way down. I am looking to upgrade the moboard/graphics/ram/ps/. I don't need to have everything maxed out. I don't care about cars on the ground, i care about smoothness and air traffic. Scenery on the higher side would be cool too. I plan on figuring out how to get Google earth as my ground soon.

I was on new egg today...

Would this do the trick?

GIGABYTE GA-MA785GT-UD3H AM3 AMD 785G HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail

AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor Model

G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Dual Channel Kit Desktop

Western Digital Caviar Green WD5000AADS 500GB SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Hard Drive -Bare Drive

PNY VCGGTS2501XPB GeForce GTS 250 1GB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card - Retail

.....

what would you change and why?

Thanks!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom