Flight Simulator New Build

[dvpro]

Hi all,

 

So tis that time of year to maybe - possibly take advantage of a few deals on components. So far I found a no name monitor for 50 bucks less than "normal". However it's been a few years since my last build and I'm ready to format and hand down to the kids while daddy builds a new system.

 

Here's all I do on the computer.....Check email - internet. I use Photo Shop CS3 as well as the entire CS3 suite. I don't really do that much video editing anymore, as You Tube is filled with quality editors...NOT.

I also play M$ Flight Sinulator X (a.k.a. FSX) I run a few very advanced airplanes that tent to be processor hogs, but the entire FSX platform is a total fat a$$ hog. Scenery objects such as stormy / foggy clouds are murder on a system.

 

What I do not do in the computer is play all these Warcraft games....and Call of duty...and anything along those lines. I don't consider myself a "gamer" other than for FSX.

 

I have 2 17" monitors now, but they will be going so I will be getting new displays. HD is not a big concern.

 

Concerns...the limitations of Win XP and the new computer. I don't want to be limited by the OS. Vista is an option but is a real pain in the FSX world. However if I can get better performance W/ Vista....so be it. Displays will be 22" or less and no more than 2 displays. You don't have to bore me with dvd drives as I have that covered.

 

Here's what I am interested in knowing about...or what I am really asking is about performance and compatibility.

 

Topics:

Processor

Mobo

Hd's (sata?) Brand and RPM

Ram

Power supply

Case

fan / cooling. Comp will be installed in bedroom

And of course -- Video card.

Monitors, if you feel like commenting on them!

 

Please know, I greatly appreciate your time. It's been about 4 years since I was really into building new systems and I am starting to relearn things. Thanks -

[Timmy94]

If you do any video editing and or photoshop, a quad core is best as they are better for multitasking on those programs

[DLS2008]

Well, one key thing that's missing is your budget. Let us know your budget so we can give you parts in your price range.

[robAP]

Honestly, i'm a X-plane fan but this is not a place to discuss whats a better flt. sim as both use similar and also different aspects of the PC. The flight sims are now using the multi-core support. example, X-plane is using the second core to pre-load maps onto to reduce the system lag, so theres no agonizing momentary pause while it gets the next map quadrant loaded right in the middle of a specific flight test or something. As far as performance of a flight-sim PC build, i had to go look and search to find just what parts of the PC the software is using and how much of it. i found this quote over at gamasutra.com

 

"To enhance the visual quality of the simulation, a number of threading techniques were used. The first thread manages the game rendering and processes the artificial intelligence and physics algorithms. On a system platform with more than one core, multiple terrain tessellation simultaneously executes on the second, third, and fourth cores. Digital elevation model loader and texture composition tasks are encompassed in this processing as well."

 

so a quad core will have more benefits in the game than even a dual core. it is also using the cores to improve the VISUAL aspect of the game. MSFS worked with Intel SPECIFICALLY for this purpose alone, so the game itself is really tuned to use a core 2 processor, and the quad was mentioned specifically. heres a picture i found showing single core rendering the left, vs. multi core processing on the right:

much sharper eh?

now all of what i found seems to center on the processor rather than the video card. i think they're utilizing the processor as much as possible instead of loading up the graphics cards as much as possible like alot of the FPS games. However going over to Tom's Hardware is a valuable thing to do as they ues FSx to test cards. Just to paraphrase Tom's, they see Nvidia cards work better than ATI cards for FSx. It's just how it's utilized. If AA is utilized, it stats taking graphics work off of the processor and loading it on to the cards, and tom says that they see more frame-rates as a result, however when at 1920, the 8800 series cards seem to have a problem. example of expected speeds? the 8800gts 512 pops out 35fps at 1680x1050 game AA and game AF. so a pair of those in SLI should work out nicely. maybe 50fps? apparently not as tom's test did that and it made LESS FPS!!...30. so i dunno how but it did. but with the same settings, a single GTX280 made 31, and an HD4870 could only manage 25. so FSx is set up a little different to process its graphics.

 

so i guess a nice quad-core and single 8800 gts should work well for you.

are you looking to do this on a budget or do you want power? I would hazard to think that if you want absolutely eye popping details, and given that FSx uses a TON of CPU power, that the i7 would make seriously good visuals. but your budget would triple to do that.

 

so the parts. we really need to know a budget here and if you ware going to run vista. ive seen a few reports of fsx running quite well on vista 64. the key to running things on vista properly is to have enough memory for it. if i were to run vista 64, you really need 8 gigs memory. thats how i feel about it. the friends that run that config report all great solid stability and everything runs fine. so if it were my parts i had to buy? To recommend i have to know the budget first and what OS you will run. but really sticking to a budget oriented system, I would probably buy the following for my personal FSx rig.

 

mobo: EVGA with 750i chipset. lets you go sLI if you want to in the future but works realyl well with the 8800gts card.

power supply: with the memory, a combo deal lets you have a good solid PSU. you dont want to skimp on cheap crap power supplies.. this one delivers a typical 82% efficiency too.

chip: Core 2 Quad Q6600 (overclocked on air)

CPU cooling: it all depends on if your overclocking it or not. im guessing not so id go with a cooler thats proven to be quiet. I think the ULTRA 120 with a quiet fan se ton low will be absolutely nice for a stock speed q6600.

memory: an 8 gig kit for vista 64. OCZ after mail in rebates its $90

video card: bfg tech 8800gts

Hard drives: they're relatively cheap now. How much storage do you want? Just get a Segate drive, Sata connection and 7200 rpm. $140 gets you 1.5 terrabytes anyway! so just get whatever space you need.

Monitor: I'm a BIG Samsung Fanboy. I use a 226bw widescreen and its amazing. it's no longer in production but theres even better monitors out there now replacing it. Get whatever you like. if you want single monitor and you have $400 to spend on one, get a 24" and don't look back. otherwise settle on a 22" for half the money. youll be happy either way.

Case: i really dont know. Get something with good airflow but not outlandish. last thing you need is a focal point to the bedroom that your wife hates....like putting that Chuck Norris Wine Decanter on the Mantle....."uh, no honey" so something thats nice and durable and rather quiet, expect to spend from $50-$100 (for a really nice one)

 

so the system i specced above...WITH VISTA 64-ULTIMATE would cost around $1300 WITH a 22" monitor, 1.5 TB drive, and case. after all the mail in rebates: $1120 but tell us what YOU can afford to spend and i know alot of us here would be happy to help find budget shortcuts. you could go AMD and save alot, but would miss out on the graphic processing power the FS program was written for. going with core i7 would add an easy $500 or more to the setup. i would avoid that.

Edited November 26, 2008 by robAP

[dvpro]

Honestly, i'm a X-plane fan but this is not a place to discuss whats a better flt. sim as both use similar and also different aspects of the PC. The flight sims are now using the multi-core support. example, X-plane is using the second core to pre-load maps onto to reduce the system lag, so theres no agonizing momentary pause while it gets the next map quadrant loaded right in the middle of a specific flight test or something. As far as performance of a flight-sim PC build, i had to go look and search to find just what parts of the PC the software is using and how much of it. i found this quote over at gamasutra.com

 

"To enhance the visual quality of the simulation, a number of threading techniques were used. The first thread manages the game rendering and processes the artificial intelligence and physics algorithms. On a system platform with more than one core, multiple terrain tessellation simultaneously executes on the second, third, and fourth cores. Digital elevation model loader and texture composition tasks are encompassed in this processing as well."

 

so a quad core will have more benefits in the game than even a dual core. it is also using the cores to improve the VISUAL aspect of the game. MSFS worked with Intel SPECIFICALLY for this purpose alone, so the game itself is really tuned to use a core 2 processor, and the quad was mentioned specifically. heres a picture i found showing single core rendering the left, vs. multi core processing on the right:

much sharper eh?

now all of what i found seems to center on the processor rather than the video card. i think they're utilizing the processor as much as possible instead of loading up the graphics cards as much as possible like alot of the FPS games. However going over to Tom's Hardware is a valuable thing to do as they ues FSx to test cards. Just to paraphrase Tom's, they see Nvidia cards work better than ATI cards for FSx. It's just how it's utilized. If AA is utilized, it stats taking graphics work off of the processor and loading it on to the cards, and tom says that they see more frame-rates as a result, however when at 1920, the 8800 series cards seem to have a problem. example of expected speeds? the 8800gts 512 pops out 35fps at 1680x1050 game AA and game AF. so a pair of those in SLI should work out nicely. maybe 50fps? apparently not as tom's test did that and it made LESS FPS!!...30. so i dunno how but it did. but with the same settings, a single GTX280 made 31, and an HD4870 could only manage 25. so FSx is set up a little different to process its graphics.

 

so i guess a nice quad-core and single 8800 gts should work well for you.

are you looking to do this on a budget or do you want power? I would hazard to think that if you want absolutely eye popping details, and given that FSx uses a TON of CPU power, that the i7 would make seriously good visuals. but your budget would triple to do that.

 

so the parts. we really need to know a budget here and if you ware going to run vista. ive seen a few reports of fsx running quite well on vista 64. the key to running things on vista properly is to have enough memory for it. if i were to run vista 64, you really need 8 gigs memory. thats how i feel about it. the friends that run that config report all great solid stability and everything runs fine. so if it were my parts i had to buy? To recommend i have to know the budget first and what OS you will run. but really sticking to a budget oriented system, I would probably buy the following for my personal FSx rig.

 

mobo: EVGA with 750i chipset. lets you go sLI if you want to in the future but works realyl well with the 8800gts card.

power supply: with the memory, a combo deal lets you have a good solid PSU. you dont want to skimp on cheap crap power supplies.. this one delivers a typical 82% efficiency too.

chip: Core 2 Quad Q6600 (overclocked on air)

CPU cooling: it all depends on if your overclocking it or not. im guessing not so id go with a cooler thats proven to be quiet. I think the ULTRA 120 with a quiet fan se ton low will be absolutely nice for a stock speed q6600.

memory: an 8 gig kit for vista 64. OCZ after mail in rebates its $90

video card: bfg tech 8800gts

Hard drives: they're relatively cheap now. How much storage do you want? Just get a Segate drive, Sata connection and 7200 rpm. $140 gets you 1.5 terrabytes anyway! so just get whatever space you need.

Monitor: I'm a BIG Samsung Fanboy. I use a 226bw widescreen and its amazing. it's no longer in production but theres even better monitors out there now replacing it. Get whatever you like. if you want single monitor and you have $400 to spend on one, get a 24" and don't look back. otherwise settle on a 22" for half the money. youll be happy either way.

Case: i really dont know. Get something with good airflow but not outlandish. last thing you need is a focal point to the bedroom that your wife hates....like putting that Chuck Norris Wine Decanter on the Mantle....."uh, no honey" so something thats nice and durable and rather quiet, expect to spend from $50-$100 (for a really nice one)

 

so the system i specced above...WITH VISTA 64-ULTIMATE would cost around $1300 WITH a 22" monitor, 1.5 TB drive, and case. after all the mail in rebates: $1120 but tell us what YOU can afford to spend and i know alot of us here would be happy to help find budget shortcuts. you could go AMD and save alot, but would miss out on the graphic processing power the FS program was written for. going with core i7 would add an easy $500 or more to the setup. i would avoid that.

 

 

 

WOW...Thanks for the replies!!

 

Ok, so let me give an idea of what I am after....STABILITY is key for me. It takes me almost 30 minutes to setup a long haul flight. Loading the FMS in a B767 or a 747 with a real world flight plan...including winds and Weather, not to mention passenger / cargo loading takes a while. Nothing pisses me off more, than on climb out it just freezes up. I know part is the install, but the other part is program instability. I only have 1 gig now, on a P4 3.0

 

I am aware that MSFS is very processor dependant, so I was looking into the i7 line...I just hate to spend so much on one aspect, for a part that will be half the price in 6-12 months...but I guess that's the way it goes and this will be the next processor that will be the "one" to get. As for the budget, I could go 2 grand easy....depending on monitors...maybe 2300 but that would have to be with tax (CA) - cables - shipping....everything. If that budges is not realistic, please let me know. I am not totally into the best of the best with respect to the eye candy. At 38 thousand feet, I really don't care what the terrain mesh quality is. However on the ground I like to have well populated airports. Because I fly the big haulers, I mainly am going to major airports, There is alot of scenery their and I would want to add a few custom built sceneries for the places I frequent (KLAX-KBOS- FACT-NZAA-YSSY-). Also the other aspect is the planes. This is where things get tricky, becasue one plane may run better in XP, another may be stable in Vista..etc..etc...In either event, the developers know people are using vista for them so they are making SP's for any issues...but they are a pain in the arse if they decide to not agree with the system. That is something I will have to deal with when it happends.

8 gigs....damn, that's alot. One thing I have learned over the years is to not buy cheap ram. I am a fan of Corsair and Crucial (or are they the same??) I once used a few sticks of Kingston......God, what crap.

 

What's the deal with the PC speeds these days? Is FSB even talked about, and what limitations would the different OS play?

 

Thanks again!!

[robAP]

im typing this from a hotel room at KMSY, getting ready to go to work and fly a real emb145 on a msy-cvg-gsp-cvg-buf route for the day.

 

so, 2k to 2.3k budget? (on a side note, something to think about is...well that's pretty much half of a private pilot license.......and they do 20-30 year loans on airplanes..like a mortgage. but thats besides the points)

OK we have a budget. and you just have to live with the developers advances as they're probably going to be focused on vista for the future. 8 gigs isnt too much. and if were talking about the i7, you really would be just fine with the 3-channel 6gig kit. thats like $200+, the i7 motherboard is just under $300, the chip is $300, after that its all normal parts your used to. so add $450 or so to the price above and that will get you into a solid i7. so thats $1650. throw in the big monitor, $1850. mabye throw in a second vid card and another 24" monitor....$2400. or gowith 3 22" monitors....$2200.........thats alot of monitor real estate.

 

somethign that has me in a quandary is, when is MS going to start utilizing the absolute raw horsepower the high end video cards are capable of instead of loading it all up on the chip. if they worked it out for both to be used they could get ALOT of nice frames out of it.

 

Friday, Tiger Direct is selling a limited batch of i7's for $150.....

Edited November 26, 2008 by robAP

[dvpro]

Ahhh...Commuter man, I applaud your patience. I do have my pilots license as well as my instrument rating. When I was getting ready for multi's and than my CFI, the GF got pregnant. COuldn't afford my persuit to be a bus driver. So now it's arm chair flying and everynow and than I get some time farting around so my BFR isn't too brutal. Anyhow, I applaud you boys for going after the majors.....tough business these days.

 

OK, so I think I understand what you are saying, but what is a 3 channel kit? And which MOBO's that are out for the i7 are solid products? Do I dare mention overclocking with the i7? I noticed there are 3 i7 processors, is the price really justified versus the performance?

 

Thanks Rob!!

 

"KBUF 261954Z 25015KT 3/4SM R23/4000V5500FT -SN BR BKN007 BKN010 OVC015 01/M01 A2980"

Something tells me you ain't going to Buffalo

 

 

im typing this from a hotel room at KMSY, getting ready to go to work and fly a real emb145 on a msy-cvg-gsp-cvg-buf route for the day.

 

so, 2k to 2.3k budget? (on a side note, something to think about is...well that's pretty much half of a private pilot license.......and they do 20-30 year loans on airplanes..like a mortgage. but thats besides the points)

OK we have a budget. and you just have to live with the developers advances as they're probably going to be focused on vista for the future. 8 gigs isnt too much. and if were talking about the i7, you really would be just fine with the 3-channel 6gig kit. thats like $200+, the i7 motherboard is just under $300, the chip is $300, after that its all normal parts your used to. so add $450 or so to the price above and that will get you into a solid i7. so thats $1650. throw in the big monitor, $1850. mabye throw in a second vid card and another 24" monitor....$2400. or gowith 3 22" monitors....$2200.........thats alot of monitor real estate.

 

somethign that has me in a quandary is, when is MS going to start utilizing the absolute raw horsepower the high end video cards are capable of instead of loading it all up on the chip. if they worked it out for both to be used they could get ALOT of nice frames out of it.

 

Friday, Tiger Direct is selling a limited batch of i7's for $150.....

[dvpro]

Ok, so being home sick with a cold has yeilded some good research!

 

6 gigs of: "CORSAIR XMS3 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Triple Channel Kit Desktop Memory" allows me 3 more spots for another 6 gigs, should I even need / want it.

 

THe processor: "Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 8MB L3 Cache LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor". I am tenitivly opting for the lower of the three. A) I need the cash for other aspects of the build and B) I wasn't sold on almost double the price for a slightly faster processor....Am I wrong in this thinking?

 

Mobo....I have always built systems with Asus boards. They have the P6t for this socket, there is another that I was looking at....."MSI X58 Eclipse SLI LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard". I have no knowledge of this board, but others seem to be pleaed with it. Is this like a boxers vs. briefs sorta thing? You all know what I plan on doing with this system, which mobo do you all recommend?

 

A few other things I am a little unclear on:

OS......THer is Vista SP1...Vista 64...XP 64....I don't know about the differences. I am not a network admin, this will not be a server of any kind, just a simple PC. Which OS is best suited for me...standard Vista?

 

Heat sink and thermal compound. As I understand this processor runs a bit hot. Not interested in liquid cooling - fans, I don't mind spending the money on. I hate loud fans.

 

Case, I have a Lian Li full ATX case that is perfectly fine. I think I will gut it and transfer everything into a cheepie for the kids to use, so that saves me some cash.

 

Power supply....no where can I see what I need, As I understand it now - processor and video card are my main power hogs...maybe a sound card. is 800w enough? Or do I need +1000watts?

 

Video card...I did some research on flight sim, and they basically said they chose to go more processor dependent because of the dynamic rendering required. It was a compromise to go more CPU or vid card dependant, M$ chose processor. What is a good quality card for my purposes?

 

Thoughts?

 

Thanks

 

(side note: KBUF 262154Z 26018G25KT 9SM -SN FEW015 SCT025 OVC044 02/M02 A2983) Kick that rudder!!

[robAP]

not much keeps me out of the air trust me. it gets busy at times but ive done 40kt x-winds and +/- 25 kt speed changes on final. gets busy...elbows all over the place sometimes.

 

video. tom's hardware rates video cards quarterly. among the tests, they used MSFSx to test it. the nvidia 8800gts hit the most frames. I would go with that one for a dedicated FS build. Asus p6t is probably a good move. they've always done well with boards and reliability. Power supply. you dont need 1,000 watts unless your running 2 or 3 of the highest end video cards.at the same time..(wich by the way, happened to rate less frames than the 8800gts card in tom's tests). single card, i7, 6gigs, andd your drives you shouldn't need much more than 700 watts. if your overclocking that chip, 800 might be a way to go.

software. XP32 is normal. you see what it does. XP64 is really NOT supported anymore. Vista 32 and 64...i personally want to go 64 soon. I hope some other people weigh in on this and help out as i only use vista 32 on my notebook and i havent had any probs. I would assume the FSx guys will have vista 64 fully supported.

 

heatsink. reduce the noise by not only getting a very nice one for that socket, but using silver paste. "arctic silver 5" is what holds most of the OCC peoples rigs together here. Personally I'm on water and it's turned me almost silent. the i7 socket is a bit new at this point so the sink manufacturers are still catching up with their products. theres really not too many to pick from, but it wont be long. You can always pick one up later when the selection is better and retrofit it. if you stick with a core 2 quad, theres all kinds of good ones. get a sink/fan with a 120mm fan on it. its generally much quieter and better. the i7 core is the same as the other models just clocked higher. honestly you shoudl be fine with the 920 and if you wish to overclock later on, many of us here can help. a few already have the i7 setup and are starting to OC it, so youll find what you want.

 

i have to go. work calls. PM me if you like about questions.

[alexvision]

vista home premium 64 bit, so your not wasting 3gb of your ram

[maj0rgamer]

yes...if you go with a 32-bit operating system it can only use about 3.25 gigs of ram.

 

xp is most likely going to start dieing out and eventually have little to no support at all in the coming years.

 

vista 64-bit is really the only way to go on a new build right now...it's got excellent support and is nice, supports as much ram as you could probably imagine throwing at it and it's pretty. Home premium is probably the way you wanna go unless you can find ultimate around the same price (there are some nice prices on ebay). Ultimate comes with both a 64 and 32 bit disc and has a few extras (things you will probably never use), but i think that once you get into the 64-bit world you will most likely never wanna turn back...the ram situation is very nice for future upgrades, plus right now 3gb is pushing it.

 

you might wanna do some research on the various options regarding oem, academic, upgrade and retail versions of the software however. I personally would only opt for a retail version since it's the most friendly and unlimited version, but others around here disagree so i won't go into it too much.

Edited November 27, 2008 by Maj0r Gamer

[dvpro]

yes...if you go with a 32-bit operating system it can only use about 3.25 gigs of ram.

 

xp is most likely going to start dieing out and eventually have little to no support at all in the coming years.

 

vista 64-bit is really the only way to go on a new build right now...it's got excellent support and is nice, supports as much ram as you could probably imagine throwing at it and it's pretty. Home premium is probably the way you wanna go unless you can find ultimate around the same price (there are some nice prices on ebay). Ultimate comes with both a 64 and 32 bit disc and has a few extras (things you will probably never use), but i think that once you get into the 64-bit world you will most likely never wanna turn back...the ram situation is very nice for future upgrades, plus right now 3gb is pushing it.

 

you might wanna do some research on the various options regarding oem, academic, upgrade and retail versions of the software however. I personally would only opt for a retail version since it's the most friendly and unlimited version, but others around here disagree so i won't go into it too much.

 

 

I will never buy an upgrade version.....What a pain in the butt to format and start over should I pick up a nasty virus or whatever.

 

THis is exactly what I was wanting to know about the OS. so any version of XP is limited to 3.15 gigs? And any version of Vista is as much as I buy? Why would I want Vista 32, versus 64?

THanks