Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I'm upgrading; opinions please

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 7:29:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance. I know that Tom's
Hardware has done some comparisons on cards and such, but I need rock solid
opinion if I can get it from you guys.
Hopefully, some of you will be running high end Nvidia SLI dual cards and
Mobo's and can fill me in.
What I have now is a High End Hypersonic Sonic Boom gaming computer to the
following specs. It's an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe 875P Pentium4 Mobo w/Serial
ATA Raid. The Sonic Boom is a Pentium system and is using a P4 3.0gig
processor with an 800mhz FSB. I'm using 2X 512MB PC3200 DDR400 RAM. The GPU
is an EVGA Nvidia FX 5900 Ultra 256meg card.
Presently I have both the Intel cooler by Sanyo Denki, and Innerworks Active
Video Cooling. The OS is XP Home.
Now here's what I'm considering for the upgrade.
I'm going to keep the ATC-201 All Alluminum Tower Case with front and top
vents. I'll send this into Hypersonic where they will put in the following;
an Asus P5ND2-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI for Intel Mobo and a new 3.6 GIG Intel
PentiumR 4 Processor 560, 2X512 PC6400 Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 TwinX Pack
w/heat spreaders, they will bump up the power supply from my present 350W
Enermax to 550W Enermax PEG651P-VE ATX.
Now here's the kicker. Please....you hardware guys, take a long hard look at
what I'm doing with this because it's going to cost a lot of money :-) I
don't want to go the wrong way with it.
The new GPU or GPU's if I choose to buy the 2 instead of just 1, will be
Nvidia GeForce 6800 Ultra PCI-Express 256 cards. I may opt to get just 1 and
see how it affects the simulator. I can always add the second later.
I need your opinions on this. 1 or 2? They cost a bundle, but if 2 will max
the simulator, I'll go that route.
Is anyone running a 2 card SLI setup in FS9?
What I need to know, and REALLY know before I upgrade from what I have, is
whether or not this upgrade will actually increase the overall performance
and graphic capabilities in the sim, or whether I'm fairly maxed out as I am
and spending all this money won't increase things all that much.
What I have now is acceptable really. I am limited at 25 FPS with sliders
fairly to the right but not completely maxed out. I'm running AA at 4 and AF
at 4 on the card settings and not in the sim.
Do me a favor and take your time answering this. It's an important upgrade
and I don't want to screw it up so I'm asking the people whose opinions I
value the most.......you people!
Dudley

More about : upgrading opinions

June 5, 2005 11:01:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

> I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
> things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance. I know that
> Tom's Hardware has done some comparisons on cards and such, but I need
> rock solid opinion if I can get it from you guys.
> Hopefully, some of you will be running high end Nvidia SLI dual cards and
> Mobo's and can fill me in.
> What I have now is a High End Hypersonic Sonic Boom gaming computer to the
> following specs. It's an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe 875P Pentium4 Mobo w/Serial
> ATA Raid. The Sonic Boom is a Pentium system and is using a P4 3.0gig
> processor with an 800mhz FSB. I'm using 2X 512MB PC3200 DDR400 RAM. The
> GPU is an EVGA Nvidia FX 5900 Ultra 256meg card.
> Presently I have both the Intel cooler by Sanyo Denki, and Innerworks
> Active Video Cooling. The OS is XP Home.
> Now here's what I'm considering for the upgrade.
> I'm going to keep the ATC-201 All Alluminum Tower Case with front and top
> vents. I'll send this into Hypersonic where they will put in the
> following;
> an Asus P5ND2-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI for Intel Mobo and a new 3.6 GIG
> Intel PentiumR 4 Processor 560, 2X512 PC6400 Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 TwinX
> Pack w/heat spreaders, they will bump up the power supply from my present
> 350W Enermax to 550W Enermax PEG651P-VE ATX.
> Now here's the kicker. Please....you hardware guys, take a long hard look
> at what I'm doing with this because it's going to cost a lot of money :-)
> I don't want to go the wrong way with it.
> The new GPU or GPU's if I choose to buy the 2 instead of just 1, will be
> Nvidia GeForce 6800 Ultra PCI-Express 256 cards. I may opt to get just 1
> and see how it affects the simulator. I can always add the second later.
> I need your opinions on this. 1 or 2? They cost a bundle, but if 2 will
> max the simulator, I'll go that route.
> Is anyone running a 2 card SLI setup in FS9?
> What I need to know, and REALLY know before I upgrade from what I have, is
> whether or not this upgrade will actually increase the overall performance
> and graphic capabilities in the sim, or whether I'm fairly maxed out as I
> am and spending all this money won't increase things all that much.
> What I have now is acceptable really. I am limited at 25 FPS with sliders
> fairly to the right but not completely maxed out. I'm running AA at 4 and
> AF at 4 on the card settings and not in the sim.
> Do me a favor and take your time answering this. It's an important upgrade
> and I don't want to screw it up so I'm asking the people whose opinions I
> value the most.......you people!
> Dudley

From what I remember when SLI was tested with FS9, there were no performance
benefits, might have even performed worse? If you have the cash to spare I'd
still go for an SLI capable board with one graphic card for now, the next
version of FS9 might support SLI?

As for CPU, I'd be inclined to go for AMD 64. 64 bit computing is the way
ahead. I'm also thinking of upgrading in the near future and will be looking
at an A64 4000+ or possibly an FX55 if the forthcoming FX57 makes the older
CPU have a worthwhile price drop.

Graphic card wise I'm looking at an Nvidea GE Force 6800 Ultra with 256mb,
the newer 512mb cards are way to expensive and give hardly any performance
gain, the motherboard would be the excellent Asus A8N-SLi Deluxe nForce4.
The option would be to add a second 6800 at a later date once drivers mature
and if FS10 supports it.
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 3:15:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote:

> ... but I need rock solid opinion if I can get it from you guys.

Can't help it - but that statement sounds like an oxymoron ;-)

Since, if you get 10 replies from 'these guys', you'll get 12
different opinions. Nothing rock solid about that ;-))))))

-=tom=-
Related resources
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 3:19:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Thanks Colin. This is food for thought.
Dudley

"Colin" <Colin@NONEOFTHATSPAMSTUFFkatana1000.plus.com> wrote in message
news:804fc$42a29527$545c31d3$22830@nf5.news-service.com...
>
>> I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
>> things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance. I know that
>> Tom's Hardware has done some comparisons on cards and such, but I need
>> rock solid opinion if I can get it from you guys.
>> Hopefully, some of you will be running high end Nvidia SLI dual cards and
>> Mobo's and can fill me in.
>> What I have now is a High End Hypersonic Sonic Boom gaming computer to
>> the following specs. It's an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe 875P Pentium4 Mobo
>> w/Serial ATA Raid. The Sonic Boom is a Pentium system and is using a P4
>> 3.0gig processor with an 800mhz FSB. I'm using 2X 512MB PC3200 DDR400
>> RAM. The GPU is an EVGA Nvidia FX 5900 Ultra 256meg card.
>> Presently I have both the Intel cooler by Sanyo Denki, and Innerworks
>> Active Video Cooling. The OS is XP Home.
>> Now here's what I'm considering for the upgrade.
>> I'm going to keep the ATC-201 All Alluminum Tower Case with front and top
>> vents. I'll send this into Hypersonic where they will put in the
>> following;
>> an Asus P5ND2-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI for Intel Mobo and a new 3.6 GIG
>> Intel PentiumR 4 Processor 560, 2X512 PC6400 Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 TwinX
>> Pack w/heat spreaders, they will bump up the power supply from my present
>> 350W Enermax to 550W Enermax PEG651P-VE ATX.
>> Now here's the kicker. Please....you hardware guys, take a long hard look
>> at what I'm doing with this because it's going to cost a lot of money :-)
>> I don't want to go the wrong way with it.
>> The new GPU or GPU's if I choose to buy the 2 instead of just 1, will be
>> Nvidia GeForce 6800 Ultra PCI-Express 256 cards. I may opt to get just 1
>> and see how it affects the simulator. I can always add the second later.
>> I need your opinions on this. 1 or 2? They cost a bundle, but if 2 will
>> max the simulator, I'll go that route.
>> Is anyone running a 2 card SLI setup in FS9?
>> What I need to know, and REALLY know before I upgrade from what I have,
>> is whether or not this upgrade will actually increase the overall
>> performance and graphic capabilities in the sim, or whether I'm fairly
>> maxed out as I am and spending all this money won't increase things all
>> that much.
>> What I have now is acceptable really. I am limited at 25 FPS with sliders
>> fairly to the right but not completely maxed out. I'm running AA at 4 and
>> AF at 4 on the card settings and not in the sim.
>> Do me a favor and take your time answering this. It's an important
>> upgrade and I don't want to screw it up so I'm asking the people whose
>> opinions I value the most.......you people!
>> Dudley
>
> From what I remember when SLI was tested with FS9, there were no
> performance benefits, might have even performed worse? If you have the
> cash to spare I'd still go for an SLI capable board with one graphic card
> for now, the next version of FS9 might support SLI?
>
> As for CPU, I'd be inclined to go for AMD 64. 64 bit computing is the way
> ahead. I'm also thinking of upgrading in the near future and will be
> looking at an A64 4000+ or possibly an FX55 if the forthcoming FX57 makes
> the older CPU have a worthwhile price drop.
>
> Graphic card wise I'm looking at an Nvidea GE Force 6800 Ultra with 256mb,
> the newer 512mb cards are way to expensive and give hardly any performance
> gain, the motherboard would be the excellent Asus A8N-SLi Deluxe nForce4.
> The option would be to add a second 6800 at a later date once drivers
> mature and if FS10 supports it.
>
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 3:28:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote:

>I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system,

Dudley,

Since you're planning on spending a lot of money, wouldn't it be wiser
to look ahead and get a 64 bit processor?? Either a current AMD 64 or
wait for the upcoming Intel 64 bit CPU if youprefer Intel CPUs.
Rumor has it that the next generation of FS might be 64 bit capable.

I'm close to upgrading as well and I'm leaning toward the AMD 64 (but
I've been an AMD fan from way back!).

Just my nickels worth!

-=tom=-
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 4:41:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 03:29:36 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
<dhenriques@noware .net> wrote:

>I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
>things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance. I know that Tom's
>Hardware has done some comparisons on cards and such, but I need rock solid
>opinion if I can get it from you guys.

Dudley,

Already answered in the MS group, so I will copy my answer here (next
time please cross-post <G>)


I do not have a SLI setup for test so can't help much as I do not have
an opinion of those. I generally tend to shy away from the newer
technology for several months until all drivers issues are taken care
of, why not simply get one of the PCIex card now then add a second one
later and run them in SLI mode once you get more feedback?

With this P4 you will have the much needed CPU power for FS9, not sure
if the PCIex card will give or not better performance than an AGP
counterpart for FS today, it is not hardware I have been playing with
(yet) to make a comparison, did you check anandtech.com reviews as
well?

Also keep in mind we *should* see a new version of FS next year, why
do you need to upgrade now? Then when FS10 becomes available your
expensive upgrade of this year will be obsolete already.

For a quick comparison: with a P4 3Ghz, 1Gb of RAM and a 6800GT I have
my perfect FS server holding around 60fps in most conditions, I locked
it to 30fps and never get below in heavy situations with traffic and
multiple layers of clouds with my networked client computers not
loosing one network frame either.

This is to show you that FS9 today can work great with current
hardware in a complex setup, I do not feel the need to upgrade
anything for the current version of the simulator and the use I make
of it. It of course depends on how you use FS and what performance you
want out of it.

Why not wait and simply replace that so-so FX video card by a good
6800 AGP 256Mb? If you want to get the P4 and new motherboard now then
of course get one new PCIex video card, I just remain skeptical of the
card performance gain itself over its AGP equivalent but then the
faster CPU would gobble up any increase (or possible decrease)

Not much help I am afraid ;-) I am sorry I don't have any first-hand
experience and comparison with this hardware...

===
Best Regards
Katy
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 6:28:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Keep the DDR memory, get an Nforce4 mobo, A64 4000+, video could be an
Ati X850XT (PCI Express).

That will do a great job for FS I am sure, at least it's what I am
planning to get :) 

Paul.
June 5, 2005 9:56:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

If I was in your shoes I'd wait until FS 10 came out and then upgrade. The
main reason I say to wait is because, by the time it does come out, prices
for the below recommendations will have fallen some and I believe that the
current version of flight sim does not fully take advantage of the hardware
currently available (64 bit and PCI-E especially)

That said if you were to upgrade now your BEST BETS for a flight sim
computer are:

Motherboard
nForce 4 is the best chipset out there right now and is in a good position
to stay that way for a good while. Socket 939 and PCI-E are essential if
you want to keep your upgrade options open for the future. Dual core AMD
processors will be socket 939 as well (and if the next flight sim is
multithreaded or you run other programs while flying then that would be an
option that you would need.) Personally I like DFI, Abit, MSI and Asus in
that order. Stay away from ECS and other cheap stuff. If you are looking
for performance, longevity, stability, or even customer support, you would
regret it.

CPU
- high end - Personally if I had the money to spend, I'd look at getting in
a San Diego core Athlon 64 if I was to upgrade right now. They have 1MB of
L2 cache and use the 90nm process but are a little on the expensive side,
but they all seem to overclock in the 2.8 to 2.9 GHz range. I think the
cheapest one is the 3700+ and that has a maximum multiplier of 11 so it runs
stock at 2.2Ghz and with some good quality ram you could easily overclock at
least to 2.8 with air cooling and probably more like 3.0 or higher with some
really good water cooling.

- mid end - If you wanted to save a little cash but still get great
performance, get a Venice core Athlon 64 with a 10x multiplier (3200+). The
L2 cache is only 512KB but it uses the 90nm process just like the San Diego
core. More cache is better obviously but 512MB is still pretty darn good.
Plus these things consistently overclock in the 2.8 and 2.9 range just like
the San Diego! So with a 10x multiplier you just need ram rated to run at
275Mhz to get an increase of 750Mhz with your memory running in synch (1:1)
with your cpu. Many of these people are achieving these speeds using stock
cooling and only a very small voltage increase. That is simply amazing.
With a nice heatsink that had a copper base, heatpipes, and a bunch of
aluminum fins (or with more expensive water cooling) you could pump the
voltage up to 1.6 even and really push it and get 3.0GHz!!!!!. That is like
getting a whole GHz for free.

Bottom line - if you are going with AMD, avoid the Newcastle and clawhammer
/ sledgehammer cores. Yes they are great and you can overclock them but the
fastest anyone seems to be able to get them is around 2.6 Ghz and that is
with a good size voltage increase and heat increase. Winchester's max out
around 2.6 to 2.7 but don't produce near as much heat or require as much
voltage to do so. And don't even bother with a 32 bit Barton or
Thoroughbred core. You could just as cheaply get a 32 bit 754 Sempron chip
and a cheap 754 board and still have the option to go 64 bit later. Future
proof your system (as much as you can).

Ram
Intel has DDR 2. So what. Most all DDR 2 modules have very high latencies,
not good if you like a fast computer. Personally I believe DDR 2 just came
around to force consumers to switch to yet another socket for both memory
and cpu's. (Though some people think that Athlon 64 939 sockets could
theoretically be used with DDR 2 and not require a new socket design with
more pins.) Most people think that AMD is sitting this one out and will
wait for DDR 3 before switching to a new memory module (and consequently cpu
socket). This is good news for people who like to save money and have a
system that will be upgradeable further into the future. Ram with Samsung
TCCD or TCC5 chips that was rated PC4400 or higher is the BEST ram to get if
you are getting any Athlon 64 but especially so with Winchester, Venice and
San Diego cores. G.Skill, PQI and certain Corsair modules use these chips.
I prefer G.Skill) If you have one of these cores and you are not using TCCD
and are using some cheap "value" ram, then you are shooting yourself in the
foot and limiting the maximum performance of your system.

Graphics
PCI-E will no doubt gradually become the standard so go ahead and get a
board with it. Ati Radeon's best value right now is the x800 XL series
($280 PCI-E). nVidia's best value is the 6800 GT ($295 for AGP, $350 for
PCI-E). Both have 16 pixel pipelines and are 256 bit. Most come with
around 256MB of GDDR3 ram. Both are pretty darn fast. If you wanted to go
SLI down the road (that is actually a question of whether the next version
of flight sim will support it or not) then go the nVidia route.

Hard Disk
One thing for sure, if you are going to buy a hard drive now, get a SATA
drive. (Actually I recommend buying drives in pairs just in case you ever
decide to try RAID 1 or 0. And even if you don't you've still got a ton of
space for all that mesh and satellite scenery!) Definitely no matter what,
make sure the RPM is at least 7200 and that the cache is at least 8MB.

DVD Burner
You can pick up a really nice +/-RW Dual Layer burner for less than $50 at
newegg. Enough said.

My system

AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Venice 512KB L2 Cache Socket 939 2.0 GHz
DFI Lanparty UT nF4 Ultra-D
G.Skill 1GB (2 x 512MB) DDR 550 275Mhz (PC 4400) Samsung TCCD
Radeon X800XL 256MB
2 x 160GB Maxtor PATA 133 IDE 7200RPM 8MB Cache Hard Disk Drive in Raid-0
Thermalright XP-90 Heatsink

I just got the Venice core so I'm still letting it burn in before I
overclock it. Same goes with the memory. I fully expect to get at least
2.75Ghz if not higher. The Thermalright XP-90 has a copper base and 4
heatpipes and a bunch of aluminum fins and is nickel plated and is designed
to provide some cooling to your ram as well. I keeps the cpu very cool. I
highly recommend it or its bigger brother the XP-120 which uses a 120mm fan.
(just make sure it will fit on your motherboard without blocking
something!!!) The Ultra-D is not an SLI board but it does have the nForce 4
Ultra chipset and still includes 2 PCI-E 16x graphics card slots. This is
the best news for people who want to run multiple monitors at very high
resolutions. There have been reports of some people buying the SLI
connector and changing some jumper settings on the board and enabling SLI,
but later versions of the board have reportedly changed to keep people from
doing that successfully. Still, running 3 widescreen 1900x1280 monitors
with two PCI-E 6800GT's or two X800XL's would kick Parhelia's ass out the
door and across the street. I picked the X800XL because it offers
performance on par with the 6800GT but is about $70 less and I will never go
PCI (I'd rather get another X800XL and two more monitors than to use two
cards to drive one monitor)

Stay with Intel or switch to AMD?????? If you are gaming, go for AMD. If
you are spending a lot of time encoding video, get a Mac if you have the
money and go Intel if you don't.

Last piece of advice - with the above recommendations you could order the
parts from newegg and build it yourself. Just follow the instructions and
read up on a few things and educate yourself!!! Learning how to build a
computer is half the fun. If you can learn to fly a plane then you can
learn to piece together a computer. And if you get stuck or need advice you
have the internet with hundreds of computer sites, hardware reviews,
overclocking forums and even online help from the parts vendors
themselves!!! Plus you end up saving yourself on average $500 to $1500
versus equivalent systems from Dell or Alienware or some other boutique
builder (and have you ever tried to upgrade a Dell?)

So anyway, that is my opinion, however long winded. I've built systems for
myself and friends and I've done a good bit of research to try to meet each
person's needs while saving them money and providing options for easy
upgrading. That is something you can't buy from Best Buy or Circuit City or
Dell.

Sincerely,
Roy
Anonymous
June 5, 2005 11:56:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Sorry KT. I thought by posting the question seperately to each group, I
might avoid snaring you into a double answer :-))
It's just that I wanted your opinion specifically so I posted it to the MS
group, and the people over here are REAL sharp and know me fairly well.
Dudley
"Katy Pluta" <katypluta@hotmail.invalid> wrote in message
news:fmh6a1tgokvsjli8d543qobcegbmiq05pe@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 03:29:36 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
> <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote:
>
>>I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
>>things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance. I know that
>>Tom's
>>Hardware has done some comparisons on cards and such, but I need rock
>>solid
>>opinion if I can get it from you guys.
>
> Dudley,
>
> Already answered in the MS group, so I will copy my answer here (next
> time please cross-post <G>)
>
>
> I do not have a SLI setup for test so can't help much as I do not have
> an opinion of those. I generally tend to shy away from the newer
> technology for several months until all drivers issues are taken care
> of, why not simply get one of the PCIex card now then add a second one
> later and run them in SLI mode once you get more feedback?
>
> With this P4 you will have the much needed CPU power for FS9, not sure
> if the PCIex card will give or not better performance than an AGP
> counterpart for FS today, it is not hardware I have been playing with
> (yet) to make a comparison, did you check anandtech.com reviews as
> well?
>
> Also keep in mind we *should* see a new version of FS next year, why
> do you need to upgrade now? Then when FS10 becomes available your
> expensive upgrade of this year will be obsolete already.
>
> For a quick comparison: with a P4 3Ghz, 1Gb of RAM and a 6800GT I have
> my perfect FS server holding around 60fps in most conditions, I locked
> it to 30fps and never get below in heavy situations with traffic and
> multiple layers of clouds with my networked client computers not
> loosing one network frame either.
>
> This is to show you that FS9 today can work great with current
> hardware in a complex setup, I do not feel the need to upgrade
> anything for the current version of the simulator and the use I make
> of it. It of course depends on how you use FS and what performance you
> want out of it.
>
> Why not wait and simply replace that so-so FX video card by a good
> 6800 AGP 256Mb? If you want to get the P4 and new motherboard now then
> of course get one new PCIex video card, I just remain skeptical of the
> card performance gain itself over its AGP equivalent but then the
> faster CPU would gobble up any increase (or possible decrease)
>
> Not much help I am afraid ;-) I am sorry I don't have any first-hand
> experience and comparison with this hardware...
>
> ===
> Best Regards
> Katy
June 6, 2005 3:25:53 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Dudley
This is just my opinion, but the setup you have now seems fairly
sierra hotel and frankly I couldn't see you getting anymore than a 5-10%
increase in sim graphics. You would definately be able to max all your
sliders to the right, but would this small increase in graphics be worth the
big bucks you will be spending?

This is not to talk you out of upgrading,but if it was me, I would forget
about FS2004 and be looking at the next sim (if it really exists lol) and
building my new system to suit. I don't know where you might get info about
whats coming up,possibly even write an email to Microsoft.They might tell
you some basic stuff that will point you along eg designed for 64 bit cpus
etc


Just food for thought....

Bryan


"Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
news:Akuoe.14032$M36.13758@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
> things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance. I know that
> Tom's Hardware has done some comparisons on cards and such, but I need
> rock solid opinion if I can get it from you guys.
> Hopefully, some of you will be running high end Nvidia SLI dual cards and
> Mobo's and can fill me in.
> What I have now is a High End Hypersonic Sonic Boom gaming computer to the
> following specs. It's an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe 875P Pentium4 Mobo w/Serial
> ATA Raid. The Sonic Boom is a Pentium system and is using a P4 3.0gig
> processor with an 800mhz FSB. I'm using 2X 512MB PC3200 DDR400 RAM. The
> GPU is an EVGA Nvidia FX 5900 Ultra 256meg card.
> Presently I have both the Intel cooler by Sanyo Denki, and Innerworks
> Active Video Cooling. The OS is XP Home.
> Now here's what I'm considering for the upgrade.
> I'm going to keep the ATC-201 All Alluminum Tower Case with front and top
> vents. I'll send this into Hypersonic where they will put in the
> following;
> an Asus P5ND2-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI for Intel Mobo and a new 3.6 GIG
> Intel PentiumR 4 Processor 560, 2X512 PC6400 Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 TwinX
> Pack w/heat spreaders, they will bump up the power supply from my present
> 350W Enermax to 550W Enermax PEG651P-VE ATX.
> Now here's the kicker. Please....you hardware guys, take a long hard look
> at what I'm doing with this because it's going to cost a lot of money :-)
> I don't want to go the wrong way with it.
> The new GPU or GPU's if I choose to buy the 2 instead of just 1, will be
> Nvidia GeForce 6800 Ultra PCI-Express 256 cards. I may opt to get just 1
> and see how it affects the simulator. I can always add the second later.
> I need your opinions on this. 1 or 2? They cost a bundle, but if 2 will
> max the simulator, I'll go that route.
> Is anyone running a 2 card SLI setup in FS9?
> What I need to know, and REALLY know before I upgrade from what I have, is
> whether or not this upgrade will actually increase the overall performance
> and graphic capabilities in the sim, or whether I'm fairly maxed out as I
> am and spending all this money won't increase things all that much.
> What I have now is acceptable really. I am limited at 25 FPS with sliders
> fairly to the right but not completely maxed out. I'm running AA at 4 and
> AF at 4 on the card settings and not in the sim.
> Do me a favor and take your time answering this. It's an important upgrade
> and I don't want to screw it up so I'm asking the people whose opinions I
> value the most.......you people!
> Dudley
>
June 6, 2005 3:47:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Doh!
I just read your other post. It would seem we are of like minds..........



"Bryan" <nospamforme@spamless.com> wrote in message
news:D 7uufu$30t3$1@otis.netspace.net.au...
> Dudley
> This is just my opinion, but the setup you have now seems
> fairly sierra hotel and frankly I couldn't see you getting anymore than a
> 5-10% increase in sim graphics. You would definately be able to max all
> your sliders to the right, but would this small increase in graphics be
> worth the big bucks you will be spending?
>
> This is not to talk you out of upgrading,but if it was me, I would forget
> about FS2004 and be looking at the next sim (if it really exists lol) and
> building my new system to suit. I don't know where you might get info
> about whats coming up,possibly even write an email to Microsoft.They might
> tell you some basic stuff that will point you along eg designed for 64 bit
> cpus etc
>
>
> Just food for thought....
>
> Bryan
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
> news:Akuoe.14032$M36.13758@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
>> things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance. I know that
>> Tom's Hardware has done some comparisons on cards and such, but I need
>> rock solid opinion if I can get it from you guys.
>> Hopefully, some of you will be running high end Nvidia SLI dual cards and
>> Mobo's and can fill me in.
>> What I have now is a High End Hypersonic Sonic Boom gaming computer to
>> the following specs. It's an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe 875P Pentium4 Mobo
>> w/Serial ATA Raid. The Sonic Boom is a Pentium system and is using a P4
>> 3.0gig processor with an 800mhz FSB. I'm using 2X 512MB PC3200 DDR400
>> RAM. The GPU is an EVGA Nvidia FX 5900 Ultra 256meg card.
>> Presently I have both the Intel cooler by Sanyo Denki, and Innerworks
>> Active Video Cooling. The OS is XP Home.
>> Now here's what I'm considering for the upgrade.
>> I'm going to keep the ATC-201 All Alluminum Tower Case with front and top
>> vents. I'll send this into Hypersonic where they will put in the
>> following;
>> an Asus P5ND2-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI for Intel Mobo and a new 3.6 GIG
>> Intel PentiumR 4 Processor 560, 2X512 PC6400 Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 TwinX
>> Pack w/heat spreaders, they will bump up the power supply from my present
>> 350W Enermax to 550W Enermax PEG651P-VE ATX.
>> Now here's the kicker. Please....you hardware guys, take a long hard look
>> at what I'm doing with this because it's going to cost a lot of money :-)
>> I don't want to go the wrong way with it.
>> The new GPU or GPU's if I choose to buy the 2 instead of just 1, will be
>> Nvidia GeForce 6800 Ultra PCI-Express 256 cards. I may opt to get just 1
>> and see how it affects the simulator. I can always add the second later.
>> I need your opinions on this. 1 or 2? They cost a bundle, but if 2 will
>> max the simulator, I'll go that route.
>> Is anyone running a 2 card SLI setup in FS9?
>> What I need to know, and REALLY know before I upgrade from what I have,
>> is whether or not this upgrade will actually increase the overall
>> performance and graphic capabilities in the sim, or whether I'm fairly
>> maxed out as I am and spending all this money won't increase things all
>> that much.
>> What I have now is acceptable really. I am limited at 25 FPS with sliders
>> fairly to the right but not completely maxed out. I'm running AA at 4 and
>> AF at 4 on the card settings and not in the sim.
>> Do me a favor and take your time answering this. It's an important
>> upgrade and I don't want to screw it up so I'm asking the people whose
>> opinions I value the most.......you people!
>> Dudley
>>
>
>
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 5:39:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Thanks for taking the time Roy. Appreciate it. I've printed this out for
reference as you wrote it. You're in agreement with most of the 'good' minds
out here.
After hearing from everybody, I think I'm going to back off the major
upgrade for now and simply put an AGP 6800 ultra 256 in here tomorrow on my
present system to replace the 5900FX 256 ultra. That might give me the shot
I need to get me into FS10. Then I'll go for the major Hypersonic Cyclone
system or build it myself.
Thanks to you and everybody else who took the time to deal with this.
Dudley
"Roy" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:ZxKoe.15642$QX1.1746@fe06.lga...
> If I was in your shoes I'd wait until FS 10 came out and then upgrade. The
> main reason I say to wait is because, by the time it does come out, prices
> for the below recommendations will have fallen some and I believe that the
> current version of flight sim does not fully take advantage of the
> hardware currently available (64 bit and PCI-E especially)
>
> That said if you were to upgrade now your BEST BETS for a flight sim
> computer are:
>
> Motherboard
> nForce 4 is the best chipset out there right now and is in a good position
> to stay that way for a good while. Socket 939 and PCI-E are essential if
> you want to keep your upgrade options open for the future. Dual core AMD
> processors will be socket 939 as well (and if the next flight sim is
> multithreaded or you run other programs while flying then that would be an
> option that you would need.) Personally I like DFI, Abit, MSI and Asus in
> that order. Stay away from ECS and other cheap stuff. If you are looking
> for performance, longevity, stability, or even customer support, you would
> regret it.
>
> CPU
> - high end - Personally if I had the money to spend, I'd look at getting
> in a San Diego core Athlon 64 if I was to upgrade right now. They have
> 1MB of L2 cache and use the 90nm process but are a little on the expensive
> side, but they all seem to overclock in the 2.8 to 2.9 GHz range. I think
> the cheapest one is the 3700+ and that has a maximum multiplier of 11 so
> it runs stock at 2.2Ghz and with some good quality ram you could easily
> overclock at least to 2.8 with air cooling and probably more like 3.0 or
> higher with some really good water cooling.
>
> - mid end - If you wanted to save a little cash but still get great
> performance, get a Venice core Athlon 64 with a 10x multiplier (3200+).
> The L2 cache is only 512KB but it uses the 90nm process just like the San
> Diego core. More cache is better obviously but 512MB is still pretty darn
> good. Plus these things consistently overclock in the 2.8 and 2.9 range
> just like the San Diego! So with a 10x multiplier you just need ram rated
> to run at 275Mhz to get an increase of 750Mhz with your memory running in
> synch (1:1) with your cpu. Many of these people are achieving these
> speeds using stock cooling and only a very small voltage increase. That
> is simply amazing. With a nice heatsink that had a copper base, heatpipes,
> and a bunch of aluminum fins (or with more expensive water cooling) you
> could pump the voltage up to 1.6 even and really push it and get
> 3.0GHz!!!!!. That is like getting a whole GHz for free.
>
> Bottom line - if you are going with AMD, avoid the Newcastle and
> clawhammer / sledgehammer cores. Yes they are great and you can overclock
> them but the fastest anyone seems to be able to get them is around 2.6 Ghz
> and that is with a good size voltage increase and heat increase.
> Winchester's max out around 2.6 to 2.7 but don't produce near as much heat
> or require as much voltage to do so. And don't even bother with a 32 bit
> Barton or Thoroughbred core. You could just as cheaply get a 32 bit 754
> Sempron chip and a cheap 754 board and still have the option to go 64 bit
> later. Future proof your system (as much as you can).
>
> Ram
> Intel has DDR 2. So what. Most all DDR 2 modules have very high
> latencies, not good if you like a fast computer. Personally I believe DDR
> 2 just came around to force consumers to switch to yet another socket for
> both memory and cpu's. (Though some people think that Athlon 64 939
> sockets could theoretically be used with DDR 2 and not require a new
> socket design with more pins.) Most people think that AMD is sitting this
> one out and will wait for DDR 3 before switching to a new memory module
> (and consequently cpu socket). This is good news for people who like to
> save money and have a system that will be upgradeable further into the
> future. Ram with Samsung TCCD or TCC5 chips that was rated PC4400 or
> higher is the BEST ram to get if you are getting any Athlon 64 but
> especially so with Winchester, Venice and San Diego cores. G.Skill, PQI
> and certain Corsair modules use these chips. I prefer G.Skill) If you
> have one of these cores and you are not using TCCD and are using some
> cheap "value" ram, then you are shooting yourself in the foot and limiting
> the maximum performance of your system.
>
> Graphics
> PCI-E will no doubt gradually become the standard so go ahead and get a
> board with it. Ati Radeon's best value right now is the x800 XL series
> ($280 PCI-E). nVidia's best value is the 6800 GT ($295 for AGP, $350 for
> PCI-E). Both have 16 pixel pipelines and are 256 bit. Most come with
> around 256MB of GDDR3 ram. Both are pretty darn fast. If you wanted to
> go SLI down the road (that is actually a question of whether the next
> version of flight sim will support it or not) then go the nVidia route.
>
> Hard Disk
> One thing for sure, if you are going to buy a hard drive now, get a SATA
> drive. (Actually I recommend buying drives in pairs just in case you ever
> decide to try RAID 1 or 0. And even if you don't you've still got a ton
> of space for all that mesh and satellite scenery!) Definitely no matter
> what, make sure the RPM is at least 7200 and that the cache is at least
> 8MB.
>
> DVD Burner
> You can pick up a really nice +/-RW Dual Layer burner for less than $50 at
> newegg. Enough said.
>
> My system
>
> AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Venice 512KB L2 Cache Socket 939 2.0 GHz
> DFI Lanparty UT nF4 Ultra-D
> G.Skill 1GB (2 x 512MB) DDR 550 275Mhz (PC 4400) Samsung TCCD
> Radeon X800XL 256MB
> 2 x 160GB Maxtor PATA 133 IDE 7200RPM 8MB Cache Hard Disk Drive in Raid-0
> Thermalright XP-90 Heatsink
>
> I just got the Venice core so I'm still letting it burn in before I
> overclock it. Same goes with the memory. I fully expect to get at least
> 2.75Ghz if not higher. The Thermalright XP-90 has a copper base and 4
> heatpipes and a bunch of aluminum fins and is nickel plated and is
> designed to provide some cooling to your ram as well. I keeps the cpu
> very cool. I highly recommend it or its bigger brother the XP-120 which
> uses a 120mm fan. (just make sure it will fit on your motherboard without
> blocking something!!!) The Ultra-D is not an SLI board but it does have
> the nForce 4 Ultra chipset and still includes 2 PCI-E 16x graphics card
> slots. This is the best news for people who want to run multiple monitors
> at very high resolutions. There have been reports of some people buying
> the SLI connector and changing some jumper settings on the board and
> enabling SLI, but later versions of the board have reportedly changed to
> keep people from doing that successfully. Still, running 3 widescreen
> 1900x1280 monitors with two PCI-E 6800GT's or two X800XL's would kick
> Parhelia's ass out the door and across the street. I picked the X800XL
> because it offers performance on par with the 6800GT but is about $70 less
> and I will never go PCI (I'd rather get another X800XL and two more
> monitors than to use two cards to drive one monitor)
>
> Stay with Intel or switch to AMD?????? If you are gaming, go for AMD. If
> you are spending a lot of time encoding video, get a Mac if you have the
> money and go Intel if you don't.
>
> Last piece of advice - with the above recommendations you could order the
> parts from newegg and build it yourself. Just follow the instructions and
> read up on a few things and educate yourself!!! Learning how to build a
> computer is half the fun. If you can learn to fly a plane then you can
> learn to piece together a computer. And if you get stuck or need advice
> you have the internet with hundreds of computer sites, hardware reviews,
> overclocking forums and even online help from the parts vendors
> themselves!!! Plus you end up saving yourself on average $500 to $1500
> versus equivalent systems from Dell or Alienware or some other boutique
> builder (and have you ever tried to upgrade a Dell?)
>
> So anyway, that is my opinion, however long winded. I've built systems
> for myself and friends and I've done a good bit of research to try to meet
> each person's needs while saving them money and providing options for easy
> upgrading. That is something you can't buy from Best Buy or Circuit City
> or Dell.
>
> Sincerely,
> Roy
>
June 6, 2005 5:39:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

> The GT I thought was a single Molex. Why the extra cord, and how the devil
> do I make the connection....and to what on the board with this extra cord?
Yup single Molex. The extra cord is just a splitter provided in case all of
the Molex connectors that are coming from your power supply are used up by
hard drives, fans, DVD burners and your occasional uv cold cathode light!

Roy
June 6, 2005 5:39:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

BTW I had never heard of hypersonic so I checked them out. I just spec'd
out a system from hypersonic that is very similar to mine that I built with
components from NewEgg and I saved over $1000 by building it myself. Just
something to keep in mind. Don't get me wrong, they look like very nice
systems, but if you are seriously going to go with them, compare component
prices on NewEgg and add it all up. I'd be willing to bet you'd save just
as much. Heck, I could build it for you, ship it to you and charge you the
prices for the components etc plus a $100 assembly and testing fee and still
save you several hundred dollars. You don't live near WV do you?? :) 


"Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
news:o PNoe.14440$M36.6306@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Then I'll go for the major Hypersonic Cyclone system or build it myself.
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:46:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

So I take it that when I open the box, there will be a nice extra connector
on the power supply inside the case that will take one end of the supplied
cable and the other end will attach somewhere on the card?
Sounds straight forward to me :-)
DH
"a" <a@a.com> wrote in message news:qrQoe.7118$K66.1678@fe02.lga...
>> The GT I thought was a single Molex. Why the extra cord, and how the
>> devil do I make the connection....and to what on the board with this
>> extra cord?
> Yup single Molex. The extra cord is just a splitter provided in case all
> of the Molex connectors that are coming from your power supply are used up
> by hard drives, fans, DVD burners and your occasional uv cold cathode
> light!
>
> Roy
>
June 6, 2005 8:46:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

You may or may not have to use the splitter. If you don't need it then
don't use it. (I have heard of some graphics cards including a power
connector with them that is a non standard type power connector (non
Molex).) Typical power supplies have two strands of four or so of your
standard four pin Molex connecters each that you can use to power hard
drives, optical drives, fans, graphics cards, case lights, etc.... I
recommend that one of those strands have nothing but hard drives on it and
the other of those strands have optical drives, fans and graphics cards on
it.


"Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
news:NyQoe.14556$M36.10533@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> So I take it that when I open the box, there will be a nice extra
> connector on the power supply inside the case that will take one end of
> the supplied cable and the other end will attach somewhere on the card?
> Sounds straight forward to me :-)
> DH
> "a" <a@a.com> wrote in message news:qrQoe.7118$K66.1678@fe02.lga...
>>> The GT I thought was a single Molex. Why the extra cord, and how the
>>> devil do I make the connection....and to what on the board with this
>>> extra cord?
>> Yup single Molex. The extra cord is just a splitter provided in case all
>> of the Molex connectors that are coming from your power supply are used
>> up by hard drives, fans, DVD burners and your occasional uv cold cathode
>> light!
>>
>> Roy
>>
>
>
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:30:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

I guess the instructions will cover the extra cord and connection
requirements. From what I've been reading, I think it will be required.
Dudley
"a" <a@a.com> wrote in message news:gJQoe.7123$K66.4454@fe02.lga...
> You may or may not have to use the splitter. If you don't need it then
> don't use it. (I have heard of some graphics cards including a power
> connector with them that is a non standard type power connector (non
> Molex).) Typical power supplies have two strands of four or so of your
> standard four pin Molex connecters each that you can use to power hard
> drives, optical drives, fans, graphics cards, case lights, etc.... I
> recommend that one of those strands have nothing but hard drives on it and
> the other of those strands have optical drives, fans and graphics cards on
> it.
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
> news:NyQoe.14556$M36.10533@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> So I take it that when I open the box, there will be a nice extra
>> connector on the power supply inside the case that will take one end of
>> the supplied cable and the other end will attach somewhere on the card?
>> Sounds straight forward to me :-)
>> DH
>> "a" <a@a.com> wrote in message news:qrQoe.7118$K66.1678@fe02.lga...
>>>> The GT I thought was a single Molex. Why the extra cord, and how the
>>>> devil do I make the connection....and to what on the board with this
>>>> extra cord?
>>> Yup single Molex. The extra cord is just a splitter provided in case
>>> all of the Molex connectors that are coming from your power supply are
>>> used up by hard drives, fans, DVD burners and your occasional uv cold
>>> cathode light!
>>>
>>> Roy
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
June 6, 2005 9:37:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Roy"
> CPU
> - high end - Personally if I had the money to spend, I'd look at getting
in
> a San Diego core Athlon 64 if I was to upgrade right now.


Wow.. nice piece. Kinda brought me up to date in one little essay.


Dallas
June 6, 2005 9:39:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dudley Henriques"
> I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
> things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance.

When I first read your post I thought, "Ah ha! Dudley is beta testing
FS10!"

<G>


Dallas
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:40:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

That's something to think about :-) We live in Pa.
Dudley
"a" <a@a.com> wrote in message news:YiRoe.15691$QX1.15263@fe06.lga...
> BTW I had never heard of hypersonic so I checked them out. I just spec'd
> out a system from hypersonic that is very similar to mine that I built
> with components from NewEgg and I saved over $1000 by building it myself.
> Just something to keep in mind. Don't get me wrong, they look like very
> nice systems, but if you are seriously going to go with them, compare
> component prices on NewEgg and add it all up. I'd be willing to bet you'd
> save just as much. Heck, I could build it for you, ship it to you and
> charge you the prices for the components etc plus a $100 assembly and
> testing fee and still save you several hundred dollars. You don't live
> near WV do you?? :) 
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
> news:o PNoe.14440$M36.6306@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> Then I'll go for the major Hypersonic Cyclone system or build it myself.
>
>
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:45:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:%jRoe.1458$4u6.159@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Dudley Henriques"
>> I'm thinking about an upgrade to my system, and I need to know where the
>> things I'm considering fit in with simulator performance.
>
> When I first read your post I thought, "Ah ha! Dudley is beta testing
> FS10!"
>
> <G>

Well......when everything starts.............could be!!! :-)))

Dudley

Dudley
June 6, 2005 11:00:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dudley Henriques"
> So I take it that when I open the box, there will be a nice extra
connector
> on the power supply inside the case

Dudley, I'm getting the impression you are expecting a nice little place to
directly plug a connector into the physical power supply? The power supply
just has 4-6 wires with connectors on them that plug directly into the
components.

Hey, unless I misunderstood something... you should be able to unplug your
FX5900's power supply cable and use it one the new card.

Dallas
June 6, 2005 12:18:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

>> When I first read your post I thought, "Ah ha! Dudley is beta testing
>> FS10!"
>>
>> <G>
>
> Well......when everything starts.............could be!!! :-)))
>
> Dudley
>
> Dudley


In all seriousness, Dudley, if you do have associations with Microsoft on
the Flight Simulator series, couldn't you get in touch with them?

Apart from your own upgrade, many people who are MS flight sim freaks
upgrade all the time for this simulator alone, just now we have to guess
when and if FS10 will come out? and what hardware it will support? We might
be wasting our money big time if we guess wrong.

Why the secrecy with Microsoft over the future of the Flight Simulator
series? Its not as if they have any competition. All FS enthusiasts ask is
.... what direction should we be upgrading in, is it now, soon or later, will
it be 64 bit, PCI-E or what?

These are not unreasonable questions for fans that have supported the Flight
Simulator series over the years. Microsoft have let us know exactly what the
Longhorn (64 bit) OS will do, we have seen previews and screenshots for
years, this is good.

But why the secrecy with the Flight Simulator series?
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:02:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Cord on the PSU is an "extra". You're right. I was visualizing a socket
connector and didn't realize it was an extra wire with nothing attached to
it.
SEE....it pays to ask!!! :-)
D
"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:%vSoe.2690$W77.1637@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Dudley Henriques"
>> So I take it that when I open the box, there will be a nice extra
> connector
>> on the power supply inside the case
>
> Dudley, I'm getting the impression you are expecting a nice little place
> to
> directly plug a connector into the physical power supply? The power
> supply
> just has 4-6 wires with connectors on them that plug directly into the
> components.
>
> Hey, unless I misunderstood something... you should be able to unplug
> your
> FX5900's power supply cable and use it one the new card.
>
> Dallas
>
>
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:21:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Let me try and answer your question truthfully Dallas.
I understand completely how you must feel about this. On one hand you're
freely trying to help someone with a computer related issue relating to the
simulator and on the other you have the fact that the person you're helping
might have an inside track to MS and be able to answer questions you and
hundreds of other people are dying to ask about the new simulator.
Please know that although I know a few people at MS and work with them on
reality and immersion issues on the sim, I couldn't violate their trust,
even if I knew things that could be leaked, which believe me I don't.
Most of the people like me who work with MS from time to time try and walk
that thin line with our friends..people like yourself, who naturally want to
know what's coming.
Actually, as far as things like hardware requirements are concerned, I'm
probably as much in the dark as you folks are. I'm guessing myself about
where the sim will go in this department. That's why I'm upgrading really.
What I've learned here from you people has helped me make a huge decision. I
got the 6800GT as KT suggested and as I'm writing this, haven't opened the
sim yet to try it. I'm going to back off the major upgrade and wait as
everybody suggested, for the sim to unfold hardware wise. Longhorn and 64
bit technology is right down the line, and nobody really knows if the new
version will even support SLI. I'm guessing that PCI-express will be the new
wave of cards. I stuck with the AGP this time to save the new required mobo
that supports PCI X for the major upgrade after the sim is released.
I know that you and the rest of the good people on the forums understand how
much I appreciate the help I get here and that aside from any agreement I
have with MS concerning security, I wouldn't violate their trust any more
than I would violate your trust in me. It goes without saying that ANYTHING
I can ever do to help a fellow sim enthusiast EXCEPT violate my word and
trust with MS, I will always do.
Anyway...the card's in. I'll post the results in a new thread. :-)
Dudley
"Colin" <Colin@NONEOFTHATSPAMSTUFFkatana1000.plus.com> wrote in message
news:399c1$42a3f881$545c31d3$8888@nf5.news-service.com...
>
>>> When I first read your post I thought, "Ah ha! Dudley is beta testing
>>> FS10!"
>>>
>>> <G>
>>
>> Well......when everything starts.............could be!!! :-)))
>>
>> Dudley
>>
>> Dudley
>
>
> In all seriousness, Dudley, if you do have associations with Microsoft on
> the Flight Simulator series, couldn't you get in touch with them?
>
> Apart from your own upgrade, many people who are MS flight sim freaks
> upgrade all the time for this simulator alone, just now we have to guess
> when and if FS10 will come out? and what hardware it will support? We
> might be wasting our money big time if we guess wrong.
>
> Why the secrecy with Microsoft over the future of the Flight Simulator
> series? Its not as if they have any competition. All FS enthusiasts ask
> is ... what direction should we be upgrading in, is it now, soon or later,
> will it be 64 bit, PCI-E or what?
>
> These are not unreasonable questions for fans that have supported the
> Flight Simulator series over the years. Microsoft have let us know exactly
> what the Longhorn (64 bit) OS will do, we have seen previews and
> screenshots for years, this is good.
>
> But why the secrecy with the Flight Simulator series?
>
June 6, 2005 9:00:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dudley Henriques"
> Let me try and answer your question truthfully Dallas.
> I understand completely how you must feel about this.

Dudley, it was Collin that posted the question: "But why the secrecy with
the Flight Simulator series? "

I don't need to ask that question... I'm used to it. :-)


Dallas
June 6, 2005 9:18:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Colin"
> But why the secrecy with the Flight Simulator series?

You pose an interesting question, some of which can be answered by saying
they don't want to say something now they will have to take back.

But, I've watched Microsoft from the beginning and I believe the real answer
to question lies in the personality of Bill Gates which has become MS
corporate culture to this day.

My take is that Bill has a real, "Barbarians at the gate!" and "Take no
prisoners!" approach to business. His attitude toward the outside world is
down right paranoid. I've said before, I've been in National Security Black
Hole environments and that security was second place to a company who was
developing a project for Microsoft.

I'd be interested to see if Carl Frisk sees them this way, he's worked for
them.

Dallas
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:44:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:_i%oe.162$jX6.58@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Dudley Henriques"
>> Let me try and answer your question truthfully Dallas.
>> I understand completely how you must feel about this.
>
> Dudley, it was Collin that posted the question: "But why the secrecy with
> the Flight Simulator series? "
>
> I don't need to ask that question... I'm used to it. :-)

Senior moment there Dallas!! :-))) I was reading all the answers too fast I
guess and trying to answer them in a hurry.

Anyway, about the "secrecy"...I don't really understand it aside from the
normal "new product...innovative technology" protection thing, but there
might be hidden reason that isn't all that apparent. I've thought about this
answer myself from time to time, and if you think about it, it does make
some sense.
There is a whole industry out here making software for the simulator.
Thousands of jobs, and huge investments in time are involved.
To make these products, these companies need to know EXACTLY how their code
will interface with the simulator....and I mean EXACTLY!!
This poses a huge problem if they go ahead on leaked information from MS or
other sources that until the build process is completed for the sim, is a
constantly changing process where the sim code is literally being changed
minute by minute by MS all through the development stage and through the
beta.
I know believe me. In FS9, open the sim and go to KILG. Now slew up and take
a good look at the approach end to runway 1. You will notice that the
approach area is clear where the high intensity approach lights are just
before the threshold.
AFTER the last beta corrections went in before FS9 went gold, I noticed on
my beta copy that there were houses superimposed right in that area where no
houses should be. I mean it was a GROSS error, and visually terrible,
especially for me, as I use that runway every time I fly in the sim.
I asked MS to fix it. They wrote back and told me it was too late. The sim
had gone gold and the houses would have to stay until the first patch.
HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT!!!! :-(
Well......the next afternoon, I got a message telling me that MS had caught
the error and fixed it. They jokingly told me that they had done this just
for me so I wouldn't have to look at all that bad scenery :-))))))))))))))))
I'm sure this wasn't true, but it gave me a nice story to tell my Grandkids
anyway :-)
Point is....that the beta is always changing until that unknown cutoff point
during the gold transition. Imagine how complicated it would be for the
developers out there getting bad and partially untrue as well as obsolete
information pertaining to the sim's coding from leaks.
I see this single reason as a strong argument in favor of what MS does with
their security. It just makes sense that it's best for the entire add on
software industry to wait until the sim has been released to the public, so
that everyone is on the same page when the code is finally released.
I could of course be wrong about this, but it seems to make sense to me
anyway :-)
Dudley
June 8, 2005 6:57:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

"Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
news:NJ_oe.138$eM6.52@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Let me try and answer your question truthfully Dallas.
> I understand completely how you must feel about this. On one hand you're
> freely trying to help someone with a computer related issue relating to
> the simulator and on the other you have the fact that the person you're
> helping might have an inside track to MS and be able to answer questions
> you and hundreds of other people are dying to ask about the new simulator.
> Please know that although I know a few people at MS and work with them on
> reality and immersion issues on the sim, I couldn't violate their trust,
> even if I knew things that could be leaked, which believe me I don't.
> Most of the people like me who work with MS from time to time try and walk
> that thin line with our friends..people like yourself, who naturally want
> to know what's coming.
> Actually, as far as things like hardware requirements are concerned, I'm
> probably as much in the dark as you folks are. I'm guessing myself about
> where the sim will go in this department. That's why I'm upgrading really.
> What I've learned here from you people has helped me make a huge decision.
> I got the 6800GT as KT suggested and as I'm writing this, haven't opened
> the sim yet to try it. I'm going to back off the major upgrade and wait as
> everybody suggested, for the sim to unfold hardware wise. Longhorn and 64
> bit technology is right down the line, and nobody really knows if the new
> version will even support SLI. I'm guessing that PCI-express will be the
> new wave of cards. I stuck with the AGP this time to save the new required
> mobo that supports PCI X for the major upgrade after the sim is released.
> I know that you and the rest of the good people on the forums understand
> how much I appreciate the help I get here and that aside from any
> agreement I have with MS concerning security, I wouldn't violate their
> trust any more than I would violate your trust in me. It goes without
> saying that ANYTHING I can ever do to help a fellow sim enthusiast EXCEPT
> violate my word and trust with MS, I will always do.
> Anyway...the card's in. I'll post the results in a new thread. :-)
> Dudley

Thanks for that Dudley, no worries on the name mix up :) 

I just thought it would be a good idea for Microsoft (flight sim division)
to see things from our side of the fence. I would never expect or ask you to
violate a position of trust Dudley, sorry if I gave that impression.

However, It would indeed be helpful for us simmers to know what hardware
future versions of FS will exploit, many of us are looking at upgrading now,
not because we have a stash in the bank, but because of a windfall that
might be there in a years time as life's bills erodes it away, yes it would
be helpful if Microsoft could point us in the right hardware direction,
especially with such dramatic changes as 64 bit from 32 and SLI and PCIe
single core to duel core CPU's, but I now realise that this ideal situation
may not be possible for many reasons, just seems a bit strange, especially
when you consider Microsoft have let us know exactly what Longhorn will do,
they have released screenshots, specs, videos ... even free public beta
versions of the 64 bit OS for those inclined.

I suppose, at the end of the day, Microsoft have a separate policy for OS
software and a separate policy for the Flight Sim one, for whatever reason
(even though they have no competition) LOL.

Maybe somebody from MS FS10 development can see this post and realise, some
simmers just want to know what is best to do in this difficult transition
time ... that are unique to this time, with so many new changes in hardware
spec on the horizon or here already ... 64 bit, PCIe, SLI and not to mention
the newer dual core CPU's and SATA2 on the horizon. This hardware is all
pretty much out now ( AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4800+ advertised in the UK
as very soon) and will certainly be widely available for FS10 when it gets
released ... I guess? :) 

Oh well, cant complain, still getting decent performance in FS9 out of a
water cooled P4 3.2 GHz overclocked to 3.8.

Hope you get a good boost from the new card Dudley. You have done the right
thing for now.

Cheers.

Colin
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 6:57:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (More info?)

Thanks Colin;
I understand completely what you are saying about knowing in advance what
hardware will be supported and what won't. I was just in that position
myself this week. :-) From what I've been hearing and reading about SLI, it
actually decreased performance in FS9 specifically for some reason when
tested recently. I think it had something to do with the present engine.
A single PCI express however did a credible job when tested.
One thing's for certain. If there is a new version (one article suggested
sales targets for FS2004 were not met) (another said the team is hard at
work)
the only way to increase what's already in FS9 is to use new technology.
In my opinion, the sim is right now on the leading edge of having to choose
between remaining as a program for the average gaming system, or committing
full tilt into the high end market.
It's going to be VERY interesting watching this unfold at MS. They have a
wonderful program as it exists now, and the decisions they make and the
changes they make in a next version will be like threading a needle with a
razor blade to get maximum profits from the widest customer base possible.
For sure, like real world aviation itself, the next version will be a trade
off in engineering and programming.
I'm looking forward to seeing what happens :-)
Dudley
"Colin" <Colin@NONEOFTHATSPAMSTUFFkatana1000.plus.com> wrote in message
news:27509$42a65066$545c31d3$6174@nf5.news-service.com...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" <dhenriques@noware .net> wrote in message
> news:NJ_oe.138$eM6.52@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> Let me try and answer your question truthfully Dallas.
>> I understand completely how you must feel about this. On one hand you're
>> freely trying to help someone with a computer related issue relating to
>> the simulator and on the other you have the fact that the person you're
>> helping might have an inside track to MS and be able to answer questions
>> you and hundreds of other people are dying to ask about the new
>> simulator.
>> Please know that although I know a few people at MS and work with them on
>> reality and immersion issues on the sim, I couldn't violate their trust,
>> even if I knew things that could be leaked, which believe me I don't.
>> Most of the people like me who work with MS from time to time try and
>> walk that thin line with our friends..people like yourself, who naturally
>> want to know what's coming.
>> Actually, as far as things like hardware requirements are concerned, I'm
>> probably as much in the dark as you folks are. I'm guessing myself about
>> where the sim will go in this department. That's why I'm upgrading
>> really.
>> What I've learned here from you people has helped me make a huge
>> decision. I got the 6800GT as KT suggested and as I'm writing this,
>> haven't opened the sim yet to try it. I'm going to back off the major
>> upgrade and wait as everybody suggested, for the sim to unfold hardware
>> wise. Longhorn and 64 bit technology is right down the line, and nobody
>> really knows if the new version will even support SLI. I'm guessing that
>> PCI-express will be the new wave of cards. I stuck with the AGP this time
>> to save the new required mobo that supports PCI X for the major upgrade
>> after the sim is released.
>> I know that you and the rest of the good people on the forums understand
>> how much I appreciate the help I get here and that aside from any
>> agreement I have with MS concerning security, I wouldn't violate their
>> trust any more than I would violate your trust in me. It goes without
>> saying that ANYTHING I can ever do to help a fellow sim enthusiast EXCEPT
>> violate my word and trust with MS, I will always do.
>> Anyway...the card's in. I'll post the results in a new thread. :-)
>> Dudley
>
> Thanks for that Dudley, no worries on the name mix up :) 
>
> I just thought it would be a good idea for Microsoft (flight sim division)
> to see things from our side of the fence. I would never expect or ask you
> to violate a position of trust Dudley, sorry if I gave that impression.
>
> However, It would indeed be helpful for us simmers to know what hardware
> future versions of FS will exploit, many of us are looking at upgrading
> now, not because we have a stash in the bank, but because of a windfall
> that might be there in a years time as life's bills erodes it away, yes it
> would be helpful if Microsoft could point us in the right hardware
> direction, especially with such dramatic changes as 64 bit from 32 and SLI
> and PCIe single core to duel core CPU's, but I now realise that this ideal
> situation may not be possible for many reasons, just seems a bit strange,
> especially when you consider Microsoft have let us know exactly what
> Longhorn will do, they have released screenshots, specs, videos ... even
> free public beta versions of the 64 bit OS for those inclined.
>
> I suppose, at the end of the day, Microsoft have a separate policy for OS
> software and a separate policy for the Flight Sim one, for whatever reason
> (even though they have no competition) LOL.
>
> Maybe somebody from MS FS10 development can see this post and realise,
> some simmers just want to know what is best to do in this difficult
> transition time ... that are unique to this time, with so many new changes
> in hardware spec on the horizon or here already ... 64 bit, PCIe, SLI and
> not to mention the newer dual core CPU's and SATA2 on the horizon. This
> hardware is all pretty much out now ( AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4800+
> advertised in the UK as very soon) and will certainly be widely available
> for FS10 when it gets released ... I guess? :) 
>
> Oh well, cant complain, still getting decent performance in FS9 out of a
> water cooled P4 3.2 GHz overclocked to 3.8.
>
> Hope you get a good boost from the new card Dudley. You have done the
> right thing for now.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Colin
>
!