Simviation Forums

Okay, I enjoy reading with envy all about all the new processors, video cards mega-mixer machines that get 3.4 million frames per second....

But I'm not there. I'm in the low end of the FlightSimHardwareUsers club. I'm a comfortable mile from the cutting edge of hardware. I currently have an AMD Athlon 1700 (1,100) with an ATI 9800 something or other video card, 128 mem. My motherboard is some Biostar or other, don't really care. 1 gig of memory.

I run FS9 with fairly high settings and get frames in the low twenties, or teens with cloud draw extended farther out.

I'm considering an upgrade.

Without spending all my children's inheritance, I intend to upgrade only just enough to barely run FSX, maybe. But my hope is to for sure max out FS9.

I'm comfortable building, but when I start adding up prices, I find I can buy an older system for less money than building one from scratch.

Questions: Best budget processor? I've had zero problems with AMD's, and wouldn't mind staying with them, but I"m open to Pentiums. What is the best line of AMD cores? What is the best line of P cores? How bad are Celerons, really?

Would it be better to keep the video card and get the most processor I can afford,  or go ahead and move to a better PCIe card with associated Mobo, and less processor?
How cheap can it be done?
I guess I'm looking for absolute best bang/buck ratio.

This is an excellent example of what you should be looking for

If you wanted to go any cheaper, you could go for an AMD 939 system right now, but Intel has the best bang for the buck.  Note that price is in Canadian dollars.

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=21059&vpn=E63-965-1G-51W-32&manufacture=Intel&promoid=1058

Save as much as you can over the next 6 months or more and get an entirely new system.... It looks like thats what you may have to do now to be honest. You can build a good PC for around 800-1000 USD with a mid range video card and such.... Start shopping around and investigating... Consider Ebay for some parts (Not all, but some) and you will be surprised.... If you really put an effort into it I bet you could get a decent rig up for 800 bucks, then find a good video card! Plus you may want Vista in the near future.... so just save and wait! Thats what I would personally do....

Gunny

Okay, to clarify. I intend to stay WAY back from the cutting edge. I have kids to feed and clothe, and 800 bucks for a gaming computer isn't going to happen.

But $250-350 can. I very nearly purchased a refurb athlon system last week with a Sempron core for about $300 bucks. This is more what I'm talking about. I'm NOT going for Vista anytime soon, and my current gaming system is still running Win2000pro.

But I don't know the ins and outs of the AMD cores, the cheapos. I heard somewhere that Sempron wouldn't have been the best for my purposes, and I didn't buy it. I can buy a P4 2.2 for under $300 and reuse my video card and monitor, even my memory chip. But I don't know much about the Pentium chips either. I've always heard to steer clear of the Celerons, but they can be had quite cheaply.  

See where I'm at? I'm four years ago, technology-wise, and will have to remain a couple years back. I can't afford any latest and greatest. I need to know the best of the budget stuff. No overclocking either. Stuff has to last in my house.

Sempron is an equivalent of Celeron. Terrible for gaming. For a budget CPU look at AMD's Venice and San Diego CPUs. The best bang for your buck.

I would look at AMD's San Diego core. 3700+ costs like a $100.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819103539

As for video I would look at 7600GT.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814130062

You would need a new mobo with that processor.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813131530

And a probably a new power supply since newer hardware uses more power.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6817128005

It comes out to $353 plus taxes. With that setup you can definately max out FS9. You can use your old case, RAM, HD, and CD-ROM. If the case is a micro-ATX, you would need to downgrade to a micro-ATX motherboard.

If cost is a really big issue you can downgrade to a 3200+ and a micro-ATX mobo and save about $40. I wouldn't go any lower than a 3200+ and 7600GT though.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819103535

Yeah, a computer for gaming can be made very cheap, but to get at least good quality $800 is the minimum.

Don't tell me about financial problems.... I get roughly 200 a year to stick in PCs, or anything else I want! I blew my last PC up..... Bought this new from Circuit city for 583.... (look in my sig) and for 10$ more I got a 19 inch wide LCD.... and its upgradable, well.... mostly. I put the 7300LE in.... its not a gamers rig, but it can deal with vista in the future, and games with a PSU and a better graphics card. I don't have much on the financial end either, but I do what I can.

For example my 583 dollar PC cant be overclocked, but you can upgrade all the way up to a 4800 if you wanted, up to 4 gigs ram, any PCI-E GPU you want that can fit.... and as many hard drives as you want (Has space for 4)

When I bought it, I could max FS9 out all but clouds, they were on medium (Comes with a Built in 6100) So you could go my route, shop in adds, and buy what you can and upgrade in the future! Plus you could have 2 PCs and give the other one to the kids!

Just a thought..... and I am not ranting or anything else... just stating a point if you will.

Cheers, Gunny

EDIT: This pc stock was 1 gig DDR 3200 Ram, 6100 Built in GPU, and 1, 250 gig hard drive, same motherboard, processer etc... I added a gig of ram from my old PC, the 7300LE (BIG MISTAKE) and another hard drive... in about two weeks I am going to order me a new PSU so I can start getting ready for vista etc....

Thanks Cheese, now that's what I'm talking about.

So the difference between the Venice and the San Diego cores is the cache? That plus 2.2 versus 2.0? I've heard good things about the San Diego, is this why?

How do these compare to say a P4HT? Are the Athlons the better hardware? I've heard P4's have heat issues. Would I need an even better cooling system on the Athlon than a fan?

The graphics card looks like a large improvement also. I ran Everest on my 'puter and never realized I was only getting the AGP at 4X to my card. This PCIe is 16X so I can assume 4X faster than what I have? This is a buss speed, right? So it's like the width of the highway?

Sorry about the non-stop questions! I'm just trying to make sure I'm getting the best I can get in my price range.

In addition, the Motherboard you found will accept my 1 gig memory chip, and I already have a 500W power supply. So I could cut those costs also. Now we're down to what I can swing.

Yes, the primary difference is that San Diego core has twice the L2 cache of the Venice core (1MB vs. 512kb).

Pentium 4 HT are not bad as long as you don't get an outdated one. They have higher clocks than AMD 64s, but they have a much slower bus speed, so they are trying to jam all that data through a small bus, and end up being slower. They can be faster in multimedia programs, however in games AMD 64s are generally faster. I personally think the AMD is a better buy.

At stock speed you should be fine on the fan/heatsink that comes with the CPU regardless of what CPU you buy.

Yes, PCI-E allows data to be transferred faster. It transfers data in both directions at once, so it is actually 8 times as fast. So AGP 4X has a max of about 1GB/s while PCI-E 16X has a max of about 8GB/s.

If your memory is 184 pin DDR memory it should work.