system for max settings???

[bgyuk]

Hi,

I am getting a new system this week. Bottom line, i must be able to max out FSX. I've not been keeping up to speed with hardware, and to be honest i was a little surprised that years afters the release of FSX many systems still struggle to max it out.

I have been looking at this system, with an upgraded card to the HD 5870.............

System Specification
- Case: Xigmatek Asgard Midi Tower - Black
- Power Supply: Corsair Extreme 600W
- CPU: Intel Core i7 930 2.80GHz Overclocked to 4.00GHz
- Motherboard: Asus P6X58D-E Intel X58 (Socket 1366) DDR3 Motherboard
- Cooler: Prolimatech Megahalem w/ Sharkoon Silent Eagle 2000rpm 120mm Fan
- RAM: Corsair XMS3 6GB (3x2GB) DDR3 PC3-12800C9 (1600MHz) Tri-Channel
- Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 500GB SATA 3Gb/s 16MB Cache
- Graphics Card: A choice of the latest graphics cards
- Sound: 7.1 Channel Sound (On-Board)
- Optical Drive: LG DVD+/-RW SATA Drive

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-025-OP&groupid=43&catid=1444&subcat=1712

Would that do the trick?

[Groundbound1]

In short, nope.

[bgyuk]

Yeah i was a little vague. What i really want to be able to max out is the scenery. I am fed up of flying into citys that look like villages. Is it possible to max the scenery with current systems? If not i will just hold off an get one next year.

[Slotback]

I would suggest waiting till next year if you want to max things out... new AMD / intel processors will be out by then. The new AMD could possibly be a beast, and the new intel should be pretty good also..

[Mr._Ryan]

Yeah i was a little vague. What i really want to be able to max out is the scenery. I am fed up of flying into citys that look like villages. Is it possible to max the scenery with current systems? If not i will just hold off an get one next year.

Also, it may just be that you don't have the right add-ons to make the cities look good. Do you have Ground Environment X? Ultimate Terrain X? Depending on what your current system is, these might make a huge difference. I just got them recently (along with Real Environment X) and it's like an entirely different game, all at 30 fps with my quad core 2.66 ghz system that's 2 years old now. Not a bad deal...

[Flight Ace]

[quote]Hi,

I am getting a new system this week. Bottom line, i must be able to max out FSX. I've not been keeping up to speed with hardware, and to be honest i was a little surprised that years afters the release of FSX many systems still struggle to max it out.

I have been looking at this system, with an upgraded card to the HD 5870.............

System Specification
- Case: Xigmatek Asgard Midi Tower - Black
- Power Supply: Corsair Extreme 600W
- CPU: Intel Core i7 930 2.80GHz Overclocked to 4.00GHz
- Motherboard: Asus P6X58D-E Intel X58 (Socket 1366) DDR3 Motherboard
- Cooler: Prolimatech Megahalem w/ Sharkoon Silent Eagle 2000rpm 120mm Fan
- RAM: Corsair XMS3 6GB (3x2GB) DDR3 PC3-12800C9 (1600MHz) Tri-Channel
- Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 500GB SATA 3Gb/s 16MB Cache
- Graphics Card: A choice of the latest graphics cards
- Sound: 7.1 Channel Sound (On-Board)
- Optical Drive: LG DVD+/-RW SATA Drive

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-025-OP&groupid=43&catid=1444&subcat=1712

Would that do the trick?

[Speed of flight]

[quote]Hi,

I am getting a new system this week. Bottom line, i must be able to max out FSX. I've not been keeping up to speed with hardware, and to be honest i was a little surprised that years afters the release of FSX many systems still struggle to max it out.

I have been looking at this system, with an upgraded card to the HD 5870.............

System Specification
- Case: Xigmatek Asgard Midi Tower - Black
- Power Supply: Corsair Extreme 600W
- CPU: Intel Core i7 930 2.80GHz Overclocked to 4.00GHz
- Motherboard: Asus P6X58D-E Intel X58 (Socket 1366) DDR3 Motherboard
- Cooler: Prolimatech Megahalem w/ Sharkoon Silent Eagle 2000rpm 120mm Fan
- RAM: Corsair XMS3 6GB (3x2GB) DDR3 PC3-12800C9 (1600MHz) Tri-Channel
- Hard Drive: Seagate Barracuda 500GB SATA 3Gb/s 16MB Cache
- Graphics Card: A choice of the latest graphics cards
- Sound: 7.1 Channel Sound (On-Board)
- Optical Drive: LG DVD+/-RW SATA Drive

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-025-OP&groupid=43&catid=1444&subcat=1712

Would that do the trick?

[snippyfsxer]

To me, "max settings" mean EVERY slider maxxed out.

Imagine running the Leonardo Maddog, at Aerosoft Heathrow, with 4096 clouds, 9.5 LOD, 100% Airline,GA, Boat, and Car Traffic, Max Water and Waves, Radar Contact running, FS2Crew running, EZCA, Weather program, etc, etc, etc.  And you can't let your computer "cheat" by fuzzing out the ground textures either--the ground must be in perfect full clarity out to at least 7 miles.  And while we are at it, try running all that at 5760 by 1200.  Now that is maxxed out.

The computer to do that doesn't exist yet.  A 980x overclocked to 4.5 ghz and a GTX 480 won't even come close.

People who say they are getting steady 100 fps in the PMDG 747 in -any- circumstance, are not even coming close to pushing up against the limits.  I'll bet that their system is gumming up the textures.

Your system specs will probably do fine, but "max"...no.

[Flight Ace]

[quote]To me, "max settings" mean EVERY slider maxxed out.

Imagine running the Leonardo Maddog, at Aerosoft Heathrow, with 4096 clouds, 9.5 LOD, 100% Airline,GA, Boat, and Car Traffic, Max Water and Waves, Radar Contact running, FS2Crew running, EZCA, Weather program, etc, etc, etc.

[snippyfsxer]

[ And what is the difference between a resolution of 5760 X 1200 compared to 1920 X 1200. For me - visually - none.

The difference is 2 more widescreen monitors and about an extra 90 degrees field of view

[Flight Ace]

[ And what is the difference between a resolution of 5760 X 1200 compared to 1920 X 1200. For me - visually - none.

I wasn't being sarcastic with my resolution comment only honest. My single screen is a SAMSUNG 26inch high def monitor running at a resolution of 1920X1200X32. Any higher resolution I cannot see any difference. You keep referring to "max" settings for FSX. There are two definitions for "max" settings.  The first is turning everything on and placing all sliders right (full on). The second is a "max" setting for getting the best response from any one PC. If one has a high end PC for FSX running one monitor, then a combination of settings from these two definitions in my opinion will give the best performance and graphics presentation.  And yes there are places I can turn everything on with sliders full right with good results. However, by adjusting (tuning) FSX settings, the results get significantly better. I tried explaining this in my previous post but probably did a poor job. I agree with you, the original poster should do just fine since his proposed tech spec mirrors others that have had great success.


The difference is 2 more widescreen monitors and about an extra 90 degrees field of view

[RaptorF22]

[quote]To me, "max settings" mean EVERY slider maxxed out.

Imagine running the Leonardo Maddog, at Aerosoft Heathrow, with 4096 clouds, 9.5 LOD, 100% Airline,GA, Boat, and Car Traffic, Max Water and Waves, Radar Contact running, FS2Crew running, EZCA, Weather program, etc, etc, etc.

[Groundbound1]

Might do it, 'cept it runs Linux.

[RaptorF22]

Might do it, 'cept it runs Linux.

Aww, I didn't think about that.
Well, there's got to be some way around it.

[Flight Ace]

Might do it, 'cept it runs Linux.

Aww, I didn't think about that.
Well, there's got to be some way around it.

Create and load Cray version of Windows 7. See how easy that was?