Optimum hardware for running MSFS?

[airandspacemuseum]

II am going to purchase some computers specifically to run Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004.  I would like it to run smoothly on a very high setting.  What specs do I need?  I know min req. I want Optimum.  
Processor Speed?
Ram?
Video Card? (does the manufacturer matter? Ati?or Nvidia?)
I will be running it on dual monitors.  Undocking the dash and having the dash on the bottom screen.  I will also be networking about 18 together and having them fly in same airspace.  Using sidewinder joysticks and possibly CH Pedals.  I will also be running a small app. called "Roger Wilco" a freeware Voice Over IP so that Instructor can talk to the kids like a real ATC.    I hope all this helps determine what hardware I need.  For Example, I don't want to get a gig of ddr ram if 512 would do just as well.... on the other hand I don't want to get a computer that cant display things with a high degree of quality because I went too cheap.
Thanks

[Delta_]

The best processor out now would be the AMD FX-53
For GFX cards the X800xt PE or the 6800GT will suffice.
For RAM 1GB is a must for absolute max settings and for it to still stay smooth.  

[JBaymore]

airandspacemuseum,

Hi and welcome to SimV.

I'd suggest that you spend some time looking in the "Hardware Forum".... this subject has been discussed a lot there.

[Gixer]

Get the absoutle best u can afford.

[zeberdee]

Hi try this
www.flightsim.com/cgi/kds?$=main/review/alien.htm
I am building a similar spec machine just so I can run acof near max settings. Good luck with the build

[Iroquois]

The best system doesn't exist. I think it really depends what your using it for. My system is in a pretty good balance. It handles gamming but fits in with audio and video capture and word processing. Things I also frequently do.

First set a budget for yourself. You can get a pretty decent system for about $1000 these days. Computer components seem to be the only things in which the prices are dropping.  :P

As a minimun, forget what's on the box. I recomend at least a 900mhz processor, 512mb or ram, and a Geforce 4 Ti or Radeon 9000. Some people have run it on a lot less but this is the minumum in which you will achive medium settings smoothly.

On the subject of video card, no manufacturer doesn't matter. ATI did have nVidia beat for a while but they're about the same in preformance. If you like to play games like Far Cry or Doom 3, nVidia is the way to go but for FS it really doesn't make much difference.

I haven't done any pricing but here's a top gamming system on the lower end of the price spectrum.
AMD Athlon64 3500+ Socket 939, Any Socket 939 Mobo, 1gb PC3200, Geforce 6600GT (out on October), SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS. You can go from there and decide what size HDD and what CD drives you want but this is what you need for gamming. You can choose to upgrade to an X800 or 6800 video card or even an Athlon64 FX-53 CPU in the future if you go for this option.

Because FS2004 is so CPU demanding, you'll definately want to go with the Athlon64 over the Pentium 4 Extream Edition. The P4 EE is pretty fast but still uses older technology. Do not get socket 754 Athlons because AMD is going to be phasing them out soon.

[JBaymore]

The best system doesn't exist. I think it really depends what your using it for.

Iroquois,

If you look at the originating message in this thread..... they were very specific what the machines are to be used for exactly....... running fs2004 in a networked environment with something like Roger Wilco running simultaneously (and it'll take FSUIPC and WideFS running to network them too)....... and it looks like totally dedicated to that purpose.  THAT seems to narrow down the ideas on what machine to select greatly  ;).  Don't need to consider other applications..... looks like these are simulated cockpit machines....... period.

best,

................john

[logjam]

Sounds like a terific idea! I'd like to do the same sort of thing running from my wheelchair. I've seen a 3 screen setup using 17" monitors in vertical juxtaposition. What I'd like to do is to mount a 17" monitor vertical in juxta position either side of my 21". I'm loooking around for a card that will support this and give me the optimal performance. I'll be watching this forum for info regarding this dedicated system.

[Gixer]

I built my system for FS2004.  If it does other stuff fast then thats just a bonus to me.  I have seen bench tests with the FX-53 CPU and its is scoring about 3000 more in 3dMark01 if you know how to tweek your system.  I still dont think this will allow you to max every single setting in FS2004 though.

Like I said its just the dam clouds.  I just did a little test, @KSEA 100%AI clear skies I hold 24FPS on the way in using the Default Cessna 172.  Set to Fair skies it drops to 19-20.  Like I said though it still flies smooth.  I am unsure whether this is because of the CPU or the GPU though???  It just seems to me like you cannot get a good enough system for FS2004 unless you spend sooooooper loads of cash.  

I get over my few probs by lowering the Dynamic scenery to Dense, and reducing the cloud settings a smidge as said above.

If I could work out this new mobo I got I would overclock my CPU but so far I have been unable to do this  :(  Its 2210MHz standard but quite a few people have them running @ 2400MHz, just got to figure out how. I think my PC3200 is the problem I probably need higher speed stuff now.

[Gixer]

Ok just did another test.  It appears I can run with everything maxxed if I use the default weather settings.  If I load real weather this seems to hurt performance a fair bit  ???  Though of course if the real WX is clear then its alright.

Even over my Gatwick scenery with 100% AI and "everything" maxxed including the scenery and weather settings, wx set to cold fronts or fair weather the FPS stay about 20-24.  

My prob is I usually fly online with real WX so I have to make the comprimise and lower the amount of 3D clouds.  I have found out now it is my ram holding me back so until I can get hold of some PC4400DDR stuff (Which is way to expensive  :() then I will make do with what I have  ;D

So anyone wanna buy all my old bits? that way I can get me some new ram  ;D

[Iroquois]

Iroquois,

If you look at the originating message in this thread..... they were very specific what the machines are to be used for exactly....... running fs2004 in a networked environment with something like Roger Wilco running simultaneously (and it'll take FSUIPC and WideFS running to network them too)....... and it looks like totally dedicated to that purpose.  THAT seems to narrow down the ideas on what machine to select greatly  ;).  Don't need to consider other applications..... looks like these are simulated cockpit machines....... period.

best,

................john

Well sorry if I skim through these.  It's true though. There is no one ultimate computer. Every component has its strenghts and drawbacks and no two parts are exactly alike. Even with the best on the market, preformance could still be a bit better. It won't be long before we have 128-bit CPUs and and 1024-bit graphics cards that make images like on the holodeck on Star Trek and we'll be complaining that they're too slow.

If he's running all that stuff in the background, he'll need the 1gb of Ram. PC3200 is fine. Try to get a motherboard that will support 2gb or more. Windows XP is a big ram hog. It's gotten to the point where serious gamming requires more than just 512mb.