by congo » Fri Nov 10, 2006 7:05 pm
The 4400+ and the 4800+ are the same anyway Brett, most guys seem to get around 2.6ghz on stock air cooling before having to change things for more speed.
You can get 4400+'s pretty cheap now so I'd do that, and I am going that route myself as well.
The only bug in the ointment is the price of ram at the moment, but this is a constant cost no matter which route you take.
Don't under estimate the CPU power that FSX will, but trying to predict what usage under FSX and Vista? Maybe Nick has some idea of whether or not it's actually going to be enough.
There is no argument that an E6600 has higher potential, however, by the time you are going to need that much cpu power, there will be a much better option from some quarter.
Your current video card is certainly limited under FSX, just look at the review of the new 8800GTX when tested with FSX......... they were reporting under 1 FPS with sliders maxed on an E6600 rig LOL!
Suffice to say that the 8800GTX is one heck of a card, and even it cannot cope with the full brunt of FSX, not even close.
A 4400+ and 1 gb of ram is a good cheap interim upgrade while the intel crowd is basking in some limelight at the moment, but anyone serious about FSX performance should wait until we see the release of Vista, FSX patches and second generation DX10 hardware.

Mainboard: Asus P5K-Premium, CPU=Intel E6850 @ x8x450fsb 3.6ghz, RAM: 4gb PC8500 Team Dark, Video: NV8800GT, HDD: 2x1Tb Samsung F3 RAID-0 + 1Tb F3, PSU: Antec 550 Basiq, OS: Win7x64, Display: 24&