Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted September 17, 2011 Aerosoft Share Posted September 17, 2011 This was published today at lifehacker.com (one of the sites I read every day). Of all the many list of optimal PC's this is one of the best I seen lately. It will run all your sims with gusto. There is also a $600 PC that will be a nice choice for FS2004. http://lifehacker.com/5840963/the-best-pcs-you-can-build-for-600-and-1200 The Sub-$1200 Enthusiast's PC Now that we've covered a system that can be purchased and assembled on a decent budget, now it's time to go crazy. First, we're not targeting our upper limit here, we just want to give you an idea of some of the high-end components that would make a good enthusiast's build. If you're a fan of PC gaming, have to play the latest releases as soon as they're out, watch HD video, do video editing or spend a lot of time streaming video from the web in HD, or just want the beefiest box you can afford, this build is for you. The parts As with the $600 PC above, we're going to assume you have the basics, like a keyboard, mouse, and display. In this case though, we're going for the big, pretty, and powerful, as opposed to trying to keep the budget down. We won't necessarily aim directly for our high-end, but we will slap in some pricier components that we know would make a noticeable difference in your computing experience if you had them in your system. Again, remember to consider your use case before buying – the people who'll really love this build will be PC gamers, media professionals, and enthusiasts who want to futureproof themselves or just prefer the top of the line. The case: Cooler Master CM690 II ATX Mid Tower Case - $69.99 There used to be a time when how awesome your computer was directly related to the number of LEDs and light-up case fans you had. Those days are long gone, and instead most people, including enthusiasts, want a case that's sharp looking, easy to build in, and doesn't keep them up at night. Cooler Master makes great cases, and the CM690 II is a black, steel bodied mid-sized case with plenty of room for drives, enough case fans to keep even the hottest processor cool, a front-side I/O panel for power and ports, and snap-to-fit connectors for your components. It doesn't come with a power supply, but this is the kind of case that will last for a long time. Bonus, it's small, light, and roomy enough to fit the components we're about to put into it. Warning though: there are some very pretty cases on the market – buy one that has the features and look that you want. If you're willing, you can spend close to $200 on a beauty like the Silverstone Raven RV02, or alternatively save the cash and repurpose an old case from a previous build.The power supply: Corsair Enthusiast Series TX750 v2 750W Power Supply - $109.99 Corsair makes good power supplies, and 750-watts of juice should be enough to power even the most demanding components. This power supply is quiet, comes with a +12V rail for the graphics card we're about to slap into this system, and offers enthusiast-level power output at a solid price. There are more expensive power supplies out there-especially modular ones, which we sorely wish that Corsair would make in more wattages-but this one gets the job done without being overkill.The motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3 LGA 1155 Intel ATX Motherboard - $149.99 It's pricey, but this board packs the ports and features. It has tools for overclockers (although not as many as its more expensive cousin, and supports Intel's latest Core processors. The board also has built-in support for Crossfire (AMD) and SLI (NVidia) for high-end gaming with multiple graphics cards, sports 2 USB 3.0 and 8 USB 2.0 ports, gigabit Ethernet, supports on-board RAID, has 8 SATA ports (4 at 6Gb/s and 4 at 3Gb/s) and packs built-in audio and video. It's definitely a high-end board for a system builder who needs the features or isn't concerned about the budget. The CPU: Intel Core i7-2600 Sandy Bridge 3.4Ghz Quad Core Processor - $299.99 Intel's Core processors are the market leaders for a reason. They pack incredible power at decent power consumption, and while AMD is definitely a great bang-for-your-buck option, at the high end Intel processors simply blow them away, and there's little that isn't blown away by the Core i7-2600. Let's be clear - you may not see all of the benefit to Intel's top-of-the-line processor in your everyday tasks, but it wouldn't be an enthusiast's PC without one. There's very little that you'll wind up doing that will take advantage of the Core i7's increased firepower over the Core i5 2500k, unless you're doing video conversion or playing the latest high-end games. If you're a little gunshy at spending this much on a processor, step down to the Intel Core i5-2500 for $99 less.The memory: G Skill 4GB (2x2GB) DDR3 2133 RAM - $54.99 Let's be clear, 4GB of RAM is probably sufficient for most systems. If you want to spend more cash (maybe you're the type to spring for the i7 above) you can pick up the same G.Skill memory in an 8GB kit for $99.99. At the same time though, you're only really going to feel the benefit of the extra memory in a few applications, and even though you have the extra memory, there's no guarantee that your general computing experience will be any better. Buy with caution, and keep in mind what you're going to be doing with the system. The storage: Intel 320 Series 80GB SATA II MLC SSD - $159.99 + Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s Hard Drive - $89.99 Now we're ready to spend some money. We've said several times that a Solid State Drive (SSD) is one of the best upgrades you can buy for your computer, but if you're building one from scratch with absolute performance in mind, consider buying an SSD for your OS and applications, and a traditional hard drive for files and data. Still not sold? Let us help: we can assure you SSDs are worth the money. The only trick is picking one that's large enough for your OS and applications. We went with 80GB here, but you can go up to 120GB or even 256GB if you need the extra space. They're pricey though, so make sure you get the best one for your cash. Photo by TAKA@P.P.R.S. [*]The graphics card: AMD Radeon HD 6950 - $239.99 /NVidia GeForce 560 Ti - $234.99 These two cards, aside from being some of the best on the market at the moment, are both good bang-for-your-buck gaming graphics cards according to Anandtech's 2011 GPU Benchmark tests. If you're a PC gamer and you love turning up all of the settings on your games, or you have to play all of the latest releases as soon as they're out, pick your brand allegiance (or better yet, check how each of these two cards performs when benchmarked in your favorite games) and go with one of these. If you need even more power and have the money to buy it, consider the AMD Radeon HD 6970 ($359.99) or the NVidia GeForce GTX 570 ($329.99) for some gorgeous-but-wallet-busting graphical goodness. [*]The optical drive: ASUS 24x CD/DVD Burner - $20.99 Surprised? We meant it when we said in the budget section that the optical drive that you buy doesn't really matter. Again, if you're planning to watch Blu-ray video on your enthusiast PC, you'll want to spring for the appropriate drive, but if you're not, we can't find a better optical drive and disc burner for the money. Hey, just because there are more expensive ones out there doesn't mean they're better. Just because you're on an enthusiast's budget doesn't mean you have to throw your money away. [*]The total: $1195.91 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaspis29 29 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 How do you think this will run FSX? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Eric Bakker 736 Posted September 17, 2011 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted September 17, 2011 The quoted system is much like my own new system, built two weeks ago. I am very happy with how my system runs FSX, smooth and fast. - Gigabyte GA-P67A-UD4 S1155 ATX motherboard - Intel Core I7 2600K 3.4GHz LGA1155 cpu - Kingston Valueram memory HyperX/8GB 1600MHz DDR3 Non-ECC CL9 DIMM (Kit of 2) XMP - OZC Vertex 3, 120 Gb High Performance SSD - HD Caviar Black 1TB SATA 6Gb/s 7200rpm 32 MB - Gigabyte GV-N560OC-1GI GTX 560 1GB GDDR5 graphic card - Microsoft Windows 7 64-bit My FSX is installed at the SSD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaspis29 29 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Ok I'll be more precise, as you have the similar system. How many FPS do you have (and with tweaks to .cfg or not?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebksb123 99 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Thanks for posting Mathijs! I have nearly the same system now (same card, processor, rest similar) and I got it for 850€ which is about 1200$. Glad to see I did nothing wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Eric Bakker 736 Posted September 17, 2011 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted September 17, 2011 Ok I'll be more precise, as you have the similar system. How many FPS do you have (and with tweaks to .cfg or not?). Hello Kaspars, I assume your asking this to me now. The fps varies of course with the scenery, the aircraft and the chosen settings. I do not know what your preferred references are for comparison, so I cannot be precise. In general it is always more than 22, usually around 30-50, the only exception is Schiphol Mega Airport where it can go down around 15 depending on the other variables if chosen complex settings and aircraft. If you have an example of your own I can try to give you my comparative fps. I tried the Jesus Tweaks but they made no noticable difference. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaspis29 29 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Thanks Eric, I am assuming those sliders are mostly on the right? Then that sound's very good. With the AirbusX or NGX, Schipol and FSInn I would guess it would go from 15-20?(With those heavy sliders to the right) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Eric Bakker 736 Posted September 18, 2011 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted September 18, 2011 I learned from Mathijs to set the sliders to what is needed for the scenery/flight, and not always all to the right. For Schiphol this means autgen normal, water low and mesh low. Weather medium, low traffic. I do not have FSInn installed. With this setting using AirbusX gives indeed 15-20 at Schiphol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted September 19, 2011 Author Aerosoft Share Posted September 19, 2011 Thanks Eric, I am assuming those sliders are mostly on the right? Then that sound's very good. With the AirbusX or NGX, Schipol and FSInn I would guess it would go from 15-20?(With those heavy sliders to the right) Why would you want mesh sliders to the right when you are landing at Schiphol? Why would you want autogen high there, it just adds buildings that are not there. It's just a waste of resources. Tune you sim to what you do, not to your hardware. And be real careful about tweaks. There are a lot around that hardly do anything and many of those make FSX less stable. Only use those that are very well documented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Eric Bakker 736 Posted September 19, 2011 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted September 19, 2011 And be real careful about tweaks. There are a lot around that hardly do anything and many of those make FSX less stable. Only use those that are very well documented. What are the tweaks that you recommend or use yourself. Highmemfix for example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaspis29 29 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Why would you want mesh sliders to the right when you are landing at Schiphol? Why would you want autogen high there, it just adds buildings that are not there. It's just a waste of resources. Tune you sim to what you do, not to your hardware. I do follow mostly the manuals, but 1. I forget. 2. I fly to non high scenerized area's (in VATSIM) where these options may need to be bit more to the right then they are in the manual . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted September 19, 2011 Author Aerosoft Share Posted September 19, 2011 What are the tweaks that you recommend or use yourself. Highmemfix for example? I actually use no tweaks what so ever. Never felt the need for them and though I did try a lot I never found any that made sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Eric Bakker 736 Posted September 19, 2011 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted September 19, 2011 I do follow mostly the manuals, but 1. I forget. I cannot remember all those different settings advises either, and therefor I save the settings for each scenery (if it requires special settings) at installation. Now I only have to remember to load the settings when I need them. If you did not read it yet, Mathijs made a very useful posting about this: http://forum.aerosof...-you-might-not/ Especially the attached pdf opened my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaspis29 29 Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 I read the thread, but missed the .pdf. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerosoft Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558 Posted September 20, 2011 Author Aerosoft Share Posted September 20, 2011 I read the thread, but missed the .pdf. Thanks! Basically it is very simple. FSX is plenty fast as long as you are willing to tweak the settings to what you do and where you are. Look at the image. I get 60 fps at Corfu but with those settings I get 6 fps at Schiphol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
![Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account]](https://forum.aerosoft.com/uploads/monthly_2023_09/Aerosoft_Social_Media_Profilbild_Neu23.thumb.jpg.03721825e6a434ed4af0c8b2b73a5898.jpg)
Recommended Posts