New Computer decisions...Help!

[Randy_Cain]

Hi,

My RAID controller died once more. I'm losing faith in components other than just the RAID controller. (...2 controllers burned in 1 month..test results to be released tomorrow). Anyway, I'm "shopping" for ideas for a new machine. My main problem right now is, of course, the price.

I had a Gigabyte 7VRX Socket A with an AMD XP1900+. 4Gig RAM, 512cache, Nvidia GT 7900 (AGP), running Windows XP Sp2. 2x500 Gig drives in string RAID config.

If I were to go for a new machine now, almost all of the architecture has changed and I can no longer decipher truth from fiction where "American Marketing" is concerned. Could someone please help me put together something that would give at least a small boost in performance, but mostly just keep me in a machine that would run both FS9 and FSX without hickups?

I had no problems with FS9. Even with all sliders turned up all the way, and running 1280x1024x32. Basically, I didn't have a problem til died ...again. (originally built in 2002). Some of the points I need help with:

32 bit or 64 bit? I understand that any full 64 bit Vista/Windows7 system won't run unsigned drivers. This would be a real problem for me, as a lot of my old planes, and other addons to FS9 and other software has old unsigned 32 bit drivers.

Another point is I probably won't be able to get the "best" Nvidia graphics card out there. From what I've read, the GeForce GTX 260 (or better) would work for me, but does anyone have any firsthand experience with any of these?

Processor.... i7 920 or AMD Phenom II? Anyone noticed or had issues with either? ..both? Recommendations, please.

I guess that's it for now. Anyone with questions or suggestions, please let me know. I'll check back here.

Sorry I missed out this past weekend in our flight, but..I guess you've guessed by know.

Yours,

[pung]

All my knowledgeable friends claim that AMD performs better graphics, GeForce works great for me.
Unfortunately you will have to get VISTA or "7", although I understand that "7" is better than VISTA.
There is a setting that will allow unsigned drivers to be loaded, so a 64 bit would be better, since you can use more memory. 32 bit will not use more than 4 gigs.

[reichfur]

Howdy ,

I just replaced my ancient P4 system with an AMD 955 quad core , at a stock 3.2 speed . It has 4 gigs of DDR3 , 500 gb SATA drive , and an on board 6150LE . Even lacking a PCI E card at this time , my frames are never lower than 25 , sliders all set to high . I paid $494. with free shipping . I run XP Pro in 64 bit and have had no problems with running FS2004 , or with my Calclassic add ons ! (only aircraft I bother with) Runs and looks better than my old system could do , with a 6800XT Ultra agp , and a 2.4 cpu .

[Tom/CalClassic]

Hi,

The short answer is that for FS9, any reasonable computer and video card you buy today should run it just fine. So 32 bit vs 64, AMD vs Intel, and a 256 MB video card vs 1 GB really makes little difference. For FSX, buy the biggest and fastest you can afford. Head over to Tom's Hardware and do a search for the components you're interested in - usually more there than you will want to read...

Hope this helps,

[pung]

Toms dead on. You only need ultra high memory for FSX. My 32 bit VISTA runs great all sliders maxed if flying modern. When backing off in retro--no problems. I cannot max if using FSX, (on those rare occasions), but a new system would only improve FSX, itwould probably do very little for FS2004.

[Wolfgang]

Hi,

I would say the core i 7 makes the race,
even in price.
But the performance is the best at the moment.
Same is true for the newest Radeon high end
graphic cards.
Nvidia isn't a real competitor at the moment.
Also I would prefer an Intel chipset.

Permanency of this information is 2-3 months ;D

Best Regards
Wolfgang

[Randy_Cain]

Hi,

Well, I have good news and bad news.

The good news first: I don't have to buy a new computer. ;D

The bad news... I don't get to buy a new computer.

...and for what happened:

I figured something was terribly wrong with my motherboard after just burning out my RAID controller card a couple of weeks ago. I managed to find a replacement and just swapping the controller card fixed everything.... so when the array "died" last weekend, I assumed there must be some gremlin in the machine that's now burning them up. As it turns out, my guy put my array in a test bed he has at the shop and it recognized the array.... as the controller card and one array drive...and some other drive that was plugged into the card.

The best guess that with a bunch of XP updates/security updates I downloaded earlier that afternoon, there was a RAID controller driver update that was either corrupted or just didn't install correctly when they went in. Thanks, Micro$oft! ... c'est la vie.



This means I'm left with half of every file I once had... in other words, nuttin'. I'm having to start from scratch. I'm taking the precaution of getting a new RAID controller card(..as in a card that's still in production, so if one does burn out, I don't have to go through the world wide search again.) Otherwise, I should just have a much smoother and cleaner machine, as I've been loading and deleting software on that one since I bought it in 2002. In that respect, I feel very good about the prospects of a performance increase...with all the hardware being originally configured into XP instead of having 2 hardrive changes, 3 video card changes, etc.

I may be posting "Wanted" ads for files lost. I know I can depend on you guys to help me rebuild, if you can. Thanks in advance for that. ;D

You guys ROCK!

Yours,

[Tom/CalClassic]

Sorry about no new computer, but your completely new "old" computer will probably feel like it.