cyberpilot Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Just had a quote for a new computer so that I can run FTX to its full advantage. Will the following specs cut the mustard? Some advice appreciated. Many thanks. Frank Ezone Computer System misc parts Intel Core i7 920 2.66 GHz Processor Socket 1366 (8MB L3 Cache) misc parts Asus P6T Deluxe Intel X58 Chipset Socket 1366 ATX QPI Up to 6.4GT/s ICH10R Support Core i7 Processor Extreme Edition DDR3 1600 SATAII Raid Express Gate SLI + CrossFireX 2xGB Lan 8 Channel Sound 2x1394a misc parts G.SKILL 6GB Tri-Channel kit (2GB x 3) DDR3-1600 (PC-12800) CL9-9-9-24 MEMORY RETAIL F3-12800CL9T-6GBNQ 300074SN Asus ENGTX280/HTDP/1G PCI-E2.0 Video Card 2x DVI-I HTV 1G DDR3 300246VS Seagate Barracuda 1.5TB 7200rpm 32M Cache SATAII NCQ (3 years warranty) 300069SN Asus DRW-2014L1T LIGHTSCRIBE Black/White DVD-Writer DRIVE SATA 300716MS Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Retail 301015AW Thermaltake W0131 Toughpower Cable Management 850W ATX /w PFC/silent Fan 300511AT Antec Nine Hundred Ultimate Gamer Case (No Power) misc parts Philips 24" 240BW8EB Wide WUXGA Black LCD Monitor 300072MS Operating system Microsoft Windows XP Professional Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinn Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Obviously you are stepping into the slightly unknown area of the new processors and I wont comment on that apart from - good idea One thing that I would comment on from my own recent purchase of a new machine is this - I personally am regretting the selection of the Antec 900 - I am wishing that I purchased the 1200 instead because I dont have enough room to add all the drives that I now find that I require and the dust handling on the 1200 is far better than the 900 (it does make a huge difference in my case, living in a very old wooden house) Another observation is the inclusion of a single LARGE drive - this is again a personal opinion but I tend to prefer more smaller drives (in my case 500Gb) simply because that way I spread the data over multiple platters with more heads available for read/writes thereby potentially increasing efficiency and a lower cost (in terms of data loss as well as $$$) in case of failures - I also consider that 500Gb drives have a better track record and therefore better potential life expectancy It is obviously an area open to much debate but in my experience of 20 years in the industry (retired 10 yrs ago) the bleeding edge devices with moving parts are not necessarily the best way to go - I have a similar capacity of 1.5Tb usable but spread across multiple physical drives that can be cheaply replaced in the event of failure Otherwise it looks like a ball tearer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotspot Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Great specs - should be a winner!!! I was a bit reluctant to go for single big drives as Quinn mentioned, so put 500Gb multis in. ALSO I used a vista ultimate 64bit OS as the word in the forums was that FSX worked more smoothly on the 64bits - very pleased with the results on two different rigs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 To be honest like George I believe that you might be overstepping the mark and using as yet unproven hardware as far as the Main Board and Processor go. I would not use a single drive but rather a small 20-30 Gb for Boot and at least 2 SATA's for Programing and leave the 1.5 Tb for backup. Given the specs it should run well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyberpilot Posted November 11, 2008 Author Share Posted November 11, 2008 Thanks guys. Your advice is greatly appreciated. Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.