Advice About MS Flight Simulator on a new iMac

Discussion in 'Mac and PC Games' started by ted124b, Dec 12, 2007.

  1. ted124b macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    #1
    Hi, I am looking for some advice about Microsoft's flight simulators. I have a new 24 in iMac with 2.4 core 2 duo/ radeon hd 2600 256mb/ 3gb ram. I would like to use bootcamp to be able to play MS Flight Simulator. I'd like to either:
    1. Install XP Pro and play MS Flight Simulator (9) 2004 A Century of Flight
    2. Install XP Pro and play MS Flight Simulator X (2006)
    3. Install Vista Ultimate and Play MS Flight Simulator 9
    4. Install Vista Ultimate and Play MS Flight Simulator X

    The Cost of Vista vs. XP pro does not matter for me, I receive both at the same discount from a campus retailer. Also I understand many of you would recommend X-Plane over MS Flight Simulator, and I completely understand why. But I already have a copy of X-Plane 8, and I just prefer MS Flight Simulators. So what I am wondering is which of the above configurations would give me the best experience? I am worried that Vista Ultimate and Flight Simulator X might be to much of a graphics draw, and I would have a better experience playing MS FS 2004 with graphics at full settings, then MS X at half settings. Also the reason I would want Vista and the FS X is because of the Directx 10 support in Vista. However I heard that Vista vs XP will usually knock your frame rates down by about 10 per sec for almost every game. Anyway anyone who has experience with any of these configurations on a similar spec'd Mac I would appreciate any information or advice you could give me.
    Thanks!:apple:

    I didn't see this thread before posting: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=399550
    Sorry to bring up a very similar issue discussed there, but if anyone has any feedback about some of other configurations I am thinking about running I would really appreciate it!
    Thanks!
     
  2. Thunderbird8 macrumors regular

    Thunderbird8

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    Hi,

    I'm scrabbling around for similar info at present (as you have seen), and the general feedback so far seems to be that the windows environment on the mac is very stable and is excellent for running FS9 with great graphics and some really good add-ons like photographic scenery (under XP rather than Vista, seems to go the opinion), and whilst you would get FSX to run you would not get very good graphics or framerates.

    I suggest you have a look here: http://forums.flightsim.com/vbfs/forumdisplay.php?f=5

    As there is a fair bit if discussion about FS9 generally and its merits over FSX.

    A word of caution however is that opinion on these issues (IMO) is sooooo subjective that if I were you I would try and see for yourself (if at all possible) someone's machine running the setup you want, that might be easier said than done however.

    Keep in touch if you discover anything.
     
  3. sbarton macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    #3
    XP and FS 2004, no question. Your Imac doesn't have the graphics card necessary to run the DX10 version of MSFS....yeah..it'll run it but...

    FS2004 and XP will give you far better frame rates.

    You have a tough choice for resolution. Your 24" imac has a native resolution of something liek 1920x1200 so if you run MSFS at that resolution, I'm not sure how much graphic detail you'll be able to activate and still keep above 30FPS. Your other option is to drop the display resolution so your not pushing as many pixels. The downside of that option is that the display will have to interpolate and you'll get blurry graphics.

    I'm a big FS fan, and the lack of mid-high end graphics cards is what keeps me away from the iMac, despite the fact that I love everything else about it.

    Let us know what kind of frame rates you end up with at various settings and resolutions!

    Best,
    Bart
     
  4. ted124b thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    #4
    Thanks for the responses. Both were very helpful, thanks for that link, its a great source of information. I am going to go with XP and MSFS 2004 (v. 9), I value stability and good fps above the newest graphic additions in FS X. But I think I will also download the trial of FS X and see how it runs in XP, also if I have time I will see how it runs under Vista a well. I will post back my results here for people who are interested to see. If anyone else has a similar set up already running let us know what you have experienced.

    One last thing, does MS FS 2004 running in XP take advantage of the 2nd core of the intel chip? I know MS FS X did not until service pack 1 was released for the game.

    Thanks!
     
  5. Thunderbird8 macrumors regular

    Thunderbird8

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    Not sure about that Ted.

    Sure someone else will though!
     
  6. zyuzin4 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Eugene, OR
    #6
    Agreed. I run FS2004 on XP on my 1st gen Macbook. I would go for FS2004 due to the high quality addons available. You can get FS2004 to look better or equal to FSX I can get on the ground 15fps at most detailed airports with med-high graphics on just the macbook so FS2004 is pretty easy to please
     
  7. zyuzin4 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Eugene, OR
    #7

    No it won't but I THINK you can get FS process affinity to processor 1 and other addons to use only processor 2. Haven't tried it though
     

Share This Page