Experiences with FSX, iMacs and Mac Pros

[ColoKent]

All--

Let me start out by saying that I recognize that FSX was designed to be run on PCs. And also that I know that a PC can be bought for much less than a Mac. And that FSX really thrives on a PC. And that this board is packed with notables who are PC experts.

That said however, I am interested in getting either an iMac or perhaps a Mac Pro (I'm leaning toward the iMac, however). I am NOT interested in getting another PC (long story, but business requirements and personal preference are limiting me to an iMac)

What I need to know is what people's real-world experience is with the various iMacs (translation: you own a Mac and are flying FSX on it).

Here are the specific things I want to know regarding FSX on a Mac (considering I fly with the sliders 3/4 to the right-- except for traffic, which I keep at 10%):

- Better to go with the Duo Core 3.06 or the 2.8 Quad Core (new iMac)?
- Will the GT 130 video card work and yield FPS of 28-35 over cities?
- Will the ATI Radeon 4850 (new iMac) support FPS of 28-35 over cities?
- What is the best OS to run FSX on? XP 32 or 64? Vista 32 or 64? Win7 32 or 64?

Any and all constructive thoughts based on personal experience welcomed.

Cheers,

Kent

[Lionheart]

Hey Kent,

I can run FSX on my iMac 24inch Unibody, but my frames drop way down if I turn on Anti Aliasing. For some reason, that one setting kills my frame rates.

My unit has the ATI HD 2600 XT Graphics Card. I hear that nVidia is the way to go. I have thought about installing that GC. There are good used ones on sale (mac versions) on Ebay that arent expensive.

Note that the new iMac can run 16 Gigs of Ram and can hold 2 1TB HD's. :d (I want one bad).


Also, the iMac monitor is pretty dang nice. Its the clearest, brightest monitor I have ever had. (I had to get used to my arms warming up with typing in front of the large screen).

EDIT: I am sure the new GC they have will run alot nicer then mine. This past year, they have been going gung-ho on graphics performance technologies.


Bill

[SkippyBing]

Once you're running Windows it's just a PC, so the same holds true for Macs as PCs when it comes to running Windows and FSX.
I'd go for Win 7 64-bit for the OS as then you're not limited on RAM, not a major factor for FSX as it's a 32 bit program, but useful for other things and it lets you run more applications at the same time. Plus I don't think there's a difference in price.

[Lionheart]

Once you're running Windows it's just a PC, so the same holds true for Macs as PCs when it comes to running Windows and FSX.
I'd go for Win 7 64-bit for the OS as then you're not limited on RAM, not a major factor for FSX as it's a 32 bit program, but useful for other things and it lets you run more applications at the same time. Plus I don't think there's a difference in price.


This is true. I run both WinXP and MacOSX on mine.


I would make sure that Win7 runs in BootCamp with the new Snow Leopard OS. I am sure someone has asked this in the Apple forums;
discussions.apple.com (http://discussions.apple.com)

[Kiwikat]

How about the FSX experience on iMax :monkies:

That would be so cool lol.

[n4gix]

What used to be the major differences between Apple/Macintosh and "everyone else?"

1. Hardware - Apple/Mac systems were unique and completely incompatible with "everyone else."

2. Operating System - Apple/Mac OS had a completely incompatible design paradigm, and could not be run on any hardware other than that designed, manufactured and sold by Apple/Mac.

3. Software Applications - Apple/Mac have always had very limited choices, "everyone else" has enjoyed a huge variety of competitive applications from which to choose.

4. Market Penetration - Apple/Mac have always been single-source systems. With zero competition, ownership costs have always been far higher than that of "everyone else."

Today, Mac systems are built using the same hardware components as "everyone else." IOW, they are essentially high-priced versions of "everyone else." They are PC's.

Today, the highly vaunted Mac OS has been rewritten to use standard PC hardware. This doesn't diminish the uniqueness and power of Mac OS. Indeed, it demonstrates that the legendary power of the Mac OS has always been the OS, not the hardware on which it was originally developed.

In order to leverage themselves into the larger market, Mac systems now -because they are essentially PC's- are able to run any current MSOS, thus allowing owners the huge variety of applications that "everyone else" has always enjoyed.

[Lionheart]

In order to leverage themselves into the larger market, Mac systems now -because they are essentially PC's- able to run MSOS, thus allowing owners the huge variety of applications that "everyone else" has always enjoyed.

Some very good points Bill. Their OS is extremely well done, less expensive, more stable, etc. But there are Windows programs (Windows based that is) that are very 'wanted' by all the market, (like FS). At least Apple makes it possible with BootCamp so you can run FS, Gmax, etc.

More companies are going to Mac to broaden their market. Alot of Mac people just do not want any Windows OS on their rigs. After vista, I almost joined that group. Only FS held me back. Top game companies are now starting to convert their games to Mac. Call of Duty, X3TC are two of the latest to convert theirs. I was hoping Mathijs' new sim would too.

By the way, the new world market is China. They crave FS and they crave Mac... Mac is set up with the Eastern languages already. (totally off topic, but shows you the trends and directions that computers are going towards).