Assistance for a new PC for MSFS

User Support Hub Hardware & Peripherals
21

Welcome and don’t worry about the lack of ability to create a new thread yet. This forum has a trust level system that slowly grants new users more access to prevent spammers and such. Just keep participating and commenting, and your trust level will quickly get to the level you can start your own threads.

As to your jump into the sim, the minimum specs listed are probably the original minimums from when it was released several years ago, not accounting for any updates since then and may no longer be truly valid. I will say that’s how I started out and while it looked surprisingly good at minimum settings, I didn’t stay there long and don’t suggest you try it. There is a TON of info on system builds for this, and it would be too complicated to start explaining the pc nomenclature for CPU’s and GPU’s.

Instead, I’ll start with some basics and we can build from there. For the CPU, you’ll want an AMD processor with X3D at the end of the name. The 5800x3d was the king of gaming processors last generation, and the 7800x3d is this generation’s king (there is no 6000 series CPU). There are other x3d CPU’s, but those two are the sweet spot for value and performance. The sim isn’t like most games, and will be very CPU intensive.

For the GPU, things get more complicated because of new tech like upscaling techniques (rendering at a lower resolution, then upscaling the output to the monitor) and frame generation (creating a frame on the GPU that’s interpolated from two regular frames rather than running the entire processing pipeline). I personally don’t like those because I don’t want the trade-off of increased artifacts, others will swear by them because it can increase frame rates. Your monitor’s refresh rate can also play into the decision. About the only rule of thumb here is get lots of VRAM. 8 GB can get you by well as I was on that until very recently. If planning to sim at 1440p, I would suggest at least 12 GB VRAM, at 16 GB if going 4k. But VRAM is something relatively cheap to add to a card, so manufacturers sometimes do that to increase perceived value and price. Just because a card has more doesn’t automatically mean better.

If you can give us more detail on your budget, what resolution and refresh rates you want to aim for, just how high you want to run the graphics settings, and whether or not you want to rely on upscaling or frame generation, if you want to run vanilla or go heavy with mods (especially when it comes to live traffic mods) we can start providing suggestions. In the mean time, start watching YouTube videos on the sim. There are tons out there that can give you an idea of how a CPU and GPU can perform. There is no built in benchmark for it and there’s too many variables to make a direct head to head comparison, but it’ll start giving you an idea of what to expect.

4 Likes
22

Thank you for such a clear and comprehensive reply, and for the info about this forum’s approach.

As is so often the case too little and too much background can both be wrong, so I’ll elaborate, if you don’t mind.

My Sim Flying is occasional and casual. It is only ever in the 172, almost always VFR, with some IFR for fun and interest. A little bit of ATC where required. And for the most part, once in the air, the scenery is more of less irrelevant, as navigating, controlling, being safe are the focus; but nevertheless, for some obtuse reason I want the outside world to look real! Contrary, I know.

X-Plane works, but because it is on a relaively old 27" Mac it struggles at even at low settings, so the grand idea was to find a second hand gaming machine on ebay, where the owner’s requirements mean that it doesn’t work as well as he would like, but where the spec he has is sufficient for my needs.

All this is prompted by me thinking about a new Mac to replace my all-in-one, and discovering that nowadays they drive any monitor you care to provide, so I thought I’d be able to use a separate PC to drive that monitor while I was flying the Sim, so I saw an opportunity to get better scenery at a small-ish outlay.

I’m afraid the best answers I can give to your questions are a bit vague, because I’m not sure I really understand the terms you use! I don’t think I want too much out of the new system, just for it to be OK, with a fair degree of realism. I’m not too exercised about the number of ground vehicles, or other aircraft, or whether the weather is super representative, and as the flying is the southwest of the UK and across to France with only regional airports near me the skies are relatively clear, especially at my low altitudes.

And, cue snorts of derision, I was rather hoping I’d be able to find something for, say, £300 ($375) - something that has been more or less discarded by its present owner in the search for the latest. The problem with this naive approach is that while there are plenty of machines I could buy, I really don’t know whether the specs of those machines are enough, hence my original question.

23

Really excellent post, @Mooncatt3953

1 Like
24

At that price point, I suggest an Xbox Series S ($310) instead.
Or, if you can afford a bit extra, a refurbished Series X ($410).

1 Like
25

May want to put some coffee on for this one…

Sounds like you’re actually going to be a very light user, which is a good thing for your budget, but will still be a challenge. I tried looking at eBay options for here and wasn’t finding much at $375 (US), but options open up more if able to stretch the budget to $400 or better. So here’s a quick rundown of how to understand specs.

Intel: i3, i5, i7, i9 is the series of CPU in a given generation, which are further defined by the product number. Think of it like a car manufacturer that has multiple models, and those models further defined by the trim level. Example: i5-12600k. i5 is a mid range line and indicates core count. 12 means it’s twelfth generation (late 2021). 600 describes where the clock speeds lie for that line, but is NOT a direct indicator of the speeds (I.e. Not 6.00 GHz or anything like that). K means it’s unlocked for overclocking. No K suffix means you can’t overclock. They normally have integrated graphics, but an F suffix means no integrated graphics. S means a specially binned higher performing version that’s generally a waste of money. The i5-xx600k of 10th gen and above are likely your best bets for a value CPU. Maybe even a 9th gen.

AMD: I’m not as familiar with their naming because I’m a recent convert to them, but they are known for being better values. The first number in the model indicates the generation and the last 3 the relative spec. An X suffix means it’s a higher performing version of the CPU. X3D means it has a special cache layout on the CPU that significantly boosts gaming performance despite a slightly lower core speed and not overclock capable. They normally don’t have integrated graphics, but a G suffix means it does, and the newest 7000 series has integrated graphics by default without a G suffix. A 3600x or 5600x and above should do ok in your use case.

It’s worth noting that the sim primarily uses one or two cores. That means you should focus on single core speed more than core count in a given generation of CPU. You’ll need a dedicated graphics card for the sim, but a CPU with integrated graphics comes in handy in case of troubleshooting video output or your GPU outright dies. Now for GPU’s.

Nvidia: GTX is an older card type that are almost useless for the sim these days unless you get something like a 1080 Ti (Ti being a higher spec version of a card). RTX are newer GPU’s where real time ray tracing was added, but it’s worth noting ray tracing is extremely resource intensive and not worth trying on their cheaper cards, and the current version of the sim doesn’t offer it anyway. Their cards use a 4 digit naming. The first two are the generation, and the last two are the relative performance of that generation. That means an older card like the 2080 could perform on par or sometimes better than a newer 3060. The xx60 series cards are generally considered mid range gaming cards. The lower series cards are often not a good value unless they are dirt cheap. Nvidia has also been know to play games with their naming to trick customers into thinking they are getting something better than they are, so pay attention to their reviews and benchmarks.

AMD: Their cards all start with RX (also a ray tracing indicator) and a 3 or 4 digit model name. You’ll want to go with an upper 5000 series or above. XT will be their higher spec suffix, so something like a 5700xt would be about the minimum I’d go with. My last card was a 6600xt and it worked very well at 1440p at a mix of mid and high graphics settings (the sim is very tunable). It would be a pretty cheap card on the used market today, so it’s one I can personally recommend for a budget build.

RAM: You’ll want at least 16 GB. If buying a used system, make sure it has 2 sticks. On a Windows pc, they use dual channel memory, so you get more performance out of 2x8 GB sticks than a single 16 GB stick. Most motherboards have 4 RAM slots, but using those can make things unstable or require using slower memory speeds. It can serve a purpose in production workloads, but useless and possible hurtful in gaming. Try to shoot for at least 3000MHz speeds or higher.

Storage: A solid state drive (m.2 or 2.5" ssd) is a MUST. If only using one drive, try to get at least a 1TB drive because the sim is huge. It was well over 100 GB when I first got it several years ago, and all the updates have only increased it. If you plan to install other programs or get add-ons, then consider a small OS drive and 1TB or larger gaming/program drive.

Or do like @BegottenPoet228 suggested and get an Xbox Series S (not to be confused with the older Xbox One S) or Series X. It will have limitations on what it can do, but can’t deny the convenience of knowing it’s something that works and at least close to your budget. I have it on my Series X and it does fine for casual flying and for when my kids want to fly.

3 Likes
26

@FlambeSinger705 First, Welcome to the forums! :slightly_smiling_face:

Both @Mooncatt3953 & @BegottenPoet228 have given great advice. For the best performance, MSFS requires a harmonious balance between the various hardware components in a PC - primarily the CPU and graphics card, but also the memory, motherboard & storage devices.

It is for that reason that many here build their own PCs. The components in many off-the-shelf PCs available in stores are fine for most applications & games but are not well-balanced for MSFS. My concern is that if you purchase a second-hand PC, the settings required to get reasonable performance (i.e. frames per second or “FPS”) may not give you a visual experience much better than X-Plane, especially if it one of the off-the-shelf PCs. These PCs also tend to cut corners w.r.t. quality on some components to increase profit margins.

So, before purchasing, ask the seller to provide the specific make & model number of the CPU, GPU, Memory, Motherboard, Storage (hard disk drives, solid-state drives), power supply and any PCIE cards inside the case, as well as which version of the Windows operating system installed on the PC. Post the details here on the forums - I suggest you create a new thread for them - so we can take a look & advise if you are about to buy a “lemon”.

For example, the Standard version of MSFS with no additional add-ons will take up around 350 GB of storage space but also needs extra space for caches & decompression of downloaded files. You really need a minimum of 1 TB of storage space for this game. The Windows Operating System also needs storage space. If the PC only has a single 500 GB Solid-State Drive (SSD), you’re going to have to shell out additional £££ for a new drive - but there may not be a slot for it, so you’ll have to swap it with the existing one.

I tend to agree with @BegottenPoet228 that an Xbox Series S might be the best option for your price-point, especially if you are not familiar with the Windows operating system and / or don’t want to deal with troubleshooting issues with it. Note too that on a PC you can either purchase MSFS via the MS-Store, Steam or get a Gamepass, so if you decide to go that route, we can discuss the pro’s & con’s of those choices too.

To summarize: running MSFS on a PC gives you a lot of flexibility, but at the cost of greater complexity & configuration work. If you don’t mind the latter, the PC is a good platform for you. If you prefer simplicity, Xbox is the better choice.

1 Like
27

I would highly recommend raising that price point and opting for a Series X. Both Xboxes suffer with a lack of memory and the Series S has it the worst of two. Plus, the base X has 2x the storage of the base S. You’re going to be looking at buying an expansion storage card ($$) pretty quickly if you buy an S and do any sort of Marketplace purchases — even if they are just the free World Updates & City Updates.

I enjoyed the sim for about a year and a half on the Series X prior to building a bespoke PC for MSFS. It can, and will, offer an incredible amount of value and plenty of sim options to experience before you’d hit a point where you really want the added abilities of a PC.

1 Like
28

Half the fun for many of us is the sightseeing aspect of it! Unfortunately I just remembered something that you should be aware of. The sim uses what’s called photogrametry in many areas of the world, which can create more true to life cityscapes. The downside is these are often not very pretty up close, and some areas (London, for example) can look like a dystopian wasteland of half demolished buildings until you’re 1,500-2,000ft up. If you plan to fly down low over major metro areas to sight see, you may want to consider turning photogrametry off in the settings and use auto gen scenery. The technology simply isn’t there to create a true to life representation of everything. A lot of landmarks are hand crafted, though.

Again, YouTube is your friend to know what to expect. Here’s a video I made flying through the middle of Chicago to give you an idea, and it’s one of the better photogrametry locations. Ignore the performance issues as I was demonstrating effects of traffic settings and intentionally pushing the limits.

29

I’ve just returned back to MSFS as well for a couple months now. I’m still using an older HP Z420 workstation, Intel E5 1600 CPU, 48 GB DDR3 Memory, 600 watt power supply, and with Windows 10 and MSFS installation on a 1 TB solid state drive. I replaced the original video card with a Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti (8GB) for about $300. My monitor is an older Samsung LU28750 (28" 60 Hz refresh rate) but provides good 3840-2160 display resolution. A good quality DVI cable is important (stay away from HDMI).
This system is not such a good gaming computer but works just fine so far with flight simulator (note this is a simulator). Most of testing and optimization of settings were done by flying a Cesna at low altitudes around Chicago and it’s airports while making sharp turns through complex scenery.
For present I feel no need to buy a powerful high priced gaming computer.

30

@NixonRedgrave: Your points are well taken. A greater budget expands the hardware possibilities. However, I risk contradicting myself here, as in another post I wrote, in the context of MSFS 2024: “my general recommendation at this point is to hold off making any expensive (as defined by the user) hardware upgrades…”

A £300 Xbox or PC would allow @FlambeSinger705 to get an initial experience of MSFS. Hopefully the specs for 2024 will be available by October in time for the holiday sales (Does the UK have the equivalent of the Thanksgiving sales period in the USA?), so at that point FlambeSinger705 could decide to stay with Xbox or sell it & upgrade to a PC spec’d for 2024 with any additional £££ that can be squirreled away between now & then. We might also know by then, if there is a public beta for 2024 sometime this summer, if the photogrammetry and “dystopian wasteland of half demolished buildings” that @Mooncatt3953 mentions is improved / reduced in the new version.

31

Welcome to the forums.
Others have given you very good advice.
I would like to add an observation regarding power consumption.

You could probably find a used PC with specs good enough for your intended use case close to that budget (eg a quick search on ebay shows this).

However older PC hardware like this would consume more power than a console, and inflate electricity bills.

An XBOX X Series would be much more efficient power wise, and would allow you to use MSFS in relative comfort without exceeding your budget (example here). Depending on where you live it could save you quite a bit on electricity vs an older PC.

X series is the sweet spot for MSFS, console wise. Get one with as much storage as possible from the outset, as the OEM storage upgrade options are a bit costly.

The main drawback of Xbox vs PC is the limits on customizing the overall experience. But given your expected usage pattern, it should not be an issue.

You can always upgrade to a PC down the line if you feel like it, a second hand Xbox X series will retain its value on the used market.

32

Many of you have clearly put a lot of effort into thinking about, and then putting into words, how you might help me. I’m very grateful that you should do that. What a pleasant community I have stumbled upon.

So I shall try to put into action the knowledge you have given me…

Firstly, I’ll get the new Mac, and buy a display with MSFS use in mind.

When I read about building my own PC my immediate thought was “Well, that’s one option I shan’t be considering.” But out of curiosity I asked that nice Mr Google about it. What a relevation! Not nearly as daunting as I might have thought, and well within my perceived capabilities.

So I’m going to do a lot more research, and that may well be the approach. Already I can see that it will blow the budget, but that can be offset by the interest and challenges the project would provide.

And if all that comes to naught, I think the idea of an X-Box is sound.

Once again I thank you all for being so welcoming and helpful.

1 Like
33

Sounds like a fun time ahead of you, and we’ll be here to help along the way. You may want to start your own thread at that point to help us all keep track.

34

I’ll be sure to!

35

There is no direct way to play Flight Simulator on Mac OS, but there are two ways to run it on your Mac. One is by installing Parallels and the other is Apple’s Boot Camp Assistant.

The good news is Parallels is compatible with both Intel and M1-based Mac therefore it is an easy way to play Flight simulation and other games on Mac.

I’m not a Machead, so I’m unsure about any possible performance issues running Parallels or Boot Camp.

36

The sim will not run well on a Mac with either of the “emulation” applications. I would not consider that as an option. With your stated use case…xBox X should do nicely.

3 Likes
37

Thanks, I looked at both those options, and everything I read said “Don’t even think about it”. Thanks for the input, I appreciate it.

1 Like
38

I have read thru this stuff and have a question versus starting a new thread.

We currently have the following set up for the flight sim. Honeycomb Alpha yoke, 2-RealSim G5’s (this was done to mimic the real plane set up), a Real Sim Garmin 430 (also done to mimic the real plane) and a Honeycomb Bravo throttle control system for multi engine and a Thrustmaster pedals.

Needs: A computer to run MSFS 2020 with 2024 coming out soon. Three monitor set up with the capability to move to VR if available (budget restraints).

Monitors and stand suggestions to be capable of immersion into flight sim for VFR and IFR practice.

Potential add on’s would the ability to add driving games but that is secondary to the flight Sim.

I have looked at going with these different premade set ups as I am not into or have the competent skill set to buy parts but willing to try if the price is right. I have included some of the things I think I need but open to others expert opinions.

Flight Velocity PC -Model 3

Digital Storm Lumos

Jetline systems

Building my own :

  • Operating System: Windows 11 Pro 64-Bit

SSD Drive: 2TB

  • Motherboard: Intel Z690 Motherboard
  • Graphics Processor: 12GB GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, GDDR6X
  • 1000 Watt Gold Certified Power Supply
  • AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D with 4.2GHz 8 core processor
  • CPU Cooling: NZXT Kraken Liquid Cooler

IMG_1881.heic

39

You may want to check that motherboard selection :thinking:

You also need ram and likely don’t need the water cooling.

Any decent 4070-4080+ rig with the 7800X3D will CRUSH out any driving game out there, so you’re covered on GPU there…

Currently we’re limited by asosbo not being able to fully utilize the hardware we have now.

1 Like
40

Hey there :slight_smile:

Z690 is an intel chipset. You need an X670 or B650 motherboard to run a modern AMD CPU.

I have a softspot for the Asrock Taichi products, you can also pick an MSI Carbon or Asus ROG E, all premium choices without being too much or outlandish.
Choosing an X670 vs a B650 is a function of the actual usage, and actual specs. In your particular case, a X670 would do no harm, but look at the USB connectivity, SATA ports, NVME connections, etc to determine which one is best for you.
All are good choices.

GPU Wise, I would recommend a 16GB card at minimum.
The 4070ti Super is perfect and has all the Nvidia bells & whistles, I have a soft spot for the AMD 7900XT due to the 20GB VRAM.

CPU Wise, 7800X3D is the current sweet spot for MSFS.
If you intend to use your PC as a creation platform, for video editing, CAD, etc, 7950X3D is a better choice.

Storage wise, last I heard, Crucial T500 offers one of the best price / performance ratio on the market.

Your cooling choice is fine. Personally I like the ARCTIC Liquid Freezer III 420, it is sold at very good prices at the moment, but it requires a large case. A bit overkill for the current gen AM5 chips, the flip side is you can run it at lower speeds and achieve excellent thermals with little noise.

PSU wise 1000W should provide ample power.
I personally like to pick very good quality power supplies and keep them for a very long time. Seasonic has very high quality products, that are also sold under other brands (Asus ROG, etc). This is an area where you can spend money knowing you will keep it in use for 10+ years across several systems, if sized appropriately, so going 1200W+ is not a bad investment for future proofing, so that you can drop in a more power hungry CPU/GPU in the future.

Here is what a premium, high quality configuration would look like pricing wise.
You can select another country on the drop down feature at the top right of the screen, and adjust the parts selection based on your brand preferences or budget.

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/DYCKDZ

Caveat: keep in mind AMD is expected to announce their next 9000 Ryzen CPU products in early June at COMPUTEX Taipei. A new batch of Mobos will come around that time, probably named X870/B850.
NVIDIA may also unveil their 5000 GPUs sooner than initially expected as well.

1 Like