Kira

"size and resolution of this monitor should govern your choice of graphics card too." Thank you Arthur, that's something "obvious" that I'd completely overlooked. What about lifespan of the LCDs? As I've stated, these daggone CRTs just won't quit, which is part of the reason I'm still using it. You have a point about power consumption though. Another power question: FT said that the power unit isn't running full load often. I understand this. Question is will a 750W unit pull more from the wall than my current 450W unit constantly, or is it only a matter of having the extra power capability there if and only when it's needed? As per what to put the savings towards, I was thinking cheap refurbished monitors may be easy to come by. Rather than spend for new, I was thinking something more like this with the extra savings from this modified build: http://livingwithanerd.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/hotas-warthog-thrustmaster-joystick.jpg Single versus dual RAM. Space is a major question, as is power pull on a single slot. The 8GB is "taller" than the 4, but using 2x4 uses 2 slots. The 8 also would pull twice as much from a single slot. If I go with 4, I think I can put up to 16 in. 8 would mean 32. This current machine started life with 3gb and now has 4. I've not had much issue with need to add a boatload of RAM. Thinking that 8 would work for now, and 16 would be the maximum I'd need over the life of the machine. Thus, 2x4 ( eight!!! damned smilyface! GRRRRR) and eventually 4x4 (16) would work just fine. No need for 1x8 or eventually 2x4+2x8 (24) or 1x8x4 (32) in the long run based on experience with this machine. Graphics cards and monitors. Am I correct that I'm looking for specific resolution, which is directly tied to screen size (17" would provide lower resolution perhaps than a 21-24"?) and weather it's widescreen or not? I got the impression that resolution had more to do with aspect ratio than actual screen size. Basically number of pixels horizontally and vertically which isn't directly tied to screen size. Wait. That doesn't make sense. Bigger screen = more pixels = greater resolution for Graphics card to need to put out.

Thanks again Jabo. Yup mine are all SATA. No, I don't run all three. Usually two, and usually the 2TB's one of them. I'd like to change that, since it's not what I got it for in the first place, but that depends on my 250 and if I can salvage anything on it or just start over with it. Arthur: Yep, $967's more like what I'm looking at. Didn't mean for you to go back through it all, but I do appreciate it. Best thank you I can come up with? Well, we are the Dogz. What's the only thank you worth its salt? Have a sheep! I came up with $945 from what I was looking at, minus some major parts. Rundown below: CPU: I7 4790K $320 [i7 4790K $320] Board: Z97-A $145 [Z97-X SLI $115] RAM: Hadn't nailed it but figuring 4 GB at about $40 [Patriot Viper 8GB $70] Graphics: Nvidia GTX 770 $310 [EVGA GTX 960 $210] Power: Corsair 600W or 650W $65 or $75 [Antec 750 $80] DVD: LG 2x DVD:RW in hand $0 [samsung $21] OS: Win 7 $? working on a friend who's using Win 8 now... [Win 7 $100] HD: 1x 120GB SSD, 1x 250GB HHD, 1x 2TB HHD [seagate $51] TOTALS: Original: $990 might be less. Suggested (Arthur): $795 (+up to 151 = $945) I understand most of it, but there are a few I don't follow. 1. RAM. I haven't heard of these guys. But, they're on Ebay's list of top gaming RAM manufactures, so they can't be that bad. Right? http://www.ebay.com/gds/Top-8-Best-Rated-Gaming-Ram-/10000000178078475/g.html Also regarding RAM: Is one stick better than two? 1x 8GB or 2x 4GB 2. Graphics. The GTX 960 is a conundrum. How is it that it's fairly comparable (perhaps slightly less capable), from a reputable company (I have an EVGA 240 in my current build), yet a two-thirds the price of the 770? Is it in part due to 3rd party manufacturing ie it's not the name brand card? Also, why the higher number yet comparable performance? http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-960-vs-GeForce-GTX-770 3. Power. Antec's another I hadn't heard of, but upon more research, it's mentioned as one of the better ones. Once again the question arises: Do I need the 750W or will 600-650 do? Still working various calculators figuring this number. 4. Speaking of "major parts", I'm still using an old CRT. Thing's like the Energizer bunny, it just won't quit. But the other day, I ran into a deal on a refurbished LCD for $12. Ridiculous, thought I, can it be true? More important: Is it worth risking (a whopping $12!) on an old "refurbished" monitor? Silly question, but I'm asking it anyway! Still, "refurbished" makes me leery, but the price is right. I know I'm going to want an LCD with all this capability I'm cramming into this new machine, no two ways about it. Most of them were pretty small 17" or so. I'm thinking somewhere in the region of 21"-24" or so. My old 21" CRT was just huge, and wouldn't fit in my space, but with an LCD, I'd be more than okay. I do have overhead issues, though, with a shelf mounted to the wall that the 21" CRT wouldn't fit under. With an LCD, though, I could pull it out from under and it'd be okay. The shelf covers about half of my computer desk, but there's plenty of room up "forward".

Very nice. Except... Is the money for that second missile shot at the enemy A/C going down coming out of his allowance? Those things ain't cheap! Oh, and by the way sir, if the tail's gone, she ain't getting home, so save your ammo! Nice video.

Hum. I'm already $100 over that, not including the OS, using the 770 and 600W. It's still less than I paid for this system when I bought it. Looks like I need to find where you found! (Which is...?) I'll look back on Newegg and see. That's where I've been looking anyway.

About power: Yep, I've heard the same Jabo. Hate to burn it up for want of that extra 50W buffer. Overthink? Naw. If anything underthink. Just look at my choice with the K, knowing full well that I don't really need the extra since I'm (probably) not going to be overclocking. Nah, Jabo's right. Part of the fun is specing it out. I am, however, leery of other than brand name parts shall we say. Just a matter of "it's going to last" and "what's little more spent when I'm spending this much?" Well, I already know the answer to the second! A little, plus a little, plus... ohmyGod! Time? I've been thinking about this "need" for a new build for at least one and possibly two years! The problem is that now I've finally decided that it really is time, and as FT says, the fish are waiting! (And they don't wait patiently!) Regarding the 4390 vs 4390K 4390 $300 4390K $320 ...? It's $20. When I'm already spending that much, and this is the heart of the computer...

Ah. Thanks Arthur. Time to go RAM hunting. Is the roughly $10 per GB I'm running across accurate? I suspected building myself would be cheaper, but now I'm wondering. The price is $100 and will be closer to $200 more than I was thinking for this build originally - but - it's still around the same price that I payed for this one originally (minus case)... that lasted 8-10 years. I know the I7 4390K is overkill today, but figure that around the 4-5 year mark it'll be mainstream in capability, and like this one, at 8-10 years will be majorly long in the tooth but probably will still run things at lower settings. However, I'm rather happy with the thought of "got what I want rather than what they happened to have", and think it might be worth the extra price. I'll have to run that by a friend who got an I7 based computer five years ago for just about $1000. This is the one he waited for two months camping Dell's overstock and "ordered it but then canceled" section to find. That thing would run rings around this one, even five years ago. I'm still a bit concerned about power. Nvidia recommends 600W as minimum when using their 4390K, and I'm not one to go against manufacturer recommendations. Additionally I'm not looking to overclock now, but "might" in the future. It seems a bad thing to do to a card you'd like to have last as long as possible. Also, I've discovered that power packs loose efficiency like everything else as they get old, and will slowly reduce their output while load will be the same. I'm seriously considering a 650W instead for that reason, but am not entirely sure that's necessary. I'll be running this thing often enough that if I don't have to pull that extra 50W, I really, really don't want to. One of the reasons I went with the I7, then the K in the first place was power consumption vs capability, and I'm afraid that an extra 50W (if) I don't need will kill any savings from the extra efficiency of the K over standard I7 and I7 over I5.

Just updated the first post. I'm looking to spend more than I wanted (okay, a lot more), but then I'm also figuring on long term viability and adaptability of the system. I'd like to swap out the RAM when I get the chance, but since I have the old stuff, I figure I can make it work for a while. I may swap out my old CPU cooling fan as well, since it still works. Again, a matter of "new", vs "still works". If it fails, it shouldn't be catastrophic like a power unit failure, though. I don't know for a fact that it will, as the old fan is AMD and the new board is Intel.

Thank's Jabo! I have an AMD board, and am seriously considering an I5, which, of course, wouldn't work. My main concern with regards to the AMD version (FX 8350) is the prohibitive power consumption for comparative performance (roughly 45%(!) more according to CPUBoss.com). Others here have decried my "want to save money" with "I5", asking why I'm considering buying more than I need. My response, to myself, is that this current computer that is now in desperate need of replacement was over the "need" when I bought it, which is why it lasted as viable for so long (8-10 years, depending on parts in question). I'm looking for long term viability here. Thus, the AMD in that particular form isn't worth the front end savings. Over time, the I5 3470 would pay for the difference in roughly four years according to my research, due the power usage savings alone. You have a very good point about power supply. I was (and to be honest still am) thinking of salvaging my 450W PSU, but the more I think about it, the less I like the idea of chancing several brand new parts to an old power unit. I've done a little searching with regards to motherboards, and am overwhelmed, to say the least. Not really sure where to start on that front, aside from learning about various ports, etc. I am a bit concerned about "will my new board fit in the Shark case?", but what I've seen and read about that, it seems it may be okay, as long as I keep my eyes open. It's looking more and more like my original plan of swapping a few parts just isn't going to fly due to bottlenecks elsewhere. About the only thing I have going for my original plan of swap vs the Dell route is the fact that just about anything I want to put into the Shark case would be viable. Rather than "It's a Dell. Our parts, or no PC, take your pick." What I don't know yet is cost as a whole vs parting out cost. With a car, a whole car is far and away cheaper than the individual parts. I'm already get this with PCs, but not much. Seems to me from the Dell side, anyway, that the unit cost of individual parts may be cheaper than in store bought PC form. It's a matter of getting what I want vs going with something "good enough". There's also that perfectly good case shaped chunk of metal to consider. That and not paying someone else to do it, and learning how to do something in the process as well. I'm beginning to discover that "gaming PC" and "cheap(ish)" don't belong in the same sentence. I just updated the first post with my current specs. Will update proposed specs as I firm them up.

Aha! Thank you Crash. Sounds like it's new motherboard time. I've looked it up, and there's no mention of the type of graphics cards I'm looking at on the current board's stats (Gigabyte GA-MA770-UD3). Not surprising, given the age of the board (around 8 years). I think my rethink shall include a new motherboard. I've a Thermaltake Shark case that I spent more for than I should have - with the intention of being able to gut it and replace old with new parts down the road. I suspect that 'down the road' has arrived, and it's time to put that swap-out plan into motion.

I had a rethink. My rethink went something like this: "Why pay for a new case when my old one is working fine? (What's to break on a case?) Why not learn how to build this thing myself?" That way I get the system I want and save a bit on parts I already have that aren't life-limited (the case, for example). I'm now having issues with my preliminary along that line of "what motherboards will/won't fit in a Thermaltake Shark case?". Naturally, this precludes everything else. No good getting an X if I can't plug it into the setup using the motherboards possible due to my case. Still looking at replacement/addition of fans, but having paid almost $200 for the case (I think) way back when, I'm not of a mind to part with it easily, as there's nothing wrong with it physically; it is, after all, just a case. It should work find for the long haul, shouldn't it?. Got a friend who's into computers and builds/repairs them for a side job, so I've go expertise to go to when I need it. He's the one who recomended Dell, but again, what'll I learn if I get someone else to build this? Another point, just reading up on motherboards, and it seems that the motherboard, so long as it's working, has little to no effect on performance. I know I might cause an issue with an old board simply due to age, but I really hate to toss stuff that's still working - yet am a tad leery about "what damage might it cause to newer components at the moment of failure?". Perhaps the better bet is to just gut it and part it out. I'm sure there's someone out there who'd actually use an old board, for whatever reason.

I'll take all the opinions I can get FT. Just crunching numbers right now, and coming out with crumbs and wishes! Putting the thoughts in writing seems to help, as I can go back and look at thoughts and say "what wasss I thinking?" or "why didn't I think of that?!" As I stated, this is early stages. I've been here before "I really should replace this thing. Howzabout now?", but with the thing now having both mechanical failures and software faults, I'm suddenly convinced that "now" really is the time, rather than "later". (Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right, and be serious! Yeah, no idea where that came from.) Looking at the graphics cards and finding anything with even a twitch on their scale costs more than I'm looking at for the CPU... for a graphics card. That's ridiculous.

I see. Thanks all. I'll keep you updated on this. I did kinda think waiting for 10 was silly (suggested by a friend), but at the same time, his suggestion to go with a Dell through their "special build got built then the customer canceled, so here's the offer, pretty much at cost since we can't sell it as new" section seems like a really good deal. He got his beast through that program about five years ago... and it'll still run circles around this one. Took him two months of camping on the site in his spare time, but he finally got the machine he wanted. Well, not the same as a "buy the components, put it together yourself... and don't screw up and fry it!", but worth it. "Close enough, which is to say, not exact, but very close indeed." As I am planning to use this new computer as I have this one, that is the 8-10 year plan (until it quits or is so ridiculously slow it ain't funny), I need to be saving money where I can, while getting the best I can possibly afford that's not paying simply for "top of the line at this moment in time" status. For example, the extra $100 for the jump from I5 to I7 is a no brainer. Definitely going for an I7. If only for electrical load. According to CPUboss.com, they both run the same electrical load, but of course the I7 is much more capable, and thus economical. CPU Boss on the I5 4460 vs I7 4790 http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-4790-vs-Intel-Core-i5-4460 Questioning, for example, if the 4790 is "good enough" or if the extra $35 for the .4 GHz increase with the 4790K is worth it. (3.6GHz vs 4.0 GHz) ...Considering the $100 from the I5 to I7 got .6 GHz, $35 for .4 more seems like a deal. Passmark on the I7 4790 vs I7 4790K http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-4790+%40+3.60GHz&id=2226

Unfortunately, I've heard many horror stories about 8, being as it's essentially a laptop OS forced onto desktops (how the heck did they expect a touchscreen based OS to work on a desktop anyway?). Think I'll go with 7 if I can find it with the machine I'm thinking up. Then again, I suppose I could just keep the old disk I have and use that. Agreed about 64 bit. Seems to be "the way to go" lately. Think I'll skip 8 and go directly to 10 (collecting $200 or no).

The big question: Do I replace now, and believe them that they'll freely update Windows 7 to 10 when 10 comes out, or do I wait most of the year (and perhaps some of next), until Win 10 is out and get it with a new machine? While my PC still works, it's almost 10 years old. I've discovered that I'm running things at pretty much at bare minimum settings now, and have lost out on much in the way of not only "ooo smooth" but also "oooo purty!". Okay, smooth has in part to do with running scripts for (many, many) mods, which can't be helped (at least not entirely) with a new, far more capable machine, but still. Additionally, I've found that hardware is starting to give up. Like my (replaced) CD drive, that just gave up today. Not really interested in throwing money at an old [ancient] machine, but not sure I should really believe that I won't have to buy a replacement OS for a fairly new machine when 10 comes out, assuming that I go ahead and buy within the next few months. I think I pretty much answered my own question (It's failing, time to get something new that's far more capable and transfer your files before the whole thing goes poof.), but thought I'd run it by you guys. I know enough not to just go after the first one I see, and have been getting by with an old machine in part due to that. Another concern I have is with backwards comparability. I ran XP for many years and discovered that 7 does seem to run the stuff I used to run on XP just fine. Will the same be true of 10 or do I need to keep an extra 7 bootdisk and run a dual OS machine? Thanks much. EDIT: Current specs might be a good idea. Motherboard: GA MA-770 UD3, AMD 770 chipset, Socket AM2, PCI-E x16, NV GeForce6150+nForce 430, HT 2000, VGA Integrated, DDR2 800, HDTV out, HD audio, Gb LAN, 1394a, SATA RAID, EZ Flash 2 CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ (Dual core) 3GHz Memory: 4 GB DDR2 Graphics: NVidia Geforce GT 240 PSU: 450W OS: Win 7 32bit HDD: 1x 250GB, 1x WD 2TB SDD: 1x Kingston 120GB ******* Proposed specs: Motherboard: ASUS z97-A CPU: Intel I7 4790K Memory: 8GB (2x4GB) 1866 DDR3 (Kingston) Graphics: Nvidia GTX 960 2GB PSU: Corsair 750W CPU fan: Unknown yet? Apparently this comes with the CPU.

Sorry to hear about your brother in law. I too have been doing a little research of late and have heard (g)rumblings about the 970.

Hmm, does the best of Jabo include my signature maneuver, known by most as the "Lawn Dart", following getting head down for longer than I should have? Congrats, (I think).

Whatever manual I used (youtube), pointed out a bomb run starting at a range from which it wasn't possible to make out the target as it hadn't come within visual range yet. (And this was a BIG target, like the 88mm FLAK base bunker) Basically, SWAG the target location using the macro like surrounding towns or a port from which you know the general location of the target. Get the aircraft stable, the sight set to the highest setting (80 degrees?), and the airspeed and altitude set. Once the target comes into view, you move the crosshairs, and lock on target. Then you're constantly adjusting airspeed to keep the target just slightly below the crosshairs (as I remember) since the drop is from the middle of the crosshairs down. Also, the "level" bombing auto-pilot doesn't stay level, and the aircraft is in a constant slight decent that you must also constantly adjust for. I've had considerable success once I figured out the idiosyncrasies.

And I thought $300 for 30 in a Pitts Special was spending "a little money" for an experience!

"it felt like the space shuttle was running it's engines behind me.This was probably and hopefully the only time in my life I was going to wish there was a gay snowman in the kitchen which should give you some idea of the depths I was willing to sink to in order to ease the pain... ...The only solution my pain crazed mind could come up with was to gently ease one of the sprouts where no veg had gone before... ...So to sum it up Veet removes hair, dignity and self respect....... :-" Amazing. Must be some powerful stuff.

Very funny Mr. Snack Officer, sir. F-86 Canopy open/close Keyboard command (L CTL + C) non-functional On the extreme left side of the instrument panel, right beside the canopy bow and below the big gunsight selector box is a three position toggle switch. Back opens canopy, forward closes it.

Make mine an F-14 and we're cool. AV-8B'll be nice to have in IL2, that's for sure. By the way, he has two more: Test 1.2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U32IDhUSyc4 Test 1.3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPhUpof67b0

Huey Rear Doors open/close without gunners Left door Left ALT + 3 Right door Left ALT + 4 Force Trim push to set T Red button top left on cyclic Control Position mini-window Right CTL + ENTER

In light of DCS's in some cases rather odd placement (list location) and naming of commands, I propose a "Nice to Know" command list. Certainly for the everyday, but more for the obscure that you spend four hours looking for, only to stumble across three others you never thought to look for, and wouldn't be able to find again, in the process... and never get off the ground. (Been there, done that.) I'm thinking the best way to do this is to put the name of the aircraft, then system affected (what it does), DCS's name for it (location on the list), then the control, and finally, general location of clickable cockpit control if available/you know. Two assumptions. 1. The list is "All", and thus the name of the system etc will be in alphabetical order 2. Simulation mode is assumed unless specifically stated to be game mode. Example: Name of A/C System/instrument/etc affected Name DCS gives (If you know) Command Clickable's location

A biologist, chemist and statistician go hunting. They find their prey and... The biologist misses by 50 feet to the left. The chemist misses by 50 feet to the right. The statistician yells "We got him!"

I'd say it's Russian due to the center cannon with off center MG, well, assuming so. That's a setup that's typical of WWII Russia as far as I've been able to determine.