MacBook Pro + Flight Simulator X = Wow!
Well, I finally bit the bullet and I’m now a fully paid up member of the Mac club, with my recent purchase of a 17″ Macbook Pro 
So, what made me do it? A number of things:
- I’ve become increasingly disenchanted with Windows - I seemed to spend more time fixing issues and trying to tweak it for optimum performance than actually using it
- Bootcamp - this was fully released with OSX (the Mac operating system) 10.5 Leopard and it allows you to dual boot the Mac. A friend of mine who owns an iMac set up a dual-boot with Windows XP and had terrific results with Flight Simulator 9. This means I have the best of both worlds - the reliability and simplicity of the Mac for normal day-to-day use (and for X-Plane) and Windows for Microsoft’s sims
- It looks absolutely beautiful!
I was in the market for a new laptop anyway and I would’ve paid what I paid for the Macbook Pro for a “Windows” laptop in any case, so there was no additonal cost. I was apprehensive, of course, after more years than I care to remember almost exclusively on Windows, but, having used it for a few days, I’ll join all the other converts in pronouncing that I wish I’d made the move earlier.
I won’t go into all the pros and cons of Windows -v- Macs, but will concentrate on the sim experience. I installed Vista Home Premium via Bootcamp. The OSX Leopard DVD comes with all the drivers required for Vista, so it was simply a case of installing the OS, then running the drivers setup and I was ready to go. I installed Flight Simulator X, followed by Service Pack 1. I then installed X-Graphics and Active Sky X, as I love the way they enhance the sim. I then fired up the sim, running at the maximum 1680 x 1050 resolution, set all graphics settings to Ultra High except for Traffic (which I set to Medium Low) and set off for a flight. I was delighted to find I’m hitting frame rates of 50+ but, more importantly, it’s as smooth as silk - absolutely no stuttering, no blurries, just a beautifully running simulator
I’ve tried a number of add-ons (RealAir’s SF260 and Scout amongst them) and performance doesn’t seem to be affected at all. I’m thoroughly delighted with the results.
Another benefit of the dual-boot setup is that I can keep the Vista partition exclusively for flight simulator use. It won’t get cluttered up with all the other applications I’d normally have installed, so I can keep the installation “clean”.
Just for info, here’s the relevant specs of the machine:
- Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz ( Dual-Core )
- Cache Memory: 4 MB - L2 Cache
- RAM: 2 GB (installed) / 4 GB (max) - DDR II SDRAM - 667 MHz - PC2-5300 ( 2 x 1 GB )
- Hard Drive: 160 GB - Serial ATA-150 - 5400 rpm
- Optical Storage: DVD±RW (±R DL) - integrated
- Display: 17″ TFT active matrix 1680 x 1050 ( WSXGA+ )
- Graphics Controller: NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT - 256 MB
I’m also using a 2Gb USB pen drive for ReadyBoost in Vista, which seems to improve performance and I have FSX installed to a USB hard drive. I shall post some more results after I’ve used it a while longer.
Tags: macbook pro
Related posts
- FS Insider updates
- Vista patch for Out Of Memory errors
- Graphics Hardware Benchmarks
- Instant hard drive performance boost
- Was FSX the best thing that ever happened to FS9?
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
But the big question is… how much did that set-up cost, and what kind of windows based gaming machine could you get for the same price.
Interesting to hear.
I wonder how much had to do with using the Intel C2D and having a clean OS? Let us know how it’s running when you add all the usual peripheral fluff like Adobe Reader, AV software etc.
Hi Ed,
One of the benefits of this setup is that I won’t be installing all of those extras, as I’ll be doing all of my day-to-day stuff in OSX, not Vista, hence I can leave the Vista install purely for flight simming and not have it bogged down with all the usual stuff everyone ends up installing.
The processor is certainly helping, too
Mark - FlightSimX
Hi Alexander. It cost exactly the same (well, 30 Pounds more, to be precise) as the Rock laptop (Windows based) I was looking at and actually came out cheaper than the closest spec matched Dell I could find.
The only difference between the Rock and the Mac hardware wise was that the Rock had a larger hard drive (not an issue, as I install FSX to an external drive) and a slightly higher spec graphics card, but FSX doesn’t seem to mind the 8600
Mark - FlightSimX
Actually, just to annoy you, Sainsbury’s a selling a C2D 5250 lappy with 2 gig of RAM, and an 8600M GS for only £600. And you could probably use the remainder to get a fairly decent desktop too.
@Alexander: Isn’t that only the E6300 processor? In FSX, there’s a big difference between E6300 and E6600 as I made that exact upgrade.
I’ve always wandered about two operating systems and how they manage file fragmentation. Surely it’s not optimal?
Glad you’ve got a work machine that runs FSX well though!
Alexander: Firstly, it’s not a Mac and secondly, it IS a Medion! I had terrible trouble with one of those in the past and swore never to get another! They’re basically built using the very cheapest components and they don’t last (from my personal experience).
Ed: Mac OSX lives on one partition, Vista on another and FSX on an external drive. They’re all distinct drives, so they can all be defragmented and optimised as if it were a single machine.
On further tests, I’m getting around a 100% performance increase over my old machine, so I’m very happy.
Hi,
FSX also runs good on Macbooks (not Pro version).
I have lots of videos on Youtube, just search for rikm12345
Enjoy
Rik m
Thanks for that post, very useful! Does anyone know if if FSX would run as well under XP Bootcamp?
Hi Nick,
I’m running under Bootcamp with Vista. I know of a friend with an iMac running FS9 under Bootcamp with XP and he’s having great success.
Mark - FlightSimX
Hi Mark
I am sharing most of your experience, except that I am an old (1984) mac user and a novel FSX switcher (coming from X-Plane).
I own a MBP 2,2 and I get only 20- fps with an XP bootcamp installation. I wonder if the difference with your 50+ fps is due to Vista taking advantage of your NVidia 8600 card. I can’t believe there is so much difference with my x1600.
Best regards, Alle
Hi Alle. The video card could be making the difference. How much memory does your card have? Also, how much system RAM do you have? I’m also using the ReadyBoost feature of Vista which seems to help.
Mark - FlightSimX
I refuse - absolutely refuse to believe you are getting 50 fps in FSX at Ultra High settings on ANY machine much less a Mac Book Pro - I have the exact same MBP except with the faster drive and FSX barely hits 19 fps at medium settings in both Vista and XP Pro.
Additionally I have a quad Mac Pro with Vista and XP on it in Boot Camp, and a Dell XPS 720HC at work with dual Nvidia cards and even they won’t come pull 50 fps in FSX at those settings.
I don’t know of ANYONE getting 50 fps on any current machine in FSX with those settings, in XP or Vista (and not even 10 fps on a Mac Book) so I know a lot of us who would be fascinated to know how you accomplish this? I am amazed to say the least…
Hi Reality,
Well, a picture’s worth a thousand words, so check out:
http://www.flightsimx.co.uk/images/fpics/fpic1.jpg
http://www.flightsimx.co.uk/images/fpics/fpic2.jpg
http://www.flightsimx.co.uk/images/fpics/fpic3.jpg
They may take a while to load, as they’re the max res I can get on FSX, i.e. 1680×1050. I just took them a few minutes ago on my Vista Bootcamp install, 2Gb RAM, nVidia 8600 card with 256Mb RAM, 2Gb ReadyBoost.
Of course, you’ll have to take my word for it that they’re from a MacBook Pro! I could always post a photo if you’re desperate!
Seriously, though, these are genuine pics from my MBP, with everything at Ultra High (which, remember, is NOT the same as having all sliders at max) except for Traffic, which is set at Medium Low.
I’m also using X-Graphics with the 128 bit clouds, so that’ll be helping a bit.
Mark - FlightSimX
Oh, forgot to mention, I have SP1 installed and Acceleration (i.e. SP2 is also installed).
Mark - FlightSimX
Hi Mark,
very envy
My x1600 has the same VRAM (256 MByte).
Regards, Fuffo
Hi Mark
this topic is very interesting. Could you move it to a new thread in the forum?
Regards, Alle (fuffo)
Good idea. I’ve started a new thread at:
http://www.flightsimx.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=27
I love Flight Simulator, but since my family changed all the microsoft computers to mac, i ve been frustrated because i cannot play fs anymore. i just bought the new Imac with the Leopard version that includes Boot Camp. Well im looking to install windows soon, but i just wanna say that dont buy x plane 9, it can be realistic or better in some aspects, but FSX and older versions are friendly to the beginner and the advance sim pilot. Im having bad times with the X Plane, is a waste of money an is really difficult to make flight plans. X plane does not have gates in some airports, FSX does. Well please help me if you know about a free download of windows xp or latest versions. Thanks from Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala
Hi Juan,
I think it’s more than a little harsh to say X Plane is “a waste of money”. It might not be what you want, but that’s a different issue.
There are no free versions of Windows XP. You’ll need to buy a copy and you’d better be quick if you want one, as Microsoft are stopping sales shortly. After that, you’ll have to go with Vista or wait for the next version of Windows.
Leave a Comment