These is no CPU upgrade for your current mobo. Use the CPU/mobo from this set and swap over whatever you can. EEC ram is not needed (even usable?)by this mobo. Pick the pieces out of this set. This will get you a 30% increase over your current rig ($500-$1000):http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWi...tNumber=7159746The Nehalem CPUs will be released on the 17th. They will provide another 20% and cost $1K-2K for the rig. Another mobo and ramset will be required. Also, you must now run (i.e., buy) 3 sticks of ram. A user will be stuck with using either 3x1G=3G (not enough) or 3x2G=6G (wasted ram for 32bit programs). This new platform will use ram in a triple channel mode, but this will have NO performance benefit except for benchmarker fanboies braggin' rights. Ya think maybe marketing was involved in this "revolutionary memory upgrade?"! We're really getting hosed on this one. +20% is hardly worth the effort.So, for ~ $500 you can gain 30% with the Q6600 platform or wait for Nehalem and spend $1K-2K for 50%. Personally, I wait for 1000% (10X) increases. My P4 at 2.8 to my current Q6600 at 3.6 gave me that ~ 10X. You have a good CPU. It's the generation I skipped. The 10X will come with Sandybridge, after Nehalem. It will Not be about core efficiencies. It will be about number of cores. I'm at 4 cores now. I'm waiting for 40 . . . and this is Not pie-in-the-sky. It's a serious prediction. Hopefully by 2010-11 (2-3 years) software will learn to use 'em. On the other hand, we'd like to see someone spend (gamble!) $10K on that Skulltrail octicore. Hey, ya never know.

Awesome to know.And . . .an update on my MD-11. No OOMs on that flight. The only issue I had was the bug where you can't silence that autopilot disconnect aurel warning after touchdown and deactivating the autopilot. Other than that, the entire flight was error free and lasted just under 6 hours.My sweetie demanded sweetie time after that so I am going to wait until tomorrow to start my next bit of troubleshooting. Going to fly the tutorial a few times in a row, adding a single add-on each time to see if one causes a major difference in performance and memory usage.It'll take some time, but it's worth a try.

An update from me: Having thought - again - that I'd found a work-around (see earlier posts), I'm again getting crashes. I'm now pretty much convinced that the problem is to do with the MD-11. Whether it's systemic in the design, or a correctable problem, I have no idea. But it would be nice for PMDG to recognise that the problem deserves looking into.Until then, reluctantly I've given up and gone back to the Level-D 767X.Tim

I have a dual-boot system, XP and Vista64.With the above workarounds I was able to fly MD-11 tutorial flight within FSX SP2 and XP SP3 without any oom problems. But with my FSX SP2 installation at Vista64 SP1 and 4GB Ram (same computer as XP installation) I got the oom problems again. At EGLL Aerosoft scenery the fuseledge of the parking plane at the gate disappeared, when unlocking the FMC and moving it on the 2nd screen (both windowed mode).Any ideas, why Vista64 has oom problems?

It appears to be happening regardless of 64 or 32 bit. I think it might be geography based.Prey tell -- all -- where are we all when we get an OOM? I did a 6 hour flight yesterday (see my replies above) from LAX to HNL with no issues at all. Reading above, unless I am mistaken, it seems like everyone is getting the OOMs in the European area.I think for PMDG's sake it'd be a good idea if anyone having OOM errors post what add-ons they have installed (no matter how long the list) and see if we have a common factor. I guess I'll start:For me the OOMs were during the tutorial flight, usually close to the end of the flight although when I reenacted the conditions Andrea described above it happened mid-cruise. I have yet to get an OOM on my x64 installation, but I have not yet done the tutorial flight. The only flight I have done is with the LAX-HNL.For information purposes, during the OOMs I got in the 32 bit OS I had the following add-ons installed:Aerosoft Mission - LearjetAriane B737-900ER X2Carenado Mooney M20JFSGenesis North America v2.0Friendly Panels Navigation Pack on my default aircraftAerosoft Bush Hawk XPAerosoft F-16 Fighting FalconAerosoft Twin Otter X v1.11Aerosoft Twin Otter X Mission PackWilco Airbus volume 1 Deluxe v3_dWilco Airbus Volume 2 v1_gCarenado Cessna 152Georender YosemiteAerosoft Kata X (Digital Aviation)PMDG B744XUltimate Terrain X Canada v1.0Ultimate terrain X USAHorizon VFR LondonHorizon VFR Generation X Volumes 1, 2 and 3Ground Environment X Enhanced EditionHiFi ActiveSky XHiFi Graphix XFlight1 Ultimate Traffic XFS2Crew PMDG B744FS2Crew Wilco AirbusRealair ScoutEditVoicepack accelerated ATCESDG Twin CommanchePMDG MD-11Note that I had not yet installed (although I do have) Ultimate terrain Europe, so I guess rule that out for commonality at this point.With my x64 installation that I am about to test the tutorial flight on today I have:Edit Voicepack Accelerated ATCFlight1 Cessna 172RESDG Twin ComanchePMDG MD-11If the tutorial flight is successful under real world weather and dusk conditions, I'll add the above add-ons 1 at a time until I can induce an OOM. if that happens, I'll report here which one it happens on.Sorry about the long posts, but just trying to help the developer track the cause from the client end.

@ Chris S, Did the program actually shut down with an out of memory message? If not, this is likely not an OOM. It is more likely memory starvation. This is caused by increasing the VS limits by installing all the op sys/program override switching. Those VS limits were acting as a fail-safe for systems with 2G ram installs. What CPU and how much physical ram is installed? @ Chris, OOM'n a switched 32 bit system is not hard. Once physical ram loads gets above 2G, it could happen any time. Remember OOMs are about that ram talley-sheet called VS. It always leads physical ram usage.Get process explorer and watch what's going on.To get this to reliably run at high sliders, it takes 1) Vista 64, 2) FSX/SP2 3) 4Gs of ram 4) or turn down slidersIt's a messy transition. We are the pioneers (Oh boy!)

Well, I certainly have spent some time to go through this. I have Vista Premium,Duo Core 8500CPU, 4Gb RAM, GTX 280 1024Mb memory. I have never had a OOM until I bought and flew MD 11. So, in my opinion it stands to reason that MD 11 is the problem!!I have all of PMDG aircraft, Wilco's, Capt SIM, etc and flying at max with all of them in FSX has never caused a OOM. Perhaps that is the reason why PMDG keeps mum?

Yea, I told 'em too. This thing Is pushing the 32bit-op-system-envelope, but so is the rest of the software industry. I'm really guessing FSnext will be offered as a 64bit program. All we can do at this point in the transition is Deal With It. The only alternative is call the previous-gen, "The End." We all know the chances of that. This is a transition for everybody. Set your switches or go to Vista 64. It's the only answer until we start getting 64bit programs that will Only run on 64 bit op systems. That'll - Force - the solution. Until then, set your switches. But mumm? . . . Who, me!?

Just have in mind that the problem occurs under Vista 64 too, for me at least and I think others who have posted in this thread.Tim

>Just have in mind that the problem occurs under Vista 64 too,>for me at least and I think others who have posted in this>thread.>>TimThat's why I started testing on my 74 bit platform.I just did an evening w/real world weather test on the tutorial last night. At multiple points in the flight I kept changing windows, opening menus and such just like we reenacted above with Andre's situation. My memory usage this time was 60% as opposed to 53 percent solid, but that's still good. No matter how hard I tried, I could not get this to crash.Tonight I am installing Ultimate terrain for USA, Canada and Europe and maxing out the settings on all three (the UTX settings for features, that is). We'll see what happens then since a lot of folks seem to think UTX has something to do with this.Chris

> But mumm? . . . Who, me!?Yes indeed nice Sam that your trying to help and appreciated.But from a professional standpoint sorry to say I disagree with your comments ;-)It's actually real simple this small add-on uses to much memory.Remember when developing you should be into the safe boundaries of 32 bit O/S and FSX for that matter that simple.Or just say it's only compatible with 64 bit O/S due to the memory footprint lolTo offer a solution for someone to upgrade to a 64 bit O/S is just out of proportion and not realistic at all...Hence is just a workaround to fill up a bit more memory and just delays the error we see on a 32 bit O/S lol http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y156/awf1/sign.jpg

moinmoin, i had the same problems with the 747x and xp 32bit, so i "switched" to win2003 server enterprise (full 4gb or 8gb adressable, small windows "overhead"), set the sitches "/3GB /PAE" in the boot.ini and it runs great...regards

Yes, at one stage I thought I'd traced the problem to UTX not playing nicely with the MD-11 but - even after a "system restore" to a point prior to the installation of UTX - I've still got problems after all. One thing I have noticed is that we may not all be experiencing the same problem. Some people have spoken of getting explicit OOM errors. I don't think I have ever had one of these. My problem is the disappearing textures leading to a black FSX screen. This makes me wonder whether the tips from Sam etc are helping the people with the first problem; but possibly the second problem has to do with something else and it's just a COINCIDENCE that it happens when Virtual Size reaches a particular level. Knowing nothing about this sort of thing I'm hesitant to suggest it, but could one possible culprit be the way the MD-11 is using DirectX 9? After all, it is a little odd that (in my case) the only symptom of the problem is within FSX: the OS generally and any other open applications continue to work perfectly. Also, given the innumerable versions of DirectX 9.0c in circulation (look at the number of redistributables you can download from MS: a new one came out in the last few days) this might explain why not everyone has the problem. Might it might come down to some particular component in the MD-11 not perfectly respecting some piece of DX9c protocol - possibly to do with the fancy lights and/or the exterior views??? - and possibly just on (eg) Nvidia cards of a particular vintage?Anyway, it does seem increasingly likely that this is a problem with the MD-11, even if it also turns out to "involve" other products; so I do hope PMDG can trace the problem soon and hopefully find a solution.Tim

Is win 2003 a 64 or 32, cause it is basically xp with a few extra bells and whistles.

>Is win 2003 a 64 or 32, cause it is basically xp with a few>extra bells and whistles.Win2003 Enterprise Edition is a bit different as XP and more for company server environment as running as a desktop lolSee link below:http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc758523.aspxhttp://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y156/awf1/sign.jpg