Anyone using the QX6700 quad core? How does it run FSX with no overclocking? I just ordered a system based on this chip with a 4 GB and an nvidia 8800 GTX.Thanks for any comments.

FSX does not support dual or quad core.Allcott

The X6800 Dual Core processor is a better CPU to use with FSX.The X6800 runs at 2.93 MHz compared with QX6700 running at 2.66 MHz.Also althogh the QX6700 has 8 MB of cache its architecture is such that each core shares 4MB, and the X6800 has 4 MB of shared cache so a single core can only utilise up to 4MB of cache in either processor.I have run FSX with both and the difference is a few fps inccrease.. but as the QX6700 and X6800 are roughly the same price then the X6800 wins..however for future proofing the QX6700 may be the better choice...it all depends on how much concurrent processing you plan to do.I have no idea how/when ACES are going to unlock Core2 technology for FS but I doubt they will spread the load over 4 processors because the Quad market is so small (at present). I also doubt that many simmers are multi-tasking their PCS whilst flying either.At the present time you'll probably get best value by actually buying a very fast single core processor - for $90 you can get a Pentium 4 650 Prescott 3.4GHz processor. That's considerably cheaper than an X6800 which will set you back nearly $1000.The future is definitely Core2 and Quad..but for now you can get excellent performance at a really low price by sticking with single core.RegardsJim

According to Intel, the service pack 1 for Microsoft

>According to Intel, the service pack 1 for Microsoft

Although I agree with much of the second poster's comments, I still would recommend a duo core or quad core over a 3.4 Prescott. First, comparing the speed of the Pentium4-based Prescott chips to the speed of the PentiumM-based C2D chips is meaningless. They have a different architecture and even a single processor Pentium-M chip is roughly equivalent to a Pentium 4 chip with a 50-75% faster clockspeed. Second, C2D chips have a lower thermal dissipation (they use less power so they give off less heat) which simplifies cooling and noisy fan issues. Third, multi-core is clearly the way of the future. It makes no sense to invest in a dead-end technology. If price is an issue, consider the 2.4GHz E6600 which can be had for around $300. Btw, the C2D chips are an overclockers dream. People are getting as much as 50% overclocking with air cooling and even us more "conservative" overclockers are getting an additional 20% (I've taken my 2.66 quad core as high as 3.5 with no problems, although I run it at 3.2).~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Intel Quad Core QX6700/2.66GHz (water cooled @ 3.20 GHz), 2@8800GTX/768MB nVidia (SLI), 4GB RAM, 2@160GB Raptor HD (RAID 0), Razer Barracuda AC-1 Audio, Dell 3007 30" Monitor (2560x1600)FSGenesis USA Landclass, NA & World Meshes, MegasceneryX Hawaii & Phoenix,RealAir SIAI-Marchetti SF260, Aerosoft DHC-2 Beaver, MyTraffic X, WWII Fighters

If SP1 looks favorable for multicore, then I have my upgrade path figured out, and it will start with a Penryn Yorkfield or other CPU running at somewhere between 3.2 and 3.6GHz. It is to debut Q3-4 2007, is manufactured using Intel's newest 45nm Hi-k process technology with its hafnium-based Hi-k + metal gate transistor design (I think it is know for reducing current leakage or some such parameter so that I guess high clock speeds at a given power are possible), and Intel's Streaming SIMD Extensions 4 (SSE4) instructions. Yorkfield is a desktop-targeted 8-core CPU with 12mb of L2 cache. If not that Penryn then probably the quad-core. 4gb of ram, top of the line DX10 card. I hope to do this around the end of this year . . . if SP1 turns out to make FSX a truly usable sim. Plus, I'd like to keep FS9 around awhile for all the nice PMDG birds and scenery. I am keeping systems at least 4 years now, so it behooves me to buy the latest and greatest.What about 64-bit processing though? What can you say about this and the Penryn x86 line of processors?Noel

>If SP1 looks favorable for multicore, then I have my upgrade>path figured out, and it will start with a Penryn Yorkfield or>other CPU running at somewhere between 3.2 and 3.6GHz. It is>to debut Q3-4 2007, is manufactured using Intel's newest 45nm>Hi-k process Yep depending on how FS shapes out, that is about what I'm aiming for too.I guess I will end up having to spend a lot on the cpu, since the 45nm ones will be new new late this year. Oh well.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

My 4 GB, QX6700, 8800 GTX based system is due next week. I will report frame rates, initially with no overclocking, for the stock FSX and then for SP1 when it arrives (hopefully later this month).I see where Intel has announced the QX6800 but the QX6700 chip alone set me back a cool $1000.Brian

No doubt that I want to see higher clock speed on cpus. I would rather like to see much higher memory speed increase.