Thought I'd upgrade my cooler on the PC, never done this before so I put this web page together.cooler upgradeFSX is running a lot sweeter now lol

Thanks, looks like interesting experience

Thanks, looks like interesting experience

No but the beer was good, served at room temperature of course!Different topic but am i right in thinking there is no standard benchmarking of FSX? So many people say I achieve x better then you and I'm thinking yeah but were you running same set up as me. On my current system I've seen between 7 and 130 FPS. I'm sure I could do worse or better if I tried but what's the point? In real life I think I want the best possible experience and for me this means the best visual experience possible without dropping below 25 FPS.

Gary (forum name RESET MCP ALT) did do an extensive fsx benchmarking system using FRAPS and basically MS excel or equivalent to display the data.The problem is that one might get "good" FPS but blurries and textures not all loaded. There was a program in the avsim library - fsxmark or something similar. The original thread about Gary's (and others including myself) findings is here:http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtop...;hl=fsx+mark+07

That is one massive cooler! :( It seems to dwarf the motherboard. :( Seeing your results, it is certainly very efficient in lowering your temperatures. In your review of the Core i7 920, you included benchmarks that you conducted. Can I ask what program you used to perform the benchmarks shown on your site? Thanks!

Very interesting info davethewave....what Mother Board are you using??Also...you helped me a TON. I have been consistently getting horrible frame rates with a Q6600.....8800GTX Video card and 4gb of ram. I tried Vista 64 and was getting 15fps. I saw in your article that when you slightly reduced your window size your frame rates went up. Well I am running two 22" monitors with FSX running full screen in one window...when I clicked the minimize button my frame rates went from 15fps to 50 fps. I stretched the screen almost to full screen and still getting 40 to 50 fps.......AMAZING. I don't know what the heck that is all about but I am happy now. Thanks for the idea davethewave.

Well I am running two 22" monitors with FSX running full screen in one window...when I clicked the minimize button my frame rates went from 15fps to 50 fps. I stretched the screen almost to full screen and still getting 40 to 50 fps.......AMAZING. I don't know what the heck that is all about but I am happy now.

So basically you're getting higher frame rates in windowed mode?

Can I ask what program you used to perform the benchmarks shown on your site? Thanks!

Performance test, see http://www.passmark.com/products/pt.htm

what Mother Board are you using??

It's the MSI eclipse. Glad to have helped with your fps, shame you can't run full screen though.

So basically you're getting higher frame rates in windowed mode?

Yes...and it is really odd. Another friend that has about the same hardware that I have and is running Vista 64 experiences the same thing...but only in Vista 64....it doesn't work in XP. And I am running 2 monitors also. My frame rates are around 15 when I have the window maximized in one of my monitors...but when I minimize the window and then stretch it out to almost the size of the 22" monitor I get from 35 to 50 fps.....go figure. It is like having a new computer.....and the graphics in Vista 64 are much better than in XP. It is like I am flying in a picture...and nice and smooth. It is really strange.

Thought I'd upgrade my cooler on the PC, never done this before so I put this web page together.cooler upgradeFSX is running a lot sweeter now lol

Your voltage seems a little high for that OC. Try setting your core voltage to auto and see what it turns up (yeah, some people will balk at setting this to "auto", but check it out and see what you get voltage wise). Then, run Prime95 and see what your voltage is at load in CPUID. Also, make sure you have any "turbo" settings disabled i your bios (which you probably already knew). That reason I think the voltage seems a little high is a few of the people I know (as well as in my own expereince) were getting 1.150v at 3.3 ghz. when we first started to OC our chips. A bunch of us were actually able to OC to 3.3 ghz. undervolted. lolYou are in for a real treat. These i7s seem to be monster OC'ers. I get better frame rates at max settings with my CPU set to 3.6 ghz at 2560x1600, than I did with my E6600 OC'd to 3.3 Ghz with settings mostly at medium at 1600x1200. WOW....