Well...I'm overclocked...and running FSX quite stable at 4.221 GHz using a multiplier of 30 x 140.7 at 1.264v on a copper core bottom air-cooled solution.:)Well...I'll see if I stay here, or go back to 3.3 GHz standard on the i7-975. I'll have to see some kind of 'betterment' to keep it overclocked.Let the games begin....---------------------------------------------------------------EDIT: 10 minutes from posting this and running at the above spec's...I went for my five test flights ...and found NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever in the performance of FSX being run with an i7-975 over and above its stock specifications. Nothing. With running stock, on this CPU, you already get great FPS, rock solid at 30 with the limiter boot, or around 70 FPS without it and FSX set to unlimited.I will not be overclocking my i7-975. As per FSX, no need to, with running a i7-975 part.With it at total STOCK parameters....:I get absolutely clear and in-focus scenery.Great, smooth-as-silk animationGreat soundsGreat control of aircraft....and all at stock 3.342 GHz and 1.1xxx V. 38 C while whipping out the great display. Perhaps others need to overclock lower-rated i7-xxx's cores, but you sure don't need to with the top of the foodchain. At least not from what I see. Others may feel you do. :)Back to the flight. :)Mitch

Thanks Mitch:I wondered, and am glad to hear of your conclusions. I just got my i7-975 up and running. I have been in the process of getting all of my hardware and programs running on a new Win XP Pro 64 bit OS. I am snowed under with other things at the moment and am holding off to dive into the mass of FS stuff I need to install until I can give it my full attention. The only FS thing I have installed so far is FS9 bare bones with the exception of the 9.1 update just to see what it looked like. Frame rates were out of sight somewhere above 150 when set on unlimited. I speculated that when I reinstall FSX, overclocking might only be academic and would not be necessary. Your conclusions seem to bear that out.I am also amazed at how much faster hardware works (i.e. CD/DVD drives, Floppies, etc.). As an example, I am running an old AMD 1.3 in parallel for things that work only on a 32 bit system and with the intention of adding WideFS7. I can format over 3 floppies on the i7-975 unit in the time it takes to format one on the older system. Even internet/email access picked up speed to be instantaneous on virtually all selections.Again, thanks for the information.Respectfully:RTH

Something's wrong if going from 3.33 to 4.22Ghz doesn't make a differenceUnlock your FPS and disable Vsync and go fly around NYC.

If you throw 100% AI I am sure you will then see a difference in framerates with your overclocking. Quite frankly I doubt FSX would need all that power just for itself without any ai

Thanks Mitch:I wondered, and am glad to hear of your conclusions. I just got my i7-975 up and running. I have been in the process of getting all of my hardware and programs running on a new Win XP Pro 64 bit OS. I am snowed under with other things at the moment and am holding off to dive into the mass of FS stuff I need to install until I can give it my full attention. The only FS thing I have installed so far is FS9 bare bones with the exception of the 9.1 update just to see what it looked like. Frame rates were out of sight somewhere above 150 when set on unlimited. I speculated that when I reinstall FSX, overclocking might only be academic and would not be necessary. Your conclusions seem to bear that out.I am also amazed at how much faster hardware works (i.e. CD/DVD drives, Floppies, etc.). As an example, I am running an old AMD 1.3 in parallel for things that work only on a 32 bit system and with the intention of adding WideFS7. I can format over 3 floppies on the i7-975 unit in the time it takes to format one on the older system. Even internet/email access picked up speed to be instantaneous on virtually all selections.Again, thanks for the information.Respectfully:RTH

-----------------------------------------------------------Truly, I did not see anything in the 'WOW' performance factor to justify running the parts out of spec and adding stress to all the system elements. Nothing whatsoever. So..personally for myself, I set everything on my 730X H20 back to factory spec' and am having a ball now just USING FSX with the ofcourse GREAT performance my system (as stock) is pumping out. I have absolutey no regrets in purchasing the Dell 730x. It has turned out to be a fabulous platform, with high quality throughout its build. I thought my Dell Generation 3 was a good build. This....blows it right out of the sky! Enjoy your new rig...and yeah..keeping all parts at stock speeds, most likely will add years to their stability and performance. Trust me when I say, you bought the right CPU! Oh yeah!Mitch'er

If you throw 100% AI I am sure you will then see a difference in framerates with your overclocking. Quite frankly I doubt FSX would need all that power just for itself without any ai

Nope...nope...not at all. Perhaps before the i7-975, overclocking was the only way to scrape every last ounce of performance for FSX...but that day is gone. This CPU is a veritable powerhouse. In the poor vernacular...: "It don't need no stinkin' overclockin'...." It bulges muscle!I have A.I. from all quarters, and nothing slows down this chip as stock. I'm talking about smooth performance, and no longer an FPS boast game. The day has come...hardware has matured.:)Yeah...I'm all smiles and having fun.....what can I say?Mitch

Respectfully you must be doing something wrong in your testing if you see no difference between 3.3 and 4.2. My dad's pc sees HUGE increases in performance on his 920 when oc'd from 2.6 to 3.8. HUGE. I find it very difficult to believe that FSX won't use another 1ghz of power effectively when we all know what a pig it is and how hungry it is for cpu power. Are you testing in heavily populated city areas with ultimate traffic 2 on high settings or just flying around the bush gazing at all the farm land below? Did you test it with a complicated addon like a PMDG on approach to kai tak or LAX? If not then I would respectfully ask that you reevaluate your testing and report back to us. I have my eye on upgrading my machine to my dream machine as well running a 975, raptor, evga classified board and 6gb of ddr3 1600 and am going to put the cooler master V10 'TEC' cooler on it. I am shooting for 4.2 myself and I can guarantee you that hovering over LAX in my dodo that I will see quite a HUGE increase from 3.3 to 4.2.

Well...I'm overclocked...and running FSX quite stable at 4.221 GHz using a multiplier of 30 x 140.7 at 1.264v on a copper core bottom air-cooled solution.:)Well...I'll see if I stay here, or go back to 3.3 GHz standard on the i7-975. I'll have to see some kind of 'betterment' to keep it overclocked.Let the games begin....---------------------------------------------------------------EDIT: 10 minutes from posting this and running at the above spec's...I went for my five test flights ...and found NO DIFFERENCE whatsoever in the performance of FSX being run with an i7-975 over and above its stock specifications. Nothing. With running stock, on this CPU, you already get great FPS, rock solid at 30 with the limiter boot, or around 70 FPS without it and FSX set to unlimited.I will not be overclocking my i7-975. As per FSX, no need to, with running a i7-975 part.With it at total STOCK parameters....:I get absolutely clear and in-focus scenery.Great, smooth-as-silk animationGreat soundsGreat control of aircraft....and all at stock 3.342 GHz and 1.1xxx V. 38 C while whipping out the great display. Perhaps others need to overclock lower-rated i7-xxx's cores, but you sure don't need to with the top of the foodchain. At least not from what I see. Others may feel you do. :)Back to the flight. :)Mitch

Mitch, Glad your enjoying your system (green with envy) but I can't afford the alimony to justify a $ 3800 machine or a new I 975 and MOBO. Enjoy !!

I have said this before. With my i7 975 I see NO fps improvement in the most demanding areas OC at 4gig.Low fps, but smooth. 20-30 fps is good enough for me.

Mitch,What OS are you using and what video drivers.I know what my i7 975 can do, but the right video drivers and card do make a huge difference.I think that having win 7 64 U has also done wonders for fsx.There's a lot to be grateful for.

Respectfully you must be doing something wrong in your testing if you see no difference between 3.3 and 4.2. My dad's pc sees HUGE increases in performance on his 920 when oc'd from 2.6 to 3.8. HUGE. I find it very difficult to believe that FSX won't use another 1ghz of power effectively when we all know what a pig it is and how hungry it is for cpu power. Are you testing in heavily populated city areas with ultimate traffic 2 on high settings or just flying around the bush gazing at all the farm land below? Did you test it with a complicated addon like a PMDG on approach to kai tak or LAX? If not then I would respectfully ask that you reevaluate your testing and report back to us. I have my eye on upgrading my machine to my dream machine as well running a 975, raptor, evga classified board and 6gb of ddr3 1600 and am going to put the cooler master V10 'TEC' cooler on it. I am shooting for 4.2 myself and I can guarantee you that hovering over LAX in my dodo that I will see quite a HUGE increase from 3.3 to 4.2.

----------------------------------------------------------------------I'm already at 3.3-3.7GHz via Turbo when I have it running. I do not see any further enhancement of FSX when going past 3.7GHz on my I7-975 part. Overclocking probably gives enhancement on the lower rated GHz cores. It seems visually (and after all, that's what it is all about), there is no gain in pumping up the i7-975. It has enough muscle at stock+turbo mode. I decided to go for CPU coolness, low voltage, and longevity.I tested at KLAX, CYYZ, KJFK, KMIA---all with three environment programs running and A.I. up the ying-yang. With the latter stated, I get GREAT 30 plus FPS performance, no blurriness (what is that now?!!) SMOOTH AS SILK animation, etc.That is already at 3.3-3.7GHz When I went to 4.2, there was no BETTER visual or FPS activity. It was ALREADY SUPERB!The only thing else I am doing...and only out of morbid curiosity, lol,...is to slap in Mushkin Ascent Redlines which should be here next week. I'll take my system to 1600 MHz in memory speed, but honestly....why overclock a part, if it gives you a virtually real world at stock? Like one responder said...after that, it becomes academic. I guess as always, it is what the user feels is the most satisfying.This i7-975 ROCKS even at stock output. FSX is tamed.........

Mitch, Glad your enjoying your system (green with envy) but I can't afford the alimony to justify a $ 3800 machine or a new I 975 and MOBO. Enjoy !!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Please don't be! You must remember, I decided to stay for six years, going on seven,...with a Pentium 4 Prescott core 3.4GHz/ ATI 1950 Pro (256 meg) system....and waited until I could afford my 'next upgrade'. When all the others were getting duals, early quad's....poor me was still vewing Flight Cripilization, not Flight Simulation.Save your marriage (smile) and save for the BEAST.When you finally get it...AND YOU WILL!-------just be sure PLEASE...to place a thick cushion on your lap to catch your lower jaw....for trust me...it's gonna drop...and drop low.....:)Mitch

Mitch,What OS are you using and what video drivers.I know what my i7 975 can do, but the right video drivers and card do make a huge difference.I think that having win 7 64 U has also done wonders for fsx.There's a lot to be grateful for.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Hey, Mr. D!I'm using Vista Ultimate 64 bit with the new SP2 update. I am also using (as recommended by Nick) the nVidia 182.5 driver suite.Honestly, I just wanted (like you) to see what having it at 4.2 GHz would do. My system ran rock solid at my posted spec's...BUT...BUT....I did NOT SEE anything better in the way of what the 'beastie' can put out at stock. What more is there...after your virtual world is rendered as close to real life as I have EVER SEEN? I mean...kissing the waves at FULL BORE WATER setting on this machine is unbelievable. The waves look so real, the glimmer of the sun...so real, the WHOLE feel of FSX now...is SO FLIPPIN' real! Can you tell...that I am satisfied to the level 9?!?!? Oh yeah..... and not to mention as others have....anything else I do whilst not flight sim'ming has been accelerated at least 300 percent! That's conservative, I think.Cheers!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I decided to stay for six years, going on seven,...with a Pentium 4 Prescott core 3.4GHz/ ATI 1950 Pro (256 meg) system....and waited until I could afford my 'next upgrade'. When all the others were getting duals, early quad's....poor me was still vewing Flight Cripilization, not Flight Simulation.Mitch

I can understand your excitement going from a Pentium 4 to an I7. That's quite a jump. I'm wondering if an upgrade to an I7 system is justified for me based on my Dell 720H2C (below) that I have o/c to 3.7GHz. I plan on building a system if I do upgrade. I have good FPS most of the time but FSX suffers considerably with (for instance) MegaEarth California; MegaScenery Calif; UTX, Aerosofts City of San Francisco software; and then trying to fly into the San Francisco area at dusk or night (or even the day!) in commercial aircraft like PMDG's, with real world weather turned on, brings FSX into the single digit frames and most likely a CTD. If I could be assured those FPS would increase with an I7 system and there would be no slideshow and/or ctd, then I have no hesitation to upgrade tomorrow.Congrats on your Dell 730!!Best regards,Jim Young

I can understand your excitement going from a Pentium 4 to an I7. That's quite a jump. I'm wondering if an upgrade to an I7 system is justified for me based on my Dell 720H2C (below) that I have o/c to 3.7GHz. I plan on building a system if I do upgrade. I have good FPS most of the time but FSX suffers considerably with (for instance) MegaEarth California; MegaScenery Calif; UTX, Aerosofts City of San Francisco software; and then trying to fly into the San Francisco area at dusk or night (or even the day!) in commercial aircraft like PMDG's, with real world weather turned on, brings FSX into the single digit frames and most likely a CTD. If I could be assured those FPS would increase with an I7 system and there would be no slideshow and/or ctd, then I have no hesitation to upgrade tomorrow.Congrats on your Dell 730!!Best regards,Jim Young

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thank you! I'd endorse this system to anyone. :)On what you are pondering, I really can't help you decide other than to let people know that running an i7-975/GTX285 combo is a 'winna....'A person with Nick_N's background would be the one to be able to assess whether you could gleam enough of a performance hike with your machine as the baseline...to justify any further expense from yourself. For myself, it was like a caveman being defrosted from ice...and let loose in New York City......:))))))) It would have gotten his attention, LOLOLOLOL!Cheers!

I went from an AMD FX55 to a Core 2 3ghz I bought from a slickdeal for $160 a yr or so ago. I'm just waiting for system boards, i7, and memory to go down in price.