I wonder what performance using a CPU rated at 50 percent 'faster' than an i7-975 will translate 'out upon the FSX taxi-way?I get a solid and well performing 30 FPS with the i7-975. So...would that translate out to adding another 15 FPS to the mix? A solid 45 FPS?Would that be worth it to an i7-975 owner to shell out another $1,000.00 (U.S. funds) to pick up 15 FPS?I guess the above pondering...will be answered by user 'x' in the latter half of this coming March. For myself...I'm going to be sitting in the weeds until I hear what comes from that user's postings. While waiting, once you have reached the threshold of 30 FPS, and satisfactory/usable animation of FSX, will another (if it actually works out to that simple math equation) 15 FPS REALLY add to any VISUAL increase in animation quality, or would smoother (less stutter, etc) be what would be seen as FSX betterment?Dunno..will have to read what some who already have the i7-975, and decide to dig a little deeper into their pocket will report. Whatever, it shall be an interesting read.... :)

Indeed a good question it depends per simmer and personal preference and what it's worth to you?As for performance you will maybe have a general idea based on benchmarks.But when it comes to Flight-simulator software it depends on the local hardware setup / software installed.Even with 2 identical hardware setup it can give a difference in performance.Myself running a q9650 at 3.9 mhz and have a great performance in FSX locked at 25 :-)I think that bandwidth space is indeed a major factor with FSX since there is so much more data...Curious about your results too, but even then...Cheers,Andr

I wonder what performance using a CPU rated at 50 percent 'faster' than an i7-975 will translate 'out upon the FSX taxi-way?I get a solid and well performing 30 FPS with the i7-975. So...would that translate out to adding another 15 FPS to the mix? A solid 45 FPS?Would that be worth it to an i7-975 owner to shell out another $1,000.00 (U.S. funds) to pick up 15 FPS?I guess the above pondering...will be answered by user 'x' in the latter half of this coming March. For myself...I'm going to be sitting in the weeds until I hear what comes from that user's postings. While waiting, once you have reached the threshold of 30 FPS, and satisfactory/usable animation of FSX, will another (if it actually works out to that simple math equation) 15 FPS REALLY add to any VISUAL increase in animation quality, or would smoother (less stutter, etc) be what would be seen as FSX betterment?Dunno..will have to read what some who already have the i7-975, and decide to dig a little deeper into their pocket will report. Whatever, it shall be an interesting read.... :)

As I reported over in the CPU forum, one tester of the 980x has overclocked it to 5.9GHz but that's going to be difficult for everyone to obtain but it shows some of its potential capabilities. If it provides a solid 45 fps consistently, it will be worth it IMHO. With your system, you'll be able to remove that 'old' I7-975 extreme for this new CPU. I'll put my bid in now for your almost really old CPU, uh, $400? LOL. In all seriousness, I think I'm going to hold off rebuilding a new system until the 980x is released as I was planning on getting the I7-975x so I'll let you know how it performs when I get the system set up, probably in April or May.Best regards,Jim

As I reported over in the CPU forum, one tester of the 980x has overclocked it to 5.9GHz but that's going to be difficult for everyone to obtain but it shows some of its potential capabilities. If it provides a solid 45 fps consistently, it will be worth it IMHO. With your system, you'll be able to remove that 'old' I7-975 extreme for this new CPU. I'll put my bid in now for your almost really old CPU, uh, $400? LOL. In all seriousness, I think I'm going to hold off rebuilding a new system until the 980x is released as I was planning on getting the I7-975x so I'll let you know how it performs when I get the system set up, probably in April or May.Best regards,Jim

And what about the CoreI9 processors. Does anybody have any clock speed specs on those processors yet? For those of us that own the 1366 platforms, that processor will slide right in.

I'm going to wait for reviews on this one too.I am running Duo E6580 [email protected]. I was going to upgrade a while ago to a Quad 9650 and OC that. Then I thought I may as well wait and see how the new I7s fair.Its constantly moving - the hardware train - and its knowing when to jump on and enjoy the ride!If I keep saving then it may be worth buying the latest and greatest in Spring 2010 but the problem is as the newer technology gets released the older often (not always) gets reduced in price so it may still be worth upgrading with some of the soon-to-be older kit ie I7 960.Have to wait and see.Graham

As I reported over in the CPU forum, one tester of the 980x has overclocked it to 5.9GHz but that's going to be difficult for everyone to obtain but it shows some of its potential capabilities.

That system was cooled with liquid nitrogen. Here is a Core i7 975 at 5.7GHz: http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,685642/...ld-Record/News/

I'm going to wait for reviews on this one too.I am running Duo E6580 [email protected]. I was going to upgrade a while ago to a Quad 9650 and OC that. Then I thought I may as well wait and see how the new I7s fair.Its constantly moving - the hardware train - and its knowing when to jump on and enjoy the ride!If I keep saving then it may be worth buying the latest and greatest in Spring 2010 but the problem is as the newer technology gets released the older often (not always) gets reduced in price so it may still be worth upgrading with some of the soon-to-be older kit ie I7 960.Have to wait and see.Graham

You don't really have to wait, Graham: the i7-920 is quite capable of holding the magic 4 gig, and allowing beautifully smooth flying at 25 frames - at Seattle, thunderstorms, 100% airline, 100% GA, 20 road, with most sliders 3/4 or full right. I'm doing that on the 950 at four, locked at 25 and flying the Maddog. It doesn't drop below 24.9, ever. http://forums.pureoverclock.com/showthread.php?t=5736Procrastination will kill you, because you will always think there's something better just around the corner. There is always newer of course, but 4 gig is available NOW, and will give you the sim the way it was intended. :( ..and the 920 is less than 3 hundred bucks...

I thought a little more about it as I read some of your responses to my O.P.Here I have already, a powerful 4-core CPU (i7-975) that by the nature of FSX's architecture, does NOT utilize past one core for the most part (cores 1,2,3 load textures, and not as per core '0', engage the physics/driving engine' of FSX), what difference would having a 6-core proc be when you have the i7-975 acting as the base for comparison?!??Here's the crux...if a completely new flight simulator comes onto the market that FULLY LEVERAGES multi-core CPU's (and scales to as many cores as the CPU will physically have...), then it might make sense to spend more money to upgrade the CPU from any i7-'X' 4 core to the 6 core and greater that will eventually come out.I guess for myself, in thinking more about it, UNLESS others report simply amazing performance increases from FSX, with their 6 core, then I am pretty much set up until a new flight sim comes out that is actually written to be aware of today's CPU and GPU architecture. Again, all musings until March/April, I guess.... :) Musings, yes..but fun to do as you hope there will be another flight simulator from some group of talented folks. Who knows...perhaps with an economic recovery past us, Microsoft might at the drop of a hat, step back into development of what would have been FS11. You would certainly HOPE that they would write to the latest and greatest CPU/GPU available at the time of coding.... You would hope....Cheers!

Ok quick question here. I'm in the process of upgrading my system (major upgrade in terms of hardware) to get better performance out of my system. I am currently using AMD Phenom II X4 620 with 6GB DDR2 PC 6400. I am looking at getting an Intel i7 960 with 6GB DDR3 PC16000 2000mhz Triple Channel. I already have 18 fps in FSX using the above AMD setup with an GeForce 9800/9800 GTX+ 512MB, until I get into the cities then it drops to about 5 with the settings maxed out. Would adding the i7 increase the performance in FSX as to warrant the $1800 price tag (along with a liquid cooled case and some other items) Or should I just stick with my current setup and go with the X4 965 and max out the memory on my MB which is 16GB of DDR2 1066? If I go with the 965 then I can upgrade my video card to a better model possibly the 5870. As for now, I'm grounded as I had a memory meltdown this morning lost 2 modules (errors on board) and another is failing. I don't oc as I believe it shortens the life of that piece of equipment. So anybody have any ideas as to which way to go here?

Well from my point of view although you said you don't overclock, it's the best thing I ever did and I have seen a major increase in performance in my intel e8500 3.16ghz Now at 4ghzI mat be wrong but people say the processor makes the biggest difference and even people with i7 processors are overclockong those. As for shortening the life well I spose it does but in a couple of years time I'll want to upgrade anyway so it's not a problem to me.Just something to considerTom

I thought a little more about it as I read some of your responses to my O.P.Here I have already, a powerful 4-core CPU (i7-975) that by the nature of FSX's architecture, does NOT utilize past one core for the most part (cores 1,2,3 load textures, and not as per core '0', engage the physics/driving engine' of FSX), what difference would having a 6-core proc be when you have the i7-975 acting as the base for comparison?!??Here's the crux...if a completely new flight simulator comes onto the market that FULLY LEVERAGES multi-core CPU's (and scales to as many cores as the CPU will physically have...), then it might make sense to spend more money to upgrade the CPU from any i7-'X' 4 core to the 6 core and greater that will eventually come out.I guess for myself, in thinking more about it, UNLESS others report simply amazing performance increases from FSX, with their 6 core, then I am pretty much set up until a new flight sim comes out that is actually written to be aware of today's CPU and GPU architecture. Again, all musings until March/April, I guess.... :) Musings, yes..but fun to do as you hope there will be another flight simulator from some group of talented folks. Who knows...perhaps with an economic recovery past us, Microsoft might at the drop of a hat, step back into development of what would have been FS11. You would certainly HOPE that they would write to the latest and greatest CPU/GPU available at the time of coding.... You would hope....Cheers!

There is no doubt that you are set up for a long time with your 4-core i7-975x CPU. But that technology is already a year old and why should I get older technology when, in a couple of months, I can get the latest and greatest technology for nearly the same price of the 975x? As you can see below, I have the very expensive Dell XPS 720H2C and I purchased it right when FSX was released. It definitely works great with FSX as long as I don't add a lot of payware scenery. I flew the PMDG 747-8i from LAX to SFO this afternoon. My first attempt resulted in a freeze at the setup window. I then went back in and disabled every scenery I have added except for MegaScenerySOCAL and MegaEarth for the San Francisco area. I was not only able to load the aircraft quickly and with ease but had 21-24 fps the whole trip except when I hit the MegaEarth stuff near SFO and it went down to no lower than10 fps but it still landed without problems. So that's no fun disabling stuff for a flight. I like to fly with Active Sky Advanced weather too. I could have gotten many more FPS if I had also returned my fsx.cfg to the default with little AI but I left it with many settings above normal. So I will be upgrading in a couple of months with the new 980x and also the new Nvidia Fermi GF 100 and hopefully I will have better results. At least they will be as good as your results and your scores are already great results. I was going to start buying the other hardware/software and case for my new system but think I will hold off and see if any newer MB tech comes out to handle the new CPU/Video Card.Best regards,Jim

...So I will be upgrading in a couple of months with the new 980x and also the new Nvidia Fermi GF 100 and hopefully I will have better results. ...

I recommend you to wait for reviews by AnandTech, Tom's Hardware and other sites before you go for a GF 100 card. All we have at this moment is nVIDIA's white papers. It looks good on paper, but it might turn out to be a failure.

Looks promising - here's an initial review or rather an impression, from HardwareCanucks:http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardw...microscope.htmlPrice? Expensive I bet!

.

There is no doubt that you are set up for a long time with your 4-core i7-975x CPU. But that technology is already a year old and why should I get older technology when, in a couple of months, I can get the latest and greatest technology for nearly the same price of the 975x? As you can see below, I have the very expensive Dell XPS 720H2C and I purchased it right when FSX was released. It definitely works great with FSX as long as I don't add a lot of payware scenery. I flew the PMDG 747-8i from LAX to SFO this afternoon. My first attempt resulted in a freeze at the setup window. I then went back in and disabled every scenery I have added except for MegaScenerySOCAL and MegaEarth for the San Francisco area. I was not only able to load the aircraft quickly and with ease but had 21-24 fps the whole trip except when I hit the MegaEarth stuff near SFO and it went down to no lower than10 fps but it still landed without problems. So that's no fun disabling stuff for a flight. I like to fly with Active Sky Advanced weather too. I could have gotten many more FPS if I had also returned my fsx.cfg to the default with little AI but I left it with many settings above normal. So I will be upgrading in a couple of months with the new 980x and also the new Nvidia Fermi GF 100 and hopefully I will have better results. At least they will be as good as your results and your scores are already great results. I was going to start buying the other hardware/software and case for my new system but think I will hold off and see if any newer MB tech comes out to handle the new CPU/Video Card.Best regards,Jim

------------------------------------------------------Hi Jim,To play Devil's Advocate, you will probably pay quite a bit less for an i7-975 when the new 980 proc comes out. I doubt that the 975 will maintain the current asking price. Would that difference be worth it to you...only yourself to decide. I guess we will all have to wait for a modern rewrite of the flight simulation genre before we see every last drop of performance from any multi-core, let alone the i7 line. Here's hoping that that is sooner than later....Cheers!Mitch