i can reach 4.2Ghz but I should go near 1.5v and should reach 90° temp.Maybe too dangerous, but if I fry the proc. I have to take the sitiuation and buy the 980x I must think about it.What I've understood, is with the 980x it's also impossible to set fsx at maximun details.Maybe in the future with the sandy bridge and the socket 2011

i can reach 4.2Ghz but I should go near 1.5v and should reach 90° temp.Maybe too dangerous, but if I fry the proc. I have to take the sitiuation and buy the 980x I must think about it.What I've understood, is with the 980x it's also impossible to set fsx at maximun details.Maybe in the future with the sandy bridge and the socket 2011

I just got a new rig with the 980X. I really don't see why you are trying to achieve such a high moun of speed to run FSX. My 980X that came a little "factory" o/c'd at 3.9 does perfectly fine. My graphics on FSX are stunning. The experience is life like. And just about every slider is to the right. You really don't need any more. At least I dont.

Are you sure all details high??I consider maximun details in this case:All sliders to the right:autogen buildings poligons :6000autogen trees poligons: 6000Lod radius 9.5 (in the fsx settings menu the top is 4.5 but in the cfg you can increase the quality of the terrain in the distance)cars: 100%boats: 100%ship and ferries: 100%aircrafts:100%cloud distance: 110nm (i dont know the right nm in the menù but the maximun distance)water: maximun qualityPMDG 747 at Heathrow, or Frankfurt, or New York... by the way a big airport.If you get with all these settings and situation 25 fps, if think you can say all sliders to the right.Obviously this is my opinion!!

You might be able to get those settings , but without any serious addons. There is nothing that can run fsx like that with pmdg, gex, utx et al.

You might be able to get those settings , but without any serious addons. There is nothing that can run fsx like that with pmdg, gex, utx et al.

I think if you have a processor set to 5.5Ghz, you could have fsx set to those settings i've posted above!

980x at 4.43 on air using Noctua cooler - 1.35v - no problems.

980x at 4.43 on air using Noctua cooler - 1.35v - no problems.

Ahg... I've got to push my volts to 1.45 to get my OC stable. You guys are making me jealous. Thinking I'll build another couple 980x machines and put them in wideFS to get where I want to be.

980x at 4.43 on air using Noctua cooler - 1.35v - no problems.

What's about your fsx settings?

I've been following this interesting post for a bit and I am surprised of 2 things: 1. the six core [12 virtual] still doesn't bring what we want.2. despite of earlier posts on this kind of subjects, people use heavy new graphic cards. Yet Mathijs Kok of Aerosoft has stated on their forum that when you use a better, faster, graphics card things will not improve. in the contrary. Things will get worst. Because the card will want more information from FSX [a bigger flow of data] then FSX can provide. So pushing your CPU to the limits will not do the trick. You will also have to adjust the cfg. And I personally believe you are better of with a quite normal GPU, like the ones found on the 2xx series of NVidia. FSX was tested on NVidia based g-cards and test results show that they perform better [in FS] than ATI Radeon cards. I had a expensive ATI radeon card myself and it provided some strange cracks in the image, as if the image was torn in half and the two pieces weren't glued to getter well. not much, not big, but ...just.The G-card could do with some ram , i would think 1gb. I've got a NV250 with 1gb and I've seen it use slightly over 500 mb of it's onboard memorySo when I would go for a new card I would go for the new nv460 rather then the nv480. But having said that, I'm not sure whether the nv460 will be much help. yes CPU power and speed does and so does memory speed.

HelloMathijs Kok has a professional interest in convincing peaple with moderate hardware that FSX will run well with their low end cards.Quite simpy he would like to sell them some addons, don't read to much into that guide he wrote.

HelloMathijs Kok has a professional interest in convincing peaple with moderate hardware that FSX will run well with their low end cards.Quite simpy he would like to sell them some addons, don't read to much into that guide he wrote.

Agreed! Nicely said, MD

HelloMathijs Kok has a professional interest in convincing peaple with moderate hardware that FSX will run well with their low end cards.Quite simpy he would like to sell them some addons, don't read to much into that guide he wrote.

I don't agree with that. Of course he's trying to sell things, but If you look at the setup he is suggesting you can hardly call that mainstream hardware,with an i7 and ssd's in it. Not at all it's high end stuff, yet the graphics card isn't. It is not only Mathijs suggesting a grapchics card isn't doing the trick for us. Others have also stated that FS [through the years] is a CPU speedbased thing. mathijs just pointed out a bad piece of programming on behalf of the ACES guys [sadly missed] Although he's a business man I do think he's telling the truth.It can be checked on other stuff they have on their Forum. it's to simple to say that because they want to sell they stink.It's not Microsoft we're talking about, it's just a small firm.

Others have also stated that FS [through the years] is a CPU speedbased thing

^^ this

It's Microsoft that allways make us believe you can use 128 mb of RAM for Win XP and 256 mb for FS in Win XP or 512mb with Vista.Which we all know is ridiculous.Please do not mistake other companies with Microsoft.By the way I'm not working for, with, or selling Aerosoft products, nor am I stockholder or whatever. I do like many of their products and I do think they're relative honest when doing business. Their statements on their forum seems honest and true to me. They don't sell hardware but software so their interest would be to say what you need for performance since an addon gives a drop in frame rates anyway. That's completely something different than saying you could do with a cheap card. They know we're not daft.I still believe a nv480 won't help in the performance of FSX neither will a cross fire or SLI setup. Go for plenty of fast RAM, and huge CPU power [how about 2x XEON X5680 at 4.5 ghz.. :P ] okay...just dreaming :Sigh:

OK, I have medium knowledge about computers...I just wanted a machine that would run FSX full....For as hardware I am using the Intel I-980X at it's regular clock speed...GTX480X with 12GB of Kingston Ram...I have FSX running full blast with REX2 and FScommander 8.6 in the background...I have FPS set at 30.0...When flying the PMDG MD-11 and sometimes the B747-400 everything appears to be Flight simulator "heaven." My tech said not to OC the processor, because I really didn't need to....I don't sale,not a board member or stock holder of any company...I just love to fly simulators whenever I don't have "honey-do" list...hi hi