Hey guys just doing a little window shopping right now for a possible new pc, just wanted to get some input whether or not this computer is worth the investment. Currently I am running FS9 but looking to switch to FSX sometime in the future. My current computer is an Intel E6750, 2GB RAM, Nvidia 8600 GTS. Thanks for the input.Dan

You could get a lot more performance from your PC with a graphics card upgrade and an overclock of your CPU. Spend $200 or so on a GTX 275 and bring your CPU up to ~3.6GHz where it belongs and you'll be much happier with your system's MSFS performance.

I could recommend a second hard drive dedicated to FSX, have FSX and the OS running separately (not to be confused with RAID). I

One seemingly overlooked 'feature' of the i7 CPUs is that their memory spec calls out 1.5V as normal, 1.575V as max safe voltage and 1.65V as 'exceeding this can cause permanent damage', and the range between those limits as 'possible but not recommended for the long term reliability'. What gets me is that memory vendors are out there with their 1.65V 'i7 compatible' kits yet no where do they mention 'btw, using this ram as directed may shorten the life of your i7 CPU, as documented by intel'. Just consider this when buying ram for an i7; the reality is that the i7s are designed for the DDR3 JEDEC which is 1.5V (regardless of what the ram vendors say). Having no interest in burning out my CPU before its time, I'm able to use 1.65V DDR3 (see specs below) at 1.575V clocked 1345 8-8-8-20 T1 with excellent stability. All other voltages I used for my OC are within the i7 spec safe zone as well.

One seemingly overlooked 'feature' of the i7 CPUs is that their memory spec calls out 1.5V as normal, 1.575V as max 'safe' voltage and 1.65V as 'exceeding this can cause permanent damage', and the range between those limits as 'possible but not recommended for the long term reliability'. What gets me is that memory vendors are out there with their 1.65V 'i7 compatible' kits yet no where do they mention 'btw, using this ram as directed may shorten the life of your i7 CPU, as documented by intel'. Just consider this when buying ram for an i7; the reality is that the i7s are designed for the DDR3 JEDEC which is 1.5V (regardless of what the ram vendors say). Having no interest in burning out my CPU before its time, I'm able to use 1.65V DDR3 (see specs below) using 1.575V at 1345 8-8-8-20 T1 with excellent stability. I also had to bump up other voltages to hit my OC but they are all within the safe zone spec.

If the memory sticks allow a higher voltage you may increase the DRAM voltage above 1.65V as long as you keep the CPU uncore (QPI) voltage within 0.5V difference of the DRAM voltage. An overclock of memory and CPU will in some cases need an increase of QPI voltage. It's not a DRAM voltage above 1.65 that breaks the CPU, its a difference in voltage between DRAM and QPI exceeding 0.5V that breaks it.

If the memory sticks allow a higher voltage you may increase the DRAM voltage above 1.65V as long as you keep the CPU uncore (QPI) voltage within 0.5V difference of the DRAM voltage. An overclock of memory and CPU will in some cases need an increase of QPI voltage. It's not a DRAM voltage above 1.65 that breaks the CPU, its a difference in voltage between DRAM and QPI exceeding 0.5V that breaks it.

You are missing my point. If you want to overclock and exceed spec voltages, that's fine: it's your choice to take the risk and both enjoy the benefits and suffer the consequences. But if the average non-overclocker Joe looking to build a rig sees RAM advertised as 'i7 compatiable', and not only that it's in the mobo's RAM qualified vendor list (which most of these parts are), they should know that it also comes with the risk that its use as specified may be detrimental to the long term reliability of their CPU, at least according to the official Intel spec. As for what you quoted on memory voltages I've seen other places on the web, but nowhere was it backed up by anything other than 'trust me on this'. In the mean time I'll stick with what Intel says their products are designed for.

You are missing my point. If you want to overclock and exceed spec voltages, that's fine: it's your choice to take the risk and both enjoy the benefits and suffer the consequences. But if the average non-overclocker Joe looking to build a rig sees RAM advertised as 'i7 compatiable', and not only that it's in the mobo's RAM qualified vendor list (which most of these parts are), they should know that it also comes with the risk that its use as specified may be detrimental to the long term reliability of their CPU, at least according to the official Intel spec. As for what you quoted on memory voltages I've seen other places on the web, but nowhere was it backed up by anything other than 'trust me on this'. In the mean time I'll stick with what Intel says their products are designed for.

Its great that your concerned, but there is no need.A lot of us here have been overclocking exceding voltages for years, is there a danger at the >>extreme end? Sure, 1.66v is not in the least extreme. Can you find any credible sources published or a good number of users reporting that 1.6v dram is killing chips? No, because it doen't. Do you see these forums or any other filled with storeys about all the Chips and MBs that died because of going to 1.6v ram on I7s? Anands, Hardocp TomsHW, MaxPC, PC mag see anything there?Can you kill an I7 memory controler? sure, but not by running 1.66v thru the DRAM, its as my long lost brother ULFB said -QPI voltage.I7s as well as I5s and AMD quads have on die -->Internal Memory Controler, thats what you want to focus on.And QPI or VTT is the on chip memory controler for L3 cache and .5v min Voltage difference to dram must be maintained. If anyone here is going to toast their chips if at all its going to those of us like myself that push the 2000 speed memory varity thru the IMC, and its not becuase of 1.6v at Dram, its becuase the QPI voltage goes up to 1.6-2.0V or more, pushing 12Gb of that thru a CPU clocked at 4200+ creates Heat, but even there I know of no one who has set this up at reccomended settings that have lost there Chips, just the guys going to extremes.

Its great that your concerned, but there is no need.A lot of us here have been overclocking exceding voltages for years, is there a danger at the >>extreme end? Sure, 1.66v is not in the least extreme. Can you find any credible sources published or a good number of users reporting that 1.6v dram is killing chips? No, because it doen't. Do you see these forums or any other filled with storeys about all the Chips and MBs that died because of going to 1.6v ram on I7s? Anands, Hardocp TomsHW, MaxPC, PC mag see anything there?Can you kill an I7 memory controler? sure, but not by running 1.66v thru the DRAM, its as my long lost brother ULFB said -QPI voltage.I7s as well as I5s and AMD quads have on die -->Internal Memory Controler, thats what you want to focus on.And QPI or VTT is the on chip memory controler for L3 cache and .5v min Voltage difference to dram must be maintained. If anyone here is going to toast their chips if at all its going to those of us like myself that push the 2000 speed memory varity thru the IMC, and its not becuase of 1.6v at Dram, its becuase the QPI voltage goes up to 1.6-2.0V or more, pushing 12Gb of that thru a CPU clocked at 4200+ creates Heat, but even there I know of no one who has set this up at reccomended settings that have lost there Chips, just the guys going to extremes.

Well said and accurate. These chips run so well overclocked the way most of us do, that a convincing case can be made for the notion that Intel built them for that very purpose. Instead of selling them maxed out, they gave the power to the people, so to speak, thereby creating even greater customer personal satisfaction. Why? Simple. Everything runs far better than advertised. Under promise, over deliver. They are the leading technological engineering, manufacturing and marketing company in the world because they understand science, business and human nature equally well.Stephen

Intel has to think about warranty so Intel developes and publishes a specification that is going to reduce their exposure to warranty claims and the max settings published are always lower than what the actual 24/7 acceptable max settings are. All industuries do this, it just make good business sense.Just like Intel does not warranty any CPU that this been overclocked, but how many 1000's or even 100,000's of i7's are there out there that have been overclocked from 4.0GHz and above that run 24/7 with no problems.Plus like Shockwave said, go to any repected overclock forum and 1.66V is a non issue. I have mine set at 1.66V. What everyone on the i7 OC forums will say though is that you have to respect the .5V minimum between your QPI/Dram Core Voltage and your Dram Bus Voltage.Rod

Thanks for the heads-up. I really have no problems at all with overclocking, and now appreciate that Intels specs can be viewed as CYA. My gripe about RAM voltages are only aimed at RAM vendors for not disclosing that their recommended voltages exceed Intel's published 'safe' voltages for the CPUs targeted by the kits, and that is all. As you all pointed out, if you know what you getting into it's a non-issue, but for non-techy individuals looking to build their own computer they really should know everything that is going on with the components being sold them. As an aside, consider that it's pretty common for 1156 socket mobos to default the QPI to 1.1V, so if a noob installs their 1.65V kit and sets the RAM to 1.65V they just unknowningly exceeded that .5V range (but maybe at such 'low' voltages this info doesn't apply???). Anyways, thanks again...though for me I'll still play it safe; I plan to get a good four or more years out of my new rig. FSX really sings to me on my new rig...can't get enough...I've had my copy since '06 collecting dust until now.

...As an aside, consider that it's pretty common for 1156 socket mobos to default the QPI to 1.1V...

Could you please name three of these common boards that default uncore voltage below 1.2V? Should be pretty important information to all of us and that would be a true warning! :(

Could you please name three of these common boards that default uncore voltage below 1.2V? Should be pretty important information to all of us and that would be a true warning! :(

Well I can't name three but I did extrapolate that statement from my Asus P7P55D, of which I imagine the Asus P7P55D line of mobos share a common bios base. BTW, one important difference between the 1156 and the 1366 i7s are the IMC (Vtt) voltages: 1156 are maxed by intel at 1.21V, 1366 at 1.35V. In retrospect, I'm a bit bummed I didn't spend the extra $120 or so for a 1366 mobo and a i7 920 (but then again being a family man has its limitation).Another thing that gets me is that OCZ support did recommend that 1156 owner use 1.35V IMC for their 1.65V kits; someone replied "well, don't you know intel specs the max 1156 IMC at 1.21V" and their response was basically "hmmm, I should look into this".

Since FSX is more CPU bound than GPU bound, if I were you I'd choose and i7 960 CPU instead of an i7 930 and instead of the GTX 285, I suggest downgrading to the GTX 275 unless you can afford both a i7 960 and an a GTX 285 and play more than just FSX. A i7 960 / GTX 275 combo will run FSX faster than a i7 930 / GTX 285 combo but for some games it might be different. PS: I'm against overclocking and that's why I recommended that i7 960.

If you can afford it, the best choice would be an i7 960 with a GTX 285. Make sure that you get some decent ram, I use this and it was recommended to me by NickN for my P6T deluxe v2 and i7 950.http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16820226050I am for overclocking, I never OC'ed anything until I got this rig and to get to 4.2GHz was easy. The BIOS in the P6T Deluxe v2 and all the i7 overclock guides available out there make it a breeze.I know that all of this adds up, but if you are building this to run FSX then get the best that you can afford so that you will not be disappointed in the performance after everything is put together and FSX is not running as great as you thought it would or should!Rod