I have looked at the i7-870 which has a 2.9 ghz and a turboboost to 3,6 ghz.On my laptop (via the turboboost gadget) it seldom use the turboboost. In FSX it remains on its standard value.Have anyone any experience with turboboost on desktop processors? And how well it works with FSX.

Turboboost will work better in a desktop environment, provided superior cooling. If you really want more performance though, it's best to just disable Turboboost and overclock to a pre-defined value, that way you have all cores operating at maximum speed rather than just 1 or 2.

I have looked at the i7-870 which has a 2.9 ghz and a turboboost to 3,6 ghz.On my laptop (via the turboboost gadget) it seldom use the turboboost. In FSX it remains on its standard value.Have anyone any experience with turboboost on desktop processors? And how well it works with FSX.

whichone will be fastest for FSX [email protected] or i7-930@2,9 ghz?the same?

whichone will be fastest for FSX [email protected] or i7-930@2,9 ghz?the same?

That is a very interesting question!! In theory it should be the i7 9xx series as these have a more efficient method of dealing with data (different bus type QPI vs DMI) and a more efficient interface to the video card ie "better" handling of video in general. The i7 9XX series probably handle multiple gpu's and monitors more efficiently.Further, they use triple channel DDR3 RAM which is supposedly more efficient to double channel DDR3 and the i7 9xx series are supposedly easier to overclock, but who knows if FSX is influenced by the type (not speed) of RAM?.Now will it make any significant difference in FSX?? I could give you a 100 different parameters, from RAM CAS Latency, to Room temperature and humidity, that might affect that assertion. Even the number of fonts that you have installed can affect performance! I honestly don't know if the i7 9xx series would be faster, I only fly GA planes in rural areas (no mega scenery, etc) and my i7860 (+ a SSD) handles all of that efficiently, whether an i7 920 etc would handle it any better in real terms would be a moot point. I do believe that the i7 860 is a better deal than the i7 870 cost/performance wise, and if I was buying today I would probably buy the i930.Excellent question :( PeterH

I have looked at the i7-870 which has a 2.9 ghz and a turboboost to 3,6 ghz.On my laptop (via the turboboost gadget) it seldom use the turboboost. In FSX it remains on its standard value.Have anyone any experience with turboboost on desktop processors? And how well it works with FSX.

Quick add-on question; on a laptop, what would run FS9 and FSX better, an i5 450M(2.40GHz, 2.53GHz in 'TurboBoost') or an i7 720QM(1.6GHz, 2.8GHz in 'TurboBoost')?

I do believe that the i7 860 is a better deal than the i7 870 cost/performance wise

Why? The last time I checked prices at NewEgg, the 860 and the 870 were the same price and the 870 has a .13 GHz higher frequency. I do not know, however, what the max turboboost is on each.

ArtIf the price is the same (it used be nearly double) then the i870 would be a better choice, but for my primary choisce I would still stick with the i930 or upwards.RegardsPeterH