Some comments:1. DDR3 1600 is absolutely fine for getting to 4GHz, the RAM speed stays pretty low actually as you ramp the OC up, you do not need some ultra expensive stuff that's rated higher than 1600 unless you're planning on using liquid nitrogen to hit 5GHz or something insane like that. 6GB is more than enough, 12 would be serious overkill unless you're doing video or audio editing in a 64-bit aware app.2. A single GTX460 will beat SLI 260s and probably still be cheaper. Probably not a good idea to put outdated GPUs in a brand new machine.3. I agree with the SSD comments - I'd get one SSD (get one based on the Sandforce SF1200 chipset, like the OCZ Agility 2) for Windows and FS and then one large mass storage drive like a WD 1 or 2TB Caviar Black. The extra money for the Velociraptors just isn't worth it any more with how fast an SSD is4. You might just want to look at one of the top air coolers, they're a lot simpler to deal with than water cooling is and offer very similar if not better performance than the H50. Check out the new Prolimatech Armageddon.

Hello all,I just want to confirm on SSD, I'm the owner of 80GB intel X25 SSD and I'm very happy, it's a huge difference, I also have velociraptor, Most of stuff is on my SSD, but huge sceneries ie. FSGlobal is on velociraptor, I would never go away from SSD. All tested on FS2004 so far :-), later when HW becomes even better than today's one I will switch to FSX (or when NGX is released :-D).Rado

SSD's....these are good:OCZ Vertex 2G.SKILL Phoenix Pro

I can understand SSD for the OS, but what kind of performance gains might you see if the scenery was on its own SSD as well? One of the biggest issues I've been seeing (and I'm running an i7 980 extreme overclocked to 4 GHz, 1600 Mhz RAM, velociraptors, and a a GTX 295) is still loading scenery tiles, weather textures, etc. Adding in a complex aircraft, REX, UT2 and an FSDreamTeam airport and frame rates drop to around 8-12 FPS.

The only thing I like about that set of parts is the processor. Get a gtx480--gonna be cheaper. Get 12gb--its gonna be the difference between the fermi and the 2 260gtx's. Plus don't get an asus board. They are crap. Get a gigabyte or an evga. I've never had a problem with an evga before.And I would stick with a 600gb velociraptor and regular sata hdd.Oh and get a good psu.

I always bought ONLY Asus cards and my last two in my sig were EVGA and won't get anything else now. I don't think the Asus ones are crap but am prefering EVGA (plus they have a trade up program that can't be beat).

The only thing I like about that set of parts is the processor. Get a gtx480--gonna be cheaper. Get 12gb--its gonna be the difference between the fermi and the 2 260gtx's. Plus don't get an asus board. They are crap. Get a gigabyte or an evga. I've never had a problem with an evga before.And I would stick with a 600gb velociraptor and regular sata hdd.Oh and get a good psu.

I think the comment about EVGA vs ASUS is just about the only thing you have right here.1. A GTX 480 is $500, two 260s like he had listed can easily be had for a little over $300. It is in no way cheaper to get a 480. The real thing he should be switching to is a single 460 (~$220) and then adding a second later if he needs it.2. 12GB of RAM is absolutely ridiculous, no one needs that unless they're doing heavy content creation - video or audio editing, huge Photoshop file work etc. No game out there right now will use up 6GB and FSX is limited to 4GB addressable anyway as a 32-bit application.3. Exactly what reasoning are you giving for him sticking with the Veociraptors? The SSD is a MASSIVE improvement over a mechanical HD - Windows boots in about 5 seconds on one and you never ever have to wait for anything to load off the HD. Mechanical HDs are the slowest component in any system right now - a bunch of hardware sites like Anandtech, HardOCP etc say an SSD is the single biggest upgrade you can make to a modern system as far as how fast the system feels overall. It's not going to increase FPS in FSX, but it is going to drastically cut down on load times before a flight, will result in smoother loading of terrain tiles etc. Not to mention you completely eliminate the need to defragment/optimize the drive, which takes hours and hours to do on a big mechanical one. Cost is the ONLY reason not to get an SSD - if he's got the money, it will be a huge huge improvement vs. the Velociraptors.

I agree and have been putting off SSD's for a long time now and think I'll still wait awhile since I do have two fairly new Veociraptors and want the price to come down some more (and space to go up) on the SSD's. Besides, I paid a buttload for my two WD's and am quite content with their performance,,, for now. My next upgrade will most likely be 24 or 32gb of ram, but again, like Ryan stated this is not for any game what-so-ever and only for my ram preview and to see exactly what After Effect & Adobe Premiere will do (CS5). I do a lot of AE and spend way too much time on previewing.

Everyone,Thank you for the comments, they are very helpful in my decision!!! I should have stated at the beginning, I have had the 260's for about a year and half now, and I wasn't sure if I needed to upgrade them just yet. Its obvious that from what I have read here, that those would probably be my bottleneck that slows my system down.Ryan, I am going to go with you recommendation on the SSD. But would I get better performance out of FSX on its own dedicated SSD?

+1 on the Gigabyte motherboard. Great motherboards for overclocking