They don't even have mine on the list (AMD Turion 64 x2 RM-70)

will the dual channel memory give a performance hit over triple?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/107?vs=46

Just so you know Nick... the transcoding speed increases require that a video card is not installed... Still it would be worth swapping it out no less.

Sorry, I meant recording with FRAPS, not transcoding! I do a little video editing, but nothing professional by any means, just the initial stages in our production. FRAPS is my main concern for the FSX comp. So RAM wise, is going from 6GB 7-7-7-20 triple channel to 8GB 8-8-8-24 dual channel an issue? Seems a bit of a step backwards to me!

Stephen, I am the same as you, although your O\C is a little more radical than mine. I'm going to wait for this Sandy Bridge thing to sort itself out for a while before I upgrade again. That and my wife is giving me sideways looks about another upgrade. I might be able to scam my way into one because she wants me to build her a desktop and an I7-930 would be plenty fast for her.

Just curious, Fraps allows video rendering, so CPU speed is not really an issue for video recording. Am I missing something?As for 2 vs. 3 RAM channels (vs. 4 with Socket 2011!) that's still to be measured in the tests. The reason the 2600K will likely outperform your 920 is the core OC'd to 4.5 GHz (could be even higher but there are reports of some folks having fried their chips) vs. your 4 GHz. is that 90% ("approx.") of all memory access is served by the internal on-chip chaches at a speed far higher than off-chip RAM. The increase in cache access speed can thus swamp the effect of 2x vs. 3x RAM channels.4GBy RAM IMHO is a bit tight for any system running FSX, so just go for 8 GBy.Cheers,- jahman.

I see, that makes sense!I'm not sure about FRAPS to be honest, I've just always found that when I've upgraded my CPUs, the recording frame rate (which is what is important!) has improved. Do you reckon the upgrade is worth it then? I'm a little worried too about these reports of people frying their CPU's, that's the last thing I'd need obviously!

Nick: I figured if anyone needed one it would be you guys and Eric for transcoding purposes. As far as FRAPS that's still up in the air since it's very much up to what happens with FSX itself.

Nick: I figured if anyone needed one it would be you guys and Eric for transcoding purposes.

haha true - I think the next FSBreak is this coming weekend btw, we've been a little slack over new year!I think I'll bite the bullet tomorrow - if it can make things that little bit smoother then it's worth it. I have a friend buying components from my secondary computer anyway so that's a bit of an excuse in itself to upgrade.

My result is 7033. Guess kinda crappy...Someone else do a test?? You can install and run it for free anyway, so why just not try!

test? who said test? :biggrin:6791.3was your score with HT on or off?

test? who said test? :biggrin:6791.3was your score with HT on or off?

test? test?? where where?? :)))ht on.

haha true - I think the next FSBreak is this coming weekend btw, we've been a little slack over new year!I think I'll bite the bullet tomorrow - if it can make things that little bit smoother then it's worth it. I have a friend buying components from my secondary computer anyway so that's a bit of an excuse in itself to upgrade.

Thanks for the update I was actually going to PM you about that...You guys really need to stop telling us 15 minutes before going Live :)

Hmmm. My 980x hit 11,004 on stock clocks!

...I'm not sure about FRAPS to be honest, I've just always found that when I've upgraded my CPUs, the recording frame rate (which is what is important!) has improved.

With Fraps you can record at up to 120 fps on an 80386! Well, maybe not on an 80386... Reason: Frames are not rendered in real time. Get your movie loop going, record the sound (because sound must be recorded in real-time), then tell Fraps to render the loop at your desired FPS: The playback will be in slow motion and take longer depending on desired target FPS as the CPU draws frame after frame at 1/2x or 1/4x. You will have a great video recording when you play-back the file in real time. Then just add your previously recorded audio track back in with standard movie editing software and presto! you have an FSX video at a frame rate well above what your CPU can do in real-time. And the best part: Nobody needs to know!If instead of rendering loops of airplanes on planet Earth you would have rendered blue-skinned folks on planet Pandora (and they even talk funny) your name would be David Cameron, your video clip would be called "Avatar" and you would have raked-in $2 billion in ticket sales! You don't think Avatar was rendered in real-time, do you? OK, he likely didn't use Fraps (now wouldn't that be a scoop!), but you get he idea...Cheers,- jahman.

Hmmm. My 980x hit 11,004 on stock clocks!

At 3.3??? How is that possible??

Yeh I know! I set the bios back to default, checked CPU-Z, it's was at stock multiplier, base clock, voltages etc and running at 3.33GHz with HT on. Scored 11,004