Hi,Well, looks like my setup is number 3 without the overclock. Once I drop out of the top five I'll look to update. :Big Grin:

Hi Mike :smile:I can see you have a 2xSLI setup there. Be carefull with that if you plan to use it too with p67 because at x8 FSX's performance is known to slump dramatically. I really don't know at 8x8x, maybe someone more knowledgeable (or maybe you know yourself it's ok already, in which case sorry for this) can shed some light on this

So, the P67 is not only dual channel, but also forces you down to x8 PCIe with two GPUs?? Does that even matter for FSX? Why is Intel making such a downstep with a "better" chip? I think they are trying to push the sales, forcing people to go P67 now, buy new RAM, again, and then again go quad channel, extending sales even more. Could it be that transparent?

I'm sure when Intel said 4.8ghz on air, they were referring to the EE/EX that comes out later this year. Not these turbocharged Celerons...

I'm sure when Intel said 4.8ghz on air, they were referring to the EE/EX that comes out later this year. Not these turbocharged Celerons...

Turbo-charged Celerons? Yeah, lots of 4c/8t Celerons running @ 5GHz out there

Turbo-charged Celerons? Yeah, lots of 4c/8t Celerons running @ 5GHz out there

Ok it's a turbocharged SX..... obviously you don't get the reference... I'm sure most people do.

Guys, as you probably know you are on a public forum and I'm not sure people here are much interested by your duet for the last past days.So please stop. <_<

It's time to close up David.

+1 this topic turns to a ping pong between 2 members...

It's time to close up David.

No, I don't think so.That's an interesting thread and I believe everyone here knows when to stop.

For those that are interested, there is another Sandy Bridge discussion over a the ED forums(DCS:A10\DCS Black Shark). There are some interesting observations about voltage limitations and overclocking:http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=64635They are saying that only the "K" version can be overclocked significantly. BUT, at stock clocks it looks like this new processor is the new king of the hill on modern games. Interestingly enough, most benchmarks only show a 5-7% increase in frames over my current core I7 950, so I might be waiting a while to upgrade unless 5ghz becomes common with these processors. http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/20

That's obvious considering it's the only models with unlocked multipliers. That's the only way to OC a sandy bridge, using the multi because BCLK OCing doesn't work.

So, the P67 is not only dual channel, but also forces you down to x8 PCIe with two GPUs?? Does that even matter for FSX? Why is Intel making such a downstep with a "better" chip? I think they are trying to push the sales, forcing people to go P67 now, buy new RAM, again, and then again go quad channel, extending sales even more. Could it be that transparent?

It's a mainstream series, not a server / enthusiast one like 1366. p67 has the same PCIe lanes as my ever beloved p55 Both p67 & p55 drop to 8x8x in dual SLI configs that's nothing new, and interestingly enough, it makes no difference at all even at huge 5040x1080 resolutions compared to the 16x16x in 1366http://www.tomshardw...200,2537-9.htmlhttp://www.tomshardw...00,2758-12.html You can see that even a p55+nf200 tri-sli at a high resolutions + filters behaves just as well as x58 native 16x16x setup. I've seen result at even higher resolutions like those 5040x1080 I mentioned in dual SLI, but can't find the link now.Well, FSX (what a surprise) is not just another game when it comes to PCIe bandwidth utilisation. Someone in these boards (can't remember who it was, think it was jahman) posted an interesting result where different games where tested on single GPU setups comparing 16x vs 8x slots performance. Well, FSX was the only one that maxed the PCIe bus capabilities (lost 20%) at 8x http://www.tomshardw....0,1915-10.htmlI'm not sure if a 8x8x SLI in p67 will also behave like that or the full 16 lane bandwidth will be available

Possibly because FSX is the only game there that doesn't preload everything.

Possibly because FSX is the only game there that doesn't preload everything.

That could very well be the reason, I have no idea how FSX runs, I just google stuff and run tests but I think I read somewhere that FSX doesn't make good use (if any at all) of VRAM

I think that with VRAM has been mentioned couple of times on forums already. Like Dario, I too read those reviews and tests, and that 16x vs 8x really makes it interesting, and kind of pointless too, since if you run a single card, you run it at 16x on both chipsets anyway, and if you run dual, triple or quad, then there is no difference even at huge resolutions.So basically, we are there again, no point of "not" changing or changing to 1366.Still, I would SO much like to compare SB to some 920s or 950s at some 4Ghz. THAT we need! Not some benchmarks done in all other games. ONLY thing that matters is when someone runs it on the same hardware on both machines.My missus would probably do something very unpleasant to me if I made a costly upgrade now :Big Grin:

I think that with VRAM has been mentioned couple of times on forums already. Like Dario, I too read those reviews and tests, and that 16x vs 8x really makes it interesting, and kind of pointless too, since if you run a single card, you run it at 16x on both chipsets anyway, and if you run dual, triple or quad, then there is no difference even at huge resolutions.So basically, we are there again, no point of "not" changing or changing to 1366.Still, I would SO much like to compare SB to some 920s or 950s at some 4Ghz. THAT we need! Not some benchmarks done in all other games. ONLY thing that matters is when someone runs it on the same hardware on both machines.My missus would probably do something very unpleasant to me if I made a costly upgrade now :Big Grin:

The one thing we need to know here to help Mike find out if his dual SLI will work fine is if anyone has tried that in p55 or knows it's okAs for how worthy it is to upgrade to SB from a Nehalem we should expect about a 25% performance boost. Whether it it worth it or not is up to you. Personally I'm not gonna do it, especially with MS Flight round the corner. I mean it has to stop somewhere.We'll have sooner than later a new addon, a great plane or scenery that will be so much more taxiing on our systems and back to square one we are. We just need to stop aiming for perfect performance in JFK with all sliders maxed out and Aerosoft JFK + FSDT + blah, blah, blah. Come on, it's so much more fun to fly to Innsbruck or Toncontín, or pick your destination based on where you have ATC available in IVAO or VATSIM