New computer on the way

[Kosta 122]

Some other things I'm reading, would like to know what you think:Ivy Bridge is supposed to come middle of 2011, and bring about 20% more performance - if that's to believe.But, they are saying also that it should be compatible with the current 1155 socket. Even current mainboards.Also Flight might be coming with HT support - so now I buy i5, without HT - and then Flight comes out, maybe, supporting it. I'd rip my brains out...Also if IB comes out, shelled out 250€ for i7, getting new CPU? Steep...

[dazz 69]

My 2 cents:

Ivy Bridge is supposed to come middle of 2011, and bring about 20% more performance - if that's to believe.

I would expect it to overclock a bit better as it's just a shrink to 22nm. but that's about it. A 20% is way too optimistic (6GHz)

But, they are saying also that it should be compatible with the current 1155 socket. Even current mainboards.

That's what I've heard too

Also Flight might be coming with HT support - so now I buy i5, without HT - and then Flight comes out, maybe, supporting it. I'd rip my brains out...Also if IB comes out, shelled out 250€ for i7, getting new CPU? Steep...

I think we've become obsessed with CPU performance (thanks FSX) Why are we suddenly hoping for HT to be important when it's never been for any games before? Flight should be GPU bound and a 100$ Phenom II should do just fine, so if we were to speculate what Flight will bring and base our upgrade decisions on that, we should probably not upgrade at all as our computers are already monsters and FSX is the only thing they can't run maxed out. I'm almost certain HT will be useless for Flight too, it would need to make full use of 4 cores to begin with.Hell, we don't even know if Flight will be a (better) simulator, and we are still basing our upgrade decisions on Flight.... but under FSX performance standardsIt's your money, your decision, but I bet those extra 100$ you won't miss HT for years to come. I turned it off just for 100 extra MHz and by the time I need it this rig will be long gone Even if it did make a difference it should be 70 vs 80 FPS, not 10 vs 20 if you know what I mean

[Kosta 122]

Oh you are so right, it's all FSX fault. I can't remember when I was so crazy about the upgrade, not knowing which way to go. When I was upgrading E6600 for my FS9 it was such an easy decision. Faster, normal-priced, go...Now, OMG.I'm leaning towards i5 and nice watercooled gtx580, should bring me much happiness in games and all that I need in windows. If I didn't have this nice offer for my current PC (getting 700€ for those 4 main components), I'd keep my current sys and just get GTX580.Say, why can't SB support 2000mhz RAM?

[dazz 69]

Now I think of it, have you considered keeping your 6GB of RAM and running them in Flex Mode? (first 4GB in dual channel and the rest in single channel, that, on the other hand makes little to no difference anyway)Just in case it helps saving money, unless you have already commited to sell the whole package, that is

Say, why can't SB support 2000mhz RAM?

Who knows, something to do with multi availability maybe because of the FSB being fixed at 100? No idea to be honest

[cmeeks 8]

First of all, I was under the impression that Ivy Bridge wouldn't be out until December or January. Second, who knows when Flight will be out? Regardless, I think going with the 2500k now and then upgrading to Ivy Bridge when it's released is a really good game plan. That will yield the most flexibility, computing power, and best performance for Flight in the long run.I will say from some of the media on the Flight website, it does look like a decent improvement to me - primarily in the form of improved shadows. I'm pretty sure in one of the videos, clouds cause shadows on the plane as it flies under them - that's pretty awesome and realistic if it's true. A lot of life could be added to FSX in the form of shadows alone. From the screenshots, it also looks like the default scenery is a little better as well. I'm actually pretty impressed with the March sample of screen shots.

[Kosta 122]

Guys, thanks for your suggestions, but I thought about it alot, and made a following decision (you might jump and me now, but I have couple of reasons):Gainward GeForce GTX 580, 1536MB DDR5, HDMI, DVI, DP 424€Corsair Vengeance DIMM Kit 8GB PC3-14900U CL9-9-9-24 105€ASUS P8P67 PRO 156€Intel Core i7 2600K PC1155 3,4GHz 8MB boxed 269€GPU should be OK I gather. I will get watercooler in a month or so.The reason for slower RAM is that SB doesn't support 2000, and Kit with 8GB @ 2133 costs WAY more (200€+).Pro as suggested (pricediff to non-Pro is very little). Deluxe is not needed (front box).And finally 2600K:- I now have a CPU that supports HT and has 8MB of cache - I am doing this upgrade more or less against my will, since my friend's computer died, and he accepted the 700€ deal on my config, so the "sidegrade" is virtually without cost (only part pushing my costs up is the GTX580)- I am reading that if @ 4Ghz+ on i7 currently, SB is nothing but sidegradeSo if I deduct prices of the new hardware from 700€, I am selling my GPU for 170€, which is about 50€ more than it's being sold on Ebay. Plus possibly 30€ for the watercooler on Ebay (someone want it??) :)I know I will probably turn off HT for the higher OC on the 2600K, but that gives me at least a better feeling for a possibility of the higher OC.And still, if I have something that profits from HT, I can easily back down on OC a bit and turn on HT.Thanks everyone! (I know I'm doing otherwise than suggested, but you at least helped me with the decision)

[dazz 69]

It's perfectly fine. It's up to each one of us to decide what's worth paying a bit more, and you where lucky enough to sell your old parts in no time and at a good price, so enjoy your new setup! Please let us know if it turns out being a sidegrade or not, I'm pretty sure you'll find out that's not true. Obviously it will not be a tenfold performance increase or something like that, but I'm willing to bet you will not be disappointed. A stock clocked SB is a sidegrade compared to a 4GHz Nehalem, but when overclocked SB is a 30 - 40% faster and there's nothing other than an architecture upgrade that can do that for FSX. No video card, memory speed, SSD... etc Anyway, if you don't mind spending the extra 100€ for the 2600K, you might as well spend 20€ more in the 2000MHz RAM that will probably overclock to 2133MHz and get that 4% that would equate to another 200MHz CPU overclock.Your decision again, I don't think you can go wrong either wayKeep us posted my friend!

[Kosta 122]

I never had successful RAM overclock. Why should this one be any different?Corey, do you have yours running at 2133? Since you said you have the same one, but why not then at 2133 rather than 1866?

[dazz 69]

I never had successful RAM overclock. Why should this one be any different?Corey, do you have yours running at 2133? Since you said you have the same one, but why not then at 2133 rather than 1866?

I think he is running his RAM with an undervolt (1.56V vs rated 1.65)What I mean is to get the 2000MHz one, and overclock it to 2133MHz even if you need to loosen the timings to CL10. Apparently higher memory clocks help more than tighter timings, but again, the difference it's going to make is minimal. Your call

[Kosta 122]

Is there a benefit from undervolting?

[dazz 69]

To stay within Intel's supposed specs. It has more to do with being cautious than anything IMOThe thing is that when Intel published the SB datasheets, the VID range there was raised to a 1.52V max. Some people chose to believe it was ok to feed up to 1.52V to their SB CPU's based on that (I for one wished that it was safe) until a guy in the UK started to experience degrading chip sympthoms. Then the paranoia spread through the internet and now many people prefer not to push their Vdimm too much as well, which is perfecly fine of course. Intel recomends 1.5V +/- 5% so that's a max of 1.575VThe thing is that for all previous generations, the criteria was to use the ABSOLUTE MAXIMUMS as a reference, not the recomended voltages. Intel has stopped publishing those though.So the "accepted" limits are based on past architecture figures and 32nm chips had a 1.375V max Vcore and 1.8V max Vdimm. There's no reason to consider 1.575V the absolute maximum for SB when those figures (recomended, not absolute maximum) are the same ones than all Nehalem chips and therefore the absolute maximum should be the same as Nehalem (1.8V)

[Kosta 122]

OK, my current RAM requires by Corsair specs 1.65. What would be by Intel specs way over what SB would allow?!? Would that mean full incompatibility with current SB systems? Sounds like you "shouldn't" do that.The other two, Vengeance is 1.5/1.5 (tested/rated), and XMS3 is 1.65/1.5, meaning I could push it way past 1866 with higher voltage, but shouldn't since Intel doesn't recommend it? Either I don't get it, or something's very wrong here

[dazz 69]

I know it's sort of confusing. The thing is that there's no evidence about the 1.5V limit just as there's no guarantee 1.58V or more is safe either. I really don't know if a memory set rated at say 1.5 can be overclocked using 1.6V assuming the IMC will handle 1.6V. I mean, will the memory sticks burst into flames? probably not, but they might fail altogether... or maybe not, I'm totally clueless there.I'm running my old 2000 CL7 mushkins at 2133 CL8 1.65V and so far so good, but they are rated at that Vdimm so It's not really an overvolt.I'm pretty sure whichever set you pick will work without a hitch. Compatibility remains the same (uncertain) but many are running those Corsairs on P8P67 boards with zero issuesMany RAM manufacturers are advertising SB specific RAM rated at 1.65V and more, even though we all know there's no such thing as platform specific DDR3 rams, but the thing is that they seem to disregard the 1.5V Vdimm limit very often and that should tell us something IMO

[Kosta 122]

Alright, I get it. Since it's stock at 1.65, should be OK. And if I run 1.5 rated at 1.65, that *might* be a problem.Now the only question remains: will Amazon take 2600K if I "test" it. Any experience there? 14days they actually have to take it back... ("Widerrufsrecht" in german, have no idea in english...)That way I could order say two, and return on if it overclocks better.

[dazz 69]

Now the only question remains: will Amazon take 2600K if I "test" it. Any experience there? 14days they actually have to take it back... ("Widerrufsrecht" in german, have no idea in english...)That way I could order say two, and return on if it overclocks better.

Haha, that's smart. I have no idea how Amazon works, sorry, but when I got my 2600K after changing the 2500K order, the shop messed things up and ended up sending me two different 2600K within a couple of days :biggrin:I had the first one up and runningby the time the second one arrived and never tried it, but I'm happy with this overclock anyway. Actually I had to mail them so that they knew about their mistake... and it still took them a whole month to send the delivery guy to pick it up!I'm pretty sure they would have never found out about it if I hadn't mailed them LOL. They must be selling like hot cakesIf you can do that, chances are both chips will pertain to the same batch though, so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle, but sounds like a plan hehe