See here: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_9.html

If I'm reading that correctly the SB cpu's are winning when overclocked to similar frequencies?lol

Is it such a big surprise that the new architecture is faster? We established this as soon as it was released. This is typical and will go on being the case. The 990X is the last hurrah with the 1366 platform. It's aimed at those with more money than sense or a need for a blazing fast hexacore with HT. I don't find it interesting, but rather stating and testing the obvious.I'll also add that I will never spend $1,000 on a processor. Ever. -_- Here's to waiting for at least Ivy B. *cheers* :Nerd:

Quote from the Article:"After we completed the first tests of Sandy Bridge processors, the verdict was extremely positive. Intel engineers did a great job on the new microarchitecture, so the actual products based on it ended up with a great combination of consumer features. However, the Core i7-2600K processor we discussed today is a unique thing. Although this CPU, like all other Sandy Bridge processors, is designed for LGA1155 platform and theoretically doesn’t belong to the top product category, things are totally different in reality. The new microarchitecture turns out so strong, that Core i7-2600K managed to outperform many pricier products for a higher-end LGA1366 platform.In other words, in the face of the new Core i7-2600K Intel created some sort of diversion that from the inside totally messes up the company’s marketing strategy in the upper price segment. And now, as we can see, there is nothing they can do about it. Even the increase in the clock frequencies of their top-of-the-line six-core LGA1366 Gulftown processors doesn’t really help. As our tests showed, the recently launched Core i7-990X Extreme Edition processor with maximally increased clock speed can only compete against Core i7-2600K in a few individual cases – in those few applications that create heavy load that could be well-paralleled.In fact, the most expensive processor in the market, the 1000-dollar six-core Core i7-990X Extreme Edition, can be titled the today’s fastest CPU only during video processing and transcoding, final rendering and a few specific tasks, such as encryption and batch image processing. As for the majority of general-purpose applications, including contemporary 3D games, it yields significantly to Core i7-2600K. Although the latter CPU has a smaller L3 cache, it can boast much higher relative performance per core.Unfortunately, overclocking also doesn’t help to fix the situation for Core i7-990X Extreme Edition. Even though this CPU belongs to the elite Special Edition overclocker series, the potential of the regular Core i7-2600K is just as good. While its price is three times lower, it can be easily overclocked by simply raising its clock frequency multiplier, and the maximum frequencies for this processor are not any lower than those of the Core i7-990X Extreme Edition.In the light of everything we have just said, the “Extreme Edition” part in the name of a 1000-dollar processor becomes a little ridiculous, because now it refers only to power consumption and price.As for the specific recommendations, at this point it would make a lot of sense to walk away from the LGA1366 platform in general and the Core i7-990X Extreme Edition processor in particular. Much cheaper Core i7-2600K will be just as good in terms of performance in the majority of popular applications, and will leave Core i7-990X Extreme Edition behind in energy-efficiency and overclocking. Of course, there are specific applications where six-core Core i7-990X Extreme Edition is still very good, but a system based on it will cost an equivalent of two Sandy Bridge PCs."Love it! A tantalizing delight for Sandy Bridge owners! Thank you.Kind regards,

My father is stronger than your father.....:P

Yea! At least that is the one thing I did not waste my money on in this hobby, but there have been countless other items...Liking the 1155 alot!

My father is stronger than your father.....:P

LOL!

Tom's Hardware has released it's latest analysis of gaming CPU's. It rates several of the Sandy Bridge CPU models substantially ahead of everything else on the planet, including in the case of gaming, the new i7-9XX extreme hexicores.Gaming CPU Heirarchy ChartQuote from Tom's Hardware:About the core i5-2400"Sandy Bridge is here, and Intel's new microarchitechture is fast. Initial test data suggests that the new Core i5-2400 can stand toe to toe with Core i7-900-series processors when it comes to game performance. We're not talking about the entry-level models, either. This affordable processor has the chops to compete with Intel's thousand-dollar Extreme Edition chips when it comes to enabling the highest frames per second." About the core i5-2500K"From the standpoint of raw compute power, the Core i5-2500K offers very little over the cheaper Core i5-2400. It does hold three distinctions, however: it's clocked a few hundred MHz higher, it comes with Intel HD 3000 graphics, and it has an unlocked CPU multiplier. The 200 MHz (300 MHz with Turbo Boost) advantage is almost insignificant over the Core i5-2400, and gamers with discrete graphics cards will care little about the integrated graphics engine. But the unlocked CPU multiplier is a must for overclockers using any Sandy Bridge-based CPU. The Core i5-2500K is the obvious choice for gamers looking for the best combination of overclock-ability and gaming potential.CPUs priced over $220 offer rapidly diminishing returns when it comes to game performance. As such, we have a hard time recommending anything more expensive than the Core i5-2500K, especially since this multiplier-unlocked processor can be overclocked to great effect if more performance is desired. Even at stock clocks, it meets or beats the $1000 Core i7-990X Extreme Edition when it comes to gaming."About the i7-2600K"Take the Core i5-2500, add 2 MB of L3 cache, Hyper-Threading, and a 100 MHz bump across the board. What do you have? The Core i7-2600K.It doesn't sound like much of an improvement, and frankly it will make remarkably little difference when it comes to gaming. The $100 spread between the Core i5-2500K and Core i7-2600K is only recommended if you want to brag, because you're probably not going to notice any appreciable frame rate difference. The Core i7's strength is only really exploited in heavily-threaded workstation applications, rather than games.But no list is complete without the best-of-the-best, and that's the Core i7-2600K. For $330 you can have a CPU that games faster than the $1050 hexa-core Core i7-990X Extreme."UnquoteAs we know by objective FSX testing results, the golden age of FSX peformance is upon us. If ever there was a reason for upgrading computers for those who want to outgrow MSFS performance problems, this is it.Kind regards,

Listen to Spirit Flyer, he's knows his sh**t

The 2600K is clearly faster for gaming compare to the 9XX series, I can't overclock my 980X on air to 5.0Ghz without getting drunk first...:He He: so higher possible overclock is the first advantage the 2600K as over my 980X because we all know FSX is CPU cycle hungry also the new SB architecture is a + compare to the 9XX series.That been said FSX is a beast of it's own, you can't compare FSX to today's games as we all know FSX can still bring a 2600K or a 990X to it's knees something modern games can't do.No matter if you have the latest CPU, RAMS, MOBO, SSD, GPU + + + what count for FSX is a well balanced and overclocked rig and the end result will show on the screen, CPU testing on paper is good CPU testing on FSX is another story, I'll put my rig against any other FSX 2600K's rig.

Sorry to dig this up again but the question I'm faced with now is 990X with 6 cores around 4.5Ghz vs the 2600k with 4 Cores at 4.5Ghz Would the extra 2 cores provide better performance? Worthy performance?

Sorry to dig this up again but the question I'm faced with now is 990X with 6 cores around 4.5Ghz vs the 2600k with 4 Cores at 4.5Ghz Would the extra 2 cores provide better performance? Worthy performance?

Not at all. Sadly, FSX doesn't use those 2 cores effectively. It will only impact texture loading, which in flight two cores do more than well. Price vs. Performance is bad. SB will probably win also in terms of FPS on one core.

Yeah, not to mention that to get 4.5GHz stable in a 990X is 99.9% of the times only achievable under water and probably close to 1.45 - 1.5V, while 4.5GHz for a 2500K / 2600K is almost guaranteed below 1.35V

All I can say is, don't walk, RUN! This upgrade is the best money I have ever spent. HONESTLY!