EDIT: Alain! not again please! RMA your crystal ball now :P

LOL I did not put it there, MS sent the order out to Nvidia, I just talked to them (Nvidia).Flight will need fast hardware still depending on the addons, take Crysis 2 for example (I have it) this game can take a good computer like mine to the edge if you max everything out and we are in 2011.So the bare bone Flight will probably not be that demanding on a system (mom's and dad's systems) but MS will implement a lot in their engine (I can't say to much cause my crystal ball is out of commission tonight..:Big Grin: ) the sky will be the limit for the dev., meaning that they will be able to pack more eye candy in their sceneries or planes so you'll still need the best hardware money can buy if you want to max everything out.

Ok guys, we'll have to wait what Flight brings to the simming table. I'm not holding my breath for it, not just yet. Way too early to build up hopes

I hope so too. Just made my step from Core2Quad to Sandy Bridge and I hope my current parts will be useable for some time. Can´t buy a new system every time a new one comes out.

Won't you have fantastic performance w/ your SB, beyond which starts becoming academic? The way I see it, I have really good performance already, and I'm still back at Core2Quad. Your move to SB should get you mine performance x1.6-1.8 or so I guess, which is kinda hard to imagine for me. I already get sterling performance until I'm deep in a big metropolitan area with a very complex aircraft, in FTX scenery w/ weather. Anything less than that and I'm locked at 30 with great IQ, fast texture updates, etc. I'm thinking 1.6-1.8 x what I already have would mean everything would stay locked always at maybe 40, no matter where or what the situation. Can FSX use more than that? I guess for sure it can when you start adding more screens, etc.I'm holding out for Ivy Bridge myself because as I say, my current rig is good nuf for all but the worse scenarios, and they stay at 20 at the worst. Your current parts will be useable until Ivy Bridge is old news ;o)

Won't you have fantastic performance w/ your SB, beyond which starts becoming academic? The way I see it, I have really good performance already, and I'm still back at Core2Quad. Your move to SB should get you mine performance x1.6-1.8 or so I guess, which is kinda hard to imagine for me. I already get sterling performance until I'm deep in a big metropolitan area with a very complex aircraft, in FTX scenery w/ weather. Anything less than that and I'm locked at 30 with great IQ, fast texture updates, etc. I'm thinking 1.6-1.8 x what I already have would mean everything would stay locked always at maybe 40, no matter where or what the situation. Can FSX use more than that? I guess for sure it can when you start adding more screens, etc.I'm holding out for Ivy Bridge myself because as I say, my current rig is good nuf for all but the worse scenarios, and they stay at 20 at the worst. Your current parts will be useable until Ivy Bridge is old news ;o)

I know that Core2Quad´s are very good and capable of FSX, but mine had only 3 GHz fully oc´ed, so this was eventually a bit too low considering I´ll gonne use the NGX exsessively. I also had the sim pritty good setted up for my CPU with good quality and frames between 20 and 60 in the Turbine Duke in rural sceneries. But the frames went down to the low 10´s or even single digits when I flew with the TimMouse an approach to Portland. Currently, without much testing how far I can go I have it locked on 35 FPS and it mostly stays there, so I´m very happy about this.

I know that Core2Quad´s are very good and capable of FSX, but mine had only 3 GHz fully oc´ed, so this was eventually a bit too low considering I´ll gonne use the NGX exsessively. I also had the sim pritty good setted up for my CPU with good quality and frames between 20 and 60 in the Turbine Duke in rural sceneries. But the frames went down to the low 10´s or even single digits when I flew with the TimMouse an approach to Portland. Currently, without much testing how far I can go I have it locked on 35 FPS and it mostly stays there, so I´m very happy about this.

That's great I think you have a gr8 chance of staying happy with it for quite some time. I'm ok with what I have too, and very thankfully don't feel driven to upgrade anytime soon. It would be nice to be able to fly into all terminals w/ PMDG aircraft w/o a hitch, but fortunately it's good enough as it is currently. I'm spending most of my flight time in the turbine duke, and Super MD80 which is really easy on performance, and PMDG J41, and FT Emb 145 and they all fly just gr8 w/ my current setup. I'm really stoked w/ how my replacement q9650 and the existing memory are working together. I am getting really nice and low memory latency scores, etc.

That's great I think you have a gr8 chance of staying happy with it for quite some time. I'm ok with what I have too, and very thankfully don't feel driven to upgrade anytime soon. It would be nice to be able to fly into all terminals w/ PMDG aircraft w/o a hitch, but fortunately it's good enough as it is currently. I'm spending most of my flight time in the turbine duke, and Super MD80 which is really easy on performance, and PMDG J41, and FT Emb 145 and they all fly just gr8 w/ my current setup. I'm really stoked w/ how my replacement q9650 and the existing memory are working together. I am getting really nice and low memory latency scores, etc.

What did you upgrade the Q9650 from and when? That chip is extremely expensive for what you get...

What did you upgrade the Q9650 from and when? That chip is extremely expensive for what you get...

I believe Noel's referring to the non-extreme Q9650, i.e. not the QX9650. Both models exist, and the regular Q9650 was a whole lot cheaper.

What did you upgrade the Q9650 from and when? That chip is extremely expensive for what you get...

It's a longer story Zach. My expensive QX9650 died after 3.4y, and I bought a new Q9650 to extend the life of my current machine until Ivy Bridge or beyond becomes available. It's working too good to justify a huge upgrade. Plus you can't beat dropping in a new chip and not having to 'fix' anything else, except to find out how it OC's. I've been one to buy higher end at the time, keep it for quite a while, then upgrade big, versus incremental upgrades. I would like to hang on to this machine until I can get 2-3x the thruput that I currently enjoy. Ivy Bridge could do it, probably only if it can be o'clocked greatly.

It's a longer story Zach. My expensive QX9650 died after 3.4y, and I bought a new Q9650 to extend the life of my current machine until Ivy Bridge or beyond becomes available. It's working too good to justify a huge upgrade. Plus you can't beat dropping in a new chip and not having to 'fix' anything else, except to find out how it OC's. I've been one to buy higher end at the time, keep it for quite a while, then upgrade big, versus incremental upgrades. I would like to hang on to this machine until I can get 2-3x the thruput that I currently enjoy. Ivy Bridge could do it, probably only if it can be o'clocked greatly.

No arguments there! I've never upgraded within the same architecture. Heck, I've never stayed with the same socket with a processor upgrade. I like to see results too!

No arguments there! I've never upgraded within the same architecture. Heck, I've never stayed with the same socket with a processor upgrade. I like to see results too!

I have, twice, and they were both significant upgrades on the same mobo at that time. The 1st was going from from an 486SX 25Mhz to a 486DX 50Mhz Overdrive -the single best upgrade I've ever experienced. The other time was going from an E6600 2.8GHz to the E8400 3.6GHz (Asus P5Ne sli).

No arguments there! I've never upgraded within the same architecture. Heck, I've never stayed with the same socket with a processor upgrade. I like to see results too!

There will be Ivy Bridge with PCI 3.0 @ 2x the BW of PCI 2.x... (New video card needed.)Cheers,- jahman.