Fair enough, but you can't disprove the opinion in the same direct comparison can you? Anyway this is getting a bit silly now so shall we leave it there and let the thread get back on track if possible?

Fair enough, but you can't disprove the opinion in the same direct comparison can you? Anyway this is getting a bit silly now so shall we leave it there and let the thread get back on track if possible?

No problem. I don't mean to be as confrontational as I come off sometimes, so I apologize if I have given any offense.

Not at all, that's one of the drawbacks of forums in that it's hard to judge character. Sure the conversation would have been perfectly pleasant face to face. Cheers

Anyone with a Z68 board should be able to make a comparison (at least I think so)The IGP will take 2MB of L3 for it, thus leaving 6MB for the CPU, just like a 2500K. Lucilda Virtu can have them both working at a time I think?If that's the case and someone with a 2600K + Z68 board is willing to help us figure this out, we could set up a benchmark flight wherever you want Callum, and record the it with Fraps, then compare both (IGP on - 6MB vs IGP off - 8MB)

If you can find a way to measure "smooth", then sure.

If you can find a way to measure "smooth", then sure.

I tried this some time ago. It's a way to measure stutters, so smoothness in a way. The visible stutters in the sim showed in the graphs so I'm confident that it could give us an idea of how much smoother the 2600K isAnyone with a 2600K, a Z68 board and half an hour to spare willing to help us figure this out please?

That looks like it could be interesting actually. I think it would still need to be done with two separate CPU's though, as relying on the IGP method seems like it wouldn't provide a fair comparison to me. Surely the IGP can't run in conjunction with a graphics card, and even if so it would surely use extra processor cycles in doing so? Maybe I'm not sure what your getting at, but with the IGP off, the dedicated GPU would be active; then with the IGP on you would have to disable to GPU to use the IGP for FSX, otherwise it's not doing anything. That obviously wouldn't allow a direct comparison.

That looks like it could be interesting actually. I think it would still need to be done with two separate CPU's though, as relying on the IGP method seems like it wouldn't provide a fair comparison to me. Surely the IGP can't run in conjunction with a graphics card, and even if so it would surely use extra processor cycles in doing so? Maybe I'm not sure what your getting at, but with the IGP off, the dedicated GPU would be active; then with the IGP on you would have to disable to GPU to use the IGP for FSX, otherwise it's not doing anything. That obviously wouldn't allow a direct comparison.

I also thought it worked like that Callum. Read tons of previews on Z68 and they all said you couldn't have both the IGP and the discrete GPU working together, but apparently it's not true. Someone in this forum (Pierre) explained how it's doneIt would be better to test it against a genuine 2500K, that's for sure. The IGP shares other resources with the CPU apart of L3 cache, like memory bandwidth, and probably CPU cycles too as you said.But if there's a way to have it on, but idling, with no monitor plugged to it, we could run some generic CPU and memory benchmarks and see if the IGP lowers the scores. We could check the Task Manager to see if there's a significant CPU and memory usage with the IGP idle. Still not conclusive maybe, I dunno

Hmmm I'm starting to take a little more of an interest in this now than I originally had. I'm doing another build for someone within the next few weeks so should have another i5 on my hands soon. If I have the time I may well try and do a more structured test using that fraps method, to see if I can record some kind of data to illustrate any differences. Don't expect any earth shattering differences if I can document some, but should be able to put this to rest one way or another.

Hmmm I'm starting to take a little more of an interest in this now than I originally had. I'm doing another build for someone within the next few weeks so should have another i5 on my hands soon. If I have the time I may well try and do a more structured test using that fraps method, to see if I can record some kind of data to illustrate any differences. Don't expect any earth shattering differences if I can document some, but should be able to put this to rest one way or another.

That'd be great. Thanks Callum

I'd recommend the Mushkin cas 7 stuff:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226201

Yeah the Mushkin Redline stuff is great, I just really don't think it's worth the extra cash for this low latency stuff. I think I'm safe in saying that cas 8 or even 9 would be okay, if on a budget. Especially since SB. The difference in latency won't effect FSX by much if at all., considering the high frequency.

Ye there's no real perceivable difference between the different timing in anything outside of a benchmark. Much better to save money here and apply it elsewhere. CAS8 1600MHz is the sweet spot for SB RAM I reckon.