yeah..that's how i knew i was at 1.04V

Note: I said under load.

My rig is detailed on my signiature. I have been able to fly in and out of FlyTampa Scenery (Vienna, Athens) with mid 30's FPS, when I am at altitude the fps CLIMBS TO 50-60 (vsync)

I don't know why the I7 2600K series appear to be much more powerful than my I7 950? I don't have 15fps where they have 40. I should oc to 4.0 GHz or go buy a 2600K...

Sagga, you could OC it to 4.0 Ghz or you will need another MB too if you choose a Sandy Bridge/ Leffe

ok so here's what i know... and I'm not an expert in every detail of overclocking by any stretch. In the asus utility I have I set the system bus to 100Mhz and the multiplier to 47. I did not touch whatever voltage setting it had. So it's auto in that it steps down the voltage when the CPU is at idle...not sure why you wouldnt want to have that set. Is the flip side locking in it some other voltage 24/7?anyway, at the end of day if you have decent temps at load then I'm not sure if any of this matters.

That's not what "Auto" does Steve. Auto means that your motherboard will single-handedly pick your Vcore as you increase the CPU frequency.You should overclock using the BIOS, never using software. It takes some reading but it's not that hard to do it right.

I don't know why the I7 2600K series appear to be much more powerful than my I7 950? I don't have 15fps where they have 40. I should oc to 4.0 GHz or go buy a 2600K...

The 2500K / 2600K are faster, but not so much. With an OCed I5 2500K you would be in the low / mid 20's where you now see 15, provided there's not something else holding you back, that is

That's not what "Auto" does Steve. Auto means that your motherboard will single-handedly pick your Vcore as you increase the CPU frequency.You should overclock using the BIOS, never using software. It takes some reading but it's not that hard to do it right.The 2500K / 2600K are faster, but not so much. With an OCed I5 2500K you would be in the low / mid 20's where you now see 15, provided there's not something else holding you back, that is

yep don't disagree..the website gives you step by step:http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1578110I set the values in the tool, happy with fsx performance, PC is stable and decent temps. Not losing sleep over it

yep don't disagree..the website gives you step by step:http://hardforum.com...d.php?t=1578110I set the values in the tool, happy with fsx performance, PC is stable and decent temps. Not losing sleep over it

So you used the BIOS then. That's a good guideI would still check full load Vcore and temperatures

So you used the BIOS then. That's a good guideI would still check full load Vcore and temperatures

no I was too lazy . When I first got the system built I fooled around with the utility and saw that 4.7 was fine...I recall Vcore going to 1.32V @60C on prime95 which is at the low end of the levels they specify in that site so i was ok with it. Multiple sources I've read say not to exceed 1.5vwhats interesting is that with the utility the brick wall is at 4.7...4.8 and I get BSOD after about 5-10 minutes- regardless even if I step up the voltage. I keep hearing of ppl getting 4.9+ on air so my plan was to go under the hood a la the steps in that website to get there but I havent gotten around to it...besides how much improvement will there be from 4.7 to 4.9? And i dont know how thrilled I'd be with going past 1.4v. So my chip seems happy at 4.7...again agree with what youre saying and if in the end it lasts me 5 yrs instead of 8 yrs ..or whatever....i'm ok with that.

whats interesting is that with the utility the brick wall is at 4.7...4.8 and I get BSOD after about 5-10 minutes- regardless even if I step up the voltage. I keep hearing of ppl getting 4.9+ on air so my plan was to go under the hood a la the steps in that website to get there but I havent gotten around to it...besides how much improvement will there be from 4.7 to 4.9? And i dont know how thrilled I'd be with going past 1.4v. So my chip seems happy at 4.7...again agree with what youre saying and if in the end it lasts me 5 yrs instead of 8 yrs ..or whatever....i'm ok with that.

Yeah, that's typical. 4.9-5.0 is a rarity!

"1.32V @60C on prime95"That's great. Another 100 - 200MHz won't make that big of a difference. Certainly not worth it if it needs 1.4V+ IMO

Yeah, that's typical. 4.9-5.0 is a rarity!

indeed. according to the site:The results below are based on the range of the CPU turbo multiplier when overclocking. Results are representative of 100 D2 CPUs that were binned and tested for stability under load; these results will most likely represent retail CPUs.1. Approximately 50% of CPUs can go up to 4.4~4.5 GHz2. Approximately 40% of CPUs can go up to 4.6~4.7 GHz3. Approximately 10% of CPUs can go up to 4.8~5 GHz (50+ multipliers are about 2% of this group)I would love to try to push it but not sure going that extreme on air is worth it...you're going to be real close to 1.5vbtw, here's the cooler I'm using.http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835118046

got a little curious and re-ran prime95....this is after about 20 minutes...CPU warmer than I thought (67C) ambient is 22C. 1.34 Vcore. I'm still guessing this is within acceptable limits. Especially considering FSX is not pounding on 4 cores. Let me know if you disagree

1.34v is plenty safe for sandybridge. If you were able to get 4.7 I'd be happy with that, and it likely is your true wall, regardless of settings. Only a small percentage (as noted above) can reach or exceed that speed.Edit: of the 3 sb's I've personally played with, one reached 4.6 and the other 2 capped out at 4.3ghz.

Real Temp or Core Temp is what most of us use to monitor temps. Not sure how accurate that CPU temp reading isVcore is fine

Real Temp or Core Temp is what most of us use to monitor temps. Not sure how accurate that CPU temp reading isVcore is fine

That's the standard ASUS monitor suite that ships with the mb's. I haven't had any reason to doubt it, but I haven't done any comparisons with other monitoring software either.