This is why I question the sanity of pushing overclocks to the absolute limit. If you have a comfortable 4.5Ghz from your I5 2500k or i7 2600k, why bother trying to force another 200 or 300Mhz out of it if that will take the CPU close to the "edge"? The framerate increase in FSX (and anything else for that matter) would be negligible. I suppose if you're happy to fork out for new CPUs and motherboards every twelve months, then I guess it doesn't matter....

I understand (I wish I could quote, but can't remember where I read it) that 60% of the performance improvement in IB is in the video processing on the CPU. This will have no effect on FS as we use discrete video cards.

IB sports a new physical design for the logic gates called TriGate that are a whole new ballgame. Read.Cheers,- jahman.

See here.Cheers,- jahman.

Well..... That is merely chinese to me. Decipher for me? hahahaha

This is why I question the sanity of pushing overclocks to the absolute limit. If you have a comfortable 4.5Ghz from your I5 2500k or i7 2600k, why bother trying to force another 200 or 300Mhz out of it if that will take the CPU close to the "edge"? The framerate increase in FSX (and anything else for that matter) would be negligible. I suppose if you're happy to fork out for new CPUs and motherboards every twelve months, then I guess it doesn't matter....

Me too Christopher. It's why I turned back my Q9650 from 4.1 to 3.8Ghz--negligible improvement in 'performance', drastic reduction in power efficiency! Heat=inefficiency! There's another issue I notice: when the hardware is really in near-struggle mode (higher heat, higher vCore) perhaps on the edge of misfiring, you can get worsening stuttering. My sense is that if this is seen, you've already gone too far, even if Prime 95 runs flawlessly! Just a hunch, mind ya!

Well..... That is merely chinese to me. Decipher for me? hahahaha

Phil Taylor, former head of ACES -developpers of FSX- shows that at high frame rates, excessive autogen can exceed PCIe v. 2.0 16x bandwidth. PCIe v. 3.0 doubles the bandwidth of PCIe v. 2.0.Cheers,- jahman.

Phil Taylor, former head of ACES -developpers of FSX- shows that at high frame rates, excessive autogen can exceed PCIe v. 2.0 16x bandwidth. PCIe v. 3.0 doubles the bandwidth of PCIe v. 2.0.Cheers,- jahman.

What a crock. 16x bandwidth is plenty. Down with Ivy Bridge. Down with Ivy Bridge (and SB-E)... *crawls back under rock*

What a crock. 16x bandwidth is plenty. Down with Ivy Bridge. Down with Ivy Bridge (and SB-E)... *crawls back under rock*

Yeah, I just read that actually SB-E is fully PCIe 3.0 compliant, but Intel has been advertising it as 2.0 because they didn't have any 3.0 devices to validate it.If that rumor about the new AMD 7000 series being released in a couple of days is true we may have some results soon

Yeah, I just read that actually SB-E is fully PCIe 3.0 compliant, but Intel has been advertising it as 2.0 because they didn't have any 3.0 devices to validate it.If that rumor about the new AMD 7000 series being released in a couple of days is true we may have some results soon

Here's to hoping they're as impressive as they look in specs.

What a crock. 16x bandwidth is plenty. Down with Ivy Bridge. Down with Ivy Bridge (and SB-E)... *crawls back under rock*

Just to clarify, I'm not exactly claiming PCI-E 3.0 will for sure make a difference. I'm basically saying that I'm hopeful enough that you can count on me to test it out first! As with anything, end-user performance is what really matters.

Seems way too low for Intel. I could see AMD pricing like this.

I've been really surprised by all the negativity towards Ivy Bridge. It's cooler, more efficient, faster, and has much better integrated graphics. All this for a die shrink that's not going to cost any more than current Sandy Bridge chips! I'm not sure why everybody is so doom and gloom when it comes to Intel.

Corey is excited because he has been waiting to replace his GPU for it seems like ages.

Feels like ages. I thought for sure we would have some Kepler goodness by Christmas. Looks like it could be as long as summer 2012! Perhaps I would have at least picked up a GTX 460 or 560 had I known it would be this long.

Phil Taylor, former head of ACES -developpers of FSX- shows that at high frame rates, excessive autogen can exceed PCIe v. 2.0 16x bandwidth. PCIe v. 3.0 doubles the bandwidth of PCIe v. 2.0.Cheers,- jahman.

Cool, I'm thinking IB-E, SSD, PCIe v3, Keplar based high end GPU will make a . . . HUGE difference for me! Yeah! I'll take it because it's not bad already ;o)

Phil Taylor, former head of ACES -developpers of FSX- shows that at high frame rates, excessive autogen can exceed PCIe v. 2.0 16x bandwidth. PCIe v. 3.0 doubles the bandwidth of PCIe v. 2.0.Cheers,- jahman.

Ahh okay. So we should be able to see a nice jump in performance in high autogen areas once PCI3 arrives?If so, would this mean an almost ideal situation to be able to finally max out FSX?

Ahh okay. So we should be able to see a nice jump in performance in high autogen areas once PCI3 arrives?If so, would this mean an almost ideal situation to be able to finally max out FSX?

In theory.

In theory.

Well.... I can't wait for IB then. :biggrin:But, are there stills aspects of the simulation that will bottleneck systems of the future? or are we still going to have to wait for more powerful systems in the years to come...

Regarding the OP's topic of Ivy Bridge pricing, I am going to go against the flow and forecast (guess) a reduction in price under that of each present Sandy Bridge counterpart. Why? Because their costs are apt to be reduced, and so far AMD is still breathing. Once they finish their competition off and are the only player left in the marketplace, and that is a forgone (guessed) conclusion in my mind, sloth will breed sloth without much restraint, and the sky will be the limit.Translation: Price wise, it will be good news in the short run, bad news in the medium term, and disaster after that. Needless to say, I could be wrong, as it would not be the first time. :Whew:Kind regards,

Regarding the OP topic of Ivy Bridge pricing, I am going to go against the flow and forecast (guess) a reduction in price under that of each present Sandy Bridge counterpart. Why? Because their costs are apt to be reduced, and so far AMD is still breathing. Once they finish their competition off and are the only player left in the marketplace, and that is a forgone (guessed) conclusion in my mind, sloth will breed sloth without much restraint, and the sky will be the limit.Translation: Price wise, it will be good news in the short run, bad news in the medium term, and disaster after that. Needless to say, I could be wrong, as it would not be the first time. :Whew:Kind regards,

Regarding Intel's pricing. Historically (within the past 6 years) Intel's pricing seems to be pretty independent of outside influences. Here's to hoping they stay nice and level.