How would fsx run with these specs?

[mattie102 0]

I7-7700K at 4.2GHz but wanting to over clock (corsair H45 liquid cooling 120mm)

256GB Sandisk X400 Sata III Gaming SSD

2TB SATA-III 6.0Gb/s 64M Cache 7200rpm Hard Drive (Single Hard Drive)

(1x8GB) DDR4/3200mhz Dual Channel Memory Corsair Vengence with heat spreader

MSI Z270-A PRO INTEL Z270 Chipset, ATX Mainboard

Corsair 600 Watts CX600

MSI GeForce® GTX 1080 8GB Video Card

[Gary A 8]

My Q6600 ran FSX pretty good so I don't see anything here that would make it worst than that.  :>)

[Chock 17,769]

It'd run a lot better than mine lol, and I can run the FSL A320, PMDG 737, Simflyers LearJet 35 and all the other stuff notorious for being picky about wanting a fancy computer, with no problems on decent settings. However, when you say FSX, I would hope you mean the Steam version of FSX, because the Steam version runs about a million times better than the original boxed/download MS version.

[martin-w 3,235]

In the future, perhaps consider a bigger SSD.
 
In the future, perhaps consider better cooling. The H45 is a relatively new cooler. Unfortunately there aren't many reviews for it at the moment, so hard to asses it's capabilities. However, as it's a 120 radiator with one fan, it's not going to compete with bigger better options, which will of course mean a lower overclock.

 

 

(1x8GB) DDR4/3200mhz Dual Channel Memory Corsair Vengence with heat spreader

 

 

No, that's wrong. It's duel channel, so not 1X8 GB. It should be 2X8 GB [16 total] or 2X4 GB. It's needs to be two sticks to function as duel channel.

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

You shouldn't need to overclock with that rig. I'd recommend using the Turbo setting, I not overclocking.  If you do decide to overclock, do it only after the processor and motherboard have been burned in - depending on how much you hammer the computer (work it hard), anywhere from 30 to 90 days should be sufficent.

 

Best wishes.

[martin-w 3,235]

It's not necessary to "burn in". Once built and confirmed to be functioning corectly overclocking can comence.

 

Turbo is the default setup.

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

 

 

It's not necessary to "burn in"

 

Shoot!  Darn it!  I wish you would have told me that before I spent 30+ years as a computer hardware engineer!  All that wasted time! 

[johnnycrockett 43]

You shouldn't need to overclock with that rig. I'd recommend using the Turbo setting, I not overclocking.  If you do decide to overclock, do it only after the processor and motherboard have been burned in - depending on how much you hammer the computer (work it hard), anywhere from 30 to 90 days should be sufficent.

 

Best wishes.

Have to agree with you here. I bought a 7700k with intentions to overclock it at some point. It runs hot stock but it stays in turbo and just runs at 4.5ghz no problem. I'm not sure I want to bother overclocking to get 4.7-4.8ghz at the moment. Maybe down the track.

[martin-w 3,235]

If you do decide to overclock, do it only after the processor and motherboard have been burned in - depending on how much you hammer the computer (work it hard), anywhere from 30 to 90 days should be sufficent.

 

 

Shoot!  Darn it!  I wish you would have told me that before I spent 30+ years as a computer hardware engineer!  All that wasted time! 

 

 

 No need for sarcasm. Why you disagree would be better.  :smile:

 

I appreciate your 30 years of experience, as I'm sure you're appreciative of my 36 years of experience. Namely my first computer being the ZX 81. Since then, building and modifying PC's for myself, friends and relatives. And in all that time I've never found it necessary to allow a huge 90 days to "burn in" a PC before overclocking. And I should add, with zero adverse consequences.

 

If you can find me overclocking guides from Intel, Asus, Gigabyte, MSI or EVGA, that advocate up to a hugely protracted 90 days [3 months] before engaging in any overclocking with their products, I'll gladly concede the point.  Modern Intel CPU's and indeed motherboards are designed for overclocking. No 3 months of "burn in" required. Being sensible and insuring all is well before engaging in overclocking is all that's required. 

 

So Dave... precisely why do you believe it's necessary to delay overclocking for up to a very protracted 3 months? What factors are you trying to mitigate? What are you trying to "burn in"?

 

The only thing that springs to mind is TIM, as in some TIM's requiring time to achieve their full thermal conductivity. But we are talking about a few degrees, nothing that would necessitate extreme caution and protracted delays. Some system builders, to ensure their systems are functioning correctly before overclocking, will run a stress test for many hours, some up to 24 hours, and they sometimes refer to this as a burn in but up to 90 days, 3 months, certainly not.

 

No offence intended, and I appreciate your opinion, but the problem with this is that upon reading your advice, someone who wishes to overclock, will be fearful of doing so for up to a massive 3 months. I don't think it's fair to put someone of overclocking for such a long time. Unless you can provide definitive evidence you are right of course.