Gary A

Hi Greg, I think NickN summed it up well here about 1/3 of the page down http://www.simforums.com/forums/the-fsx-computer-system-the-bible-by-nickn_topic46211.html If your budget will allow a SSD that is large enough to hold all of your stuff is the best option. Second choice is multiple SSD's that will hold all of your stuff. Third choice is SSD for OS and mechanical for other. Fourth is dedicated mechanical for OS and separate mechanical dedicated to FS. Least desirable is a single mechanical drive. Not all SSD's are faster than all mechanicals you have to do your homework. Generally Samsung EVO, is a good choice with the Intel 750 pci-e the decadence. SSD's generally provide for faster load times, do not improve fps and certainly are not the deciding factor of system performance. Drive selection (like all other component decisions) should be based on what you can afford, else what you are willing to spend in order to satisfy your wants.

NickN is about as warm and fuzzy as a prickly pear cactus, which is where 99.9% of his naysayers come from. You can bet these individuals rightly had their limbs trimmed by Nick for spewing silly nonsense and have had their butts hurt. Their only retort and retaliation is their lame attempts to discredit him in another forum like here. Tisk tisk for being so petty and little. Nick has forgot more about flightsim and computers than most could ever even hope to have learned in their lifetime. Personality aside, I have tried to prove Nick wrong on many occasions. I did this because I follow no one blindly and I am certainly not any bodies follower but I wanted to see if it made a difference for myself. I never was able to prove Nick incorrect on any point that he ever made. Of all the silly nonsense on the internet and misinformation generally coming from "Google Quarterbacks" (those that convey what they find on Google as their own), Nick lives, breathes and knows emphatically what he recommends. I have even seen Nick post that he takes responsibility for advice; how many Google Quarterbacks have you seen offer that. Nicks guides and continued helpfulness are second to none and I would encourage anyone looking for real and professional PC advice to follow Nick's guide and other posts on his forum.

I was imparting some information in the spirt of helpfulness with hopes those making a purchase could do additional research and be informed. I wasn't really looking to debate w7/8 vs. W10 etc. etc. I am not certain if or how much of a headache use of W7/8 would cause on a Skylake processor. It depends, there is a difference between "support" and something not functioning. I can live without support, I cannot tolerate something not functioning. Point I was trying to convey was simply a heads up to those building or upgrading to a Skylake processor that not using W10 may give unexpected results. More specifically to those people indicating that they are purchasing new operating systems and indicating their choices to be W7/8 with Skylake. It would only be prudent to purchase W10. My advice is simply do your home work when considering the OS for a Skylake processor with hopes that research will extend beyond these forums. @Ryan, thxs for the updated information that was useful and constructive.

Folks buying a Skylake processor take notice that Microsoft is ending support for non Windows 10 operating systems with Skylake processors support ending mid 2017. Additionally certain components associated with the Skylake processor may not function under non Windows 10 OS, ie. USB3 and others. Use of non Windows 10 operating systems on Skylake chips is not recommended. I am not sure if this information was previously posted but I see several folks looking to make Skylake purchases on non W10 OS and wanted to get it out there. Save yourself a headache and do your homework if planning Skylake and non Windows 10 platform.

This seems to work: http://winsupersite.com/windows-10/stop-automatic-driver-updates-windows-10 Edit: You know Phil they are updating W10 all the time. What was said in 2015 may not apply to today. I never stopped W10 from updating and I have not seen any attempts for the OS to update my video driver. Not sure if it would or not but I probably wouldn't come out of the gate with a new system and limit its ability to update. I would wait to see if it is an issue first. Just my 2-cents.

I wouldn't adulterate an OS on its birthday with an upgrade especially when I was paying for an OS anyway but it's your dime. Make sure your MB is approved for W8. GL

MS support of Skylake for W7/8 ends 2017. W10 is highly recommended.

Give these guys a shout, they have an excellent reputation in the UK https://www.overclockers.co.uk/ If they do not have the tridents these are great as well and they do carry them: https://www.overclockers.co.uk/search?sSearch=+CMD16GX4M2B3200C16+

I7-4790K is a good option if you want to save a few pounds while giving the 6700 a run for its money. Just throwing it out there.

Hello, you will not gain 5820 versus 6700k, also do not forget the 6700k is DX12 capable. Only thing I would change from what you posted is memory to 2666.

Hi Noel, I was responding at the same time you were, missed your post. Also responding for the benefit of the masses that may be reading and actually be interested in power protection, even for my own edification. Well....depends on how you wish to define minimal. If your personal choice is to spin the wheel or otherwise console your choice for protection or no protection, then you may wish to define as minimal. :smile: For those more statistically inclined I offer a: NEMA study indicating 31% of respondents indicated equipment damage. That study consistent with a German Engineering study HERE. A white paper concluding that power protection was prudent HERE. Coupled with many North American utility providers recommending protection on their websites like HERE HERE HERE and so-on. I suspect the failure rates are actually higher than 31% and that many failures are not reported or not adequately diagnosed as attributable to a power issue. Example, MB fails and user simply buys new or returns for warranty and no cause of failure is ever determined. Of course what any one person chooses to do or not to do is their business and of little concern to me. That is an open statement not directed to you Noel specifically. As I said before, most of my electronics are not protected (doesn't make it right) and certainly doesn't make the best advice to others to be that it isn't needed.

I looked at that during my research and liked it but my reading indicated surge protection <3000 joules was a farce. I get the warranty and guarantees that most power protection folks offer against surge damage but many have exclusions in fine print. Besides, if enough of you want to hedge a $50 bet with me, I will insure your PC against a lightening strike.

Your question made me inquisitive so I have been doing some looking at power protection. Pure sine wave is still preferred top of the line recommendation. The UPS in your selection is a Stepped approximation to a sinewave. Compatibility of any non pure sine wave UPS with a PSU that has a Power Factor Correction circuit (PFC) is undetermined and case by case bases if it will work. Rule of thumb is spec UPS 50-100% higher than PSU wattage (this to ensure that a minimum of 80% of power is supplied to PSU). Source Also see Q11 Seagate - A more prudent option may be surge protection only, while this device will not protect data during unexpected shutdown, it may provide protection from serious overload/surge/spike. Trip Lite Truth be told I own one UPS, I have many PC's, many flat screens and a host of other electrical/electronic gizmos; a serious surge will wipe out existence as far as modern age is concerned. The one pc that is protected may prove useful in filing the insurance claim or otherwise typing my suicide note. :smile: Where to begin and where to end, do we want to be Doomsday preppers cause ain't no surge protector gonna stop a direct lighting strike anyway. That job requires a lightning pole.

I'm not sure Noel. I haven't looked at current market offerings (technology) for several years so I may be dated. When I did do my homework, a UPS offering a pure sinewave was top-of-the-line solution. I still think that holds true but others will surely chime in.

Sound advice Johnman. It is amazing the number of people willing to drop $1,000 on a GPU but not protect the entire system for a couple-hundred. Add the piece of mind that I have when the UPS software warns of an incoming surge arrested or the reassuring switching to battery during a brownout; priceless.

As enticing as it may be, I must generously decline your offer of kudos until the fix is substantiated. In the interim as I await confirmation I offer that, even a broken clock is correct twice a day. :smile:

I am sure that my clean install of Windows 10 Professional installed the LAN driver. Install chipset driver from disk that came with Board. Not sure rest of order matters much.

I had a HDD failure on a multiple drive system, one HDD of 3 or 4 forget how many I had. The drive that failed was not even the OS drive and it caused all kinds of trouble including the chkdisk thing on boot.

I am not bashing or cursing ASUS in any manner. I gave a reasonable account of my actual (non hypothetical) experiences to the OP's question of 5WO or manual oc. What anyone chooses to use is their business. 5WO is not necessarily terrible, I personally currently prefer manual oc.

Hi Martin, I do not agree with that broad statement. Not wanting to bash or discredit ASUS or anyone else for that matter either. However ASUS are in the business of sales, period. In this case the sales of a MB. If ASUS can hype that their board can do more than the other guys board then that = sales. ASUS would have to have no material gain and otherwise be impartial for me to subscribe to that they know best. My comparison of 4.6 to 4.6 is apples to apples no variables. RealBench to RealBench same settings in RealBench (lets not forget RealBench is designed by ROG, an entity sanctioned/supported and authorized by ASUS), same room which is temperature controlled. Fan Expert was set to "bench."The only variances were the adjustments that I made in the Bios vs. whatever adjustments 5WO made. The net result was manual settings allowed the same OC for 10c less temp. I do not believe that 5WO is doing anything more special in the manner that it overclocks because ASUS know best. My hypothesis is that the 5WO/AI 3 sets balls to the walls high voltages in attempt to quickly achieve a high OC. Further that these high voltages are not necessary to sustain the OC result given as 5WO final. Actually it (5WO) simply follows the CPU VID instructions for voltage, this was stated by Raja in one of his posts. To be fair and to further paraphrase Raja, he said that these voltages were necessary as determined by intel via the VID instructions in order to remain stable at frequency. However my argument to that is we have been overclocking CPU's for many years in the absence of ASUS's AI 3/5WO program with seemingly good success. We did this by utilizing benchmarking and temperature software to determine stability, and we didn't need or follow VID instructions to obtain our results. I also ran Intel's own "Extreme Tuning" stress test against my manual OC and passed. You would think this would dispel further notion that perhaps ASUS AWO test is somehow more stringent and detecting errors that other tests are missing. Result Then there is, what about all the other MB manufacturers software OCing is it less than ASUS. I am just affording my personal opinions/arguments against your very good questioning.

I think it was 4.7. This was 5WO with per-core. No other testing, at least not as a comparative to the stress test that 5WO performs. When I set manual OC, I stress tested with RealBench. If I tested what 5WO did in RealBench it was for a comparison of temps vs volts. Example 5WO set a 4.6 oc once then I set a manual 4.6 OC and compared results of both using RealBench. The manual setting was much cooler than the 5WO setting. At all times any comparisons that I made were apples to apples i.e. RealBench to real Bench or 5WO to 5WO. My testing was pretty loose, and you would be well advised to form your own impressions. I did have the manual TPU switches set to TPU1 through several of the 5WO runs, this potentially could have caused some issues? I have read several forums with other users experiencing inconsistent results when using 5WO. I can say my current manual OC of 4.6 ran 72c during 1-hour RealBench. 4.6 5WO I saw 82c under RealBench.

Possibly, however this wasn't a science experiment for me. I do not recall saying that I used two different stress tests for the comparison. I simply stated the 5WO results as given. Unless you mean different stress tests under varying parameters within AI 3. However I will point out that I used the program many times, although not scientific I agree. AWO wasn't supposed to require a scientist to use it. Maybe that is key, we think too much. As I stated several posts back I had uninstalled the AI 3 program. I did this because in either my ignorance as to how the program is intended to work (ASUS promotes it as one-click and-go OCing for noobies) I did click it, my results varied, my perception is the program can give inconsistent results. I am not saying it is a bad program, just that it needs (in my opinion) more oversight than a blind-click. However I am not in the motherboard marketing game and for that ASUS has me beat hands down. I agree, a manual explaining exactly how to use the program would be helpful as well as describing what changes are made by the program and why. However I think we are a small minority of the market ASUS is appealing to and those that would blindly click an overclocking program and walk away are likely not interested in the guts of the thing. Hopefully you will have an opportunity to use the AI 3 program and 5WO soon and post back with your experiences.

Hands down, the nicest most impressive work of computer art that I have seen. I even showed a few of my friends Rich (was tempted to say it was mine but never). I admire the amount of work that this took, your tenaciousness, patience and obvious skill.

Could have been me Martin, I wasn't documenting the process or even paying much attention. What I mostly did not like was 5WO, seems to just put the boots to the voltages. Whether these voltages are within the programs capability to control or not I am unsure but seems they give the same voltage to get you a 4.7 clock even if you only get 4.5. Not sure I make much sense. The 4.3 clock it gave me once really didn't make sense to me especially at the voltages it gave. The rest I may have been playing with limiting the frequency using the program. It's a good program, you just have to watch it. I know frequency and voltages are settable but if you try to limit the voltage or the frequency you will not get the result you intended.