PieEater

The latest version is 353.06, I was under the impression all your drivers were up to date so you would be using something post 350.12. Did you have the issue when you were using 347.52? If so then this is obviously not the problem, if the issue started happening after you upgraded past 350.12 then I would suggest rolling back to 350.12 or even 347.52 to confirm whether or not the NVidia drivers are the issue. Checking MSConfig to see if it looks normal isn't what I suggested. From the research I have done for you the issue appears to be with an unknown piece of software causing explorer.exe to become unresponsive. This software will have to be running in the background in order for it to cause the issue. What I suggested was that you try eliminating as many of these background pieces of software as possible through selectively disabling anything unnecessary in the startup tab of MSConfig. It's not unusual to see 20+ startup items selected with only 2 or 3 of these actually being required. if this doesn't help you can just put the ticks back in the boxes assuming you want to. Edit:/ Do you use CCleaner at all? You might find it an easier way to manage your startup options plus using it to run a registry scan / fix would be a good idea at this point. If you check out the Tools section you'll find the startup utility which allows you to select and disable the items that are starting up by default.

Click here for the benefits of an SSD over a HDD. If you are unable to afford a SSD and seperate HDD then a Hybrid drive (SSHD) that beerwolfe suggests would be a better option than a HDD drive.

I've googled this and It seems its a pretty generic message that indicates a software issue that is causing explorer to crash. One culprit that cropped up on a number of occasions was Norton anti virus and someone else posted that it was their NVidia drivers. Would be worth checking this to see if there is any more detail that would identify the exact software causing the issue. Just type Action Centre into search and check out the options under Maintenance. I would still be inclined to roll back your Nvidia drivers to 350.12, as I said a lot of people are having similar problems with versions after this one. At least it would identify / eliminate this as the culprit. You could check your startup tab in MSConfig eliminating any strictly unnecessary programs from starting up with Windows as it is likely something you have running in the background causing the issue. If you are unable to replicate the issue in Safe Mode then this would be a good indication that the issue is driver / startup program related.

Mechanical drives provide a cheap means of storing data whilst SSDs are considerably more expensive i.e. a 1TB SSD will cost you ~300 whilst a 1TB mechanical drive will cost you ~45. Obviously in an ideal world you would only want to use SSDs because of the performance gains but depending on the amount of data you need to store this may not be an affordable option. This is why a lot of people use a SSD for performance critical storage like the operating system and software and a mechanical drive for storing data such as media files, documents etc. I would recommend a minimum size of SSD at 250GB and you will need to check how much storage you are using on your current PC to get a handle on whether this would be sufficient for your immediate requirements or if you needed a larger SSD or the compromise of a 250GB SSD and a mechanical drive.

have you checked event viewer yet? It will take seconds and most likely will indicate the cause of your problem!

Have you checked event viewer? Quite a few people are having similar issues with the latest NVidia drivers even in 2D (often whilst running Chrome), rolling back to 350.12 seems to fix it.

Have you checked the menu settings on your monitor, it could be you've set the default input as HDMI at some point. The boot sequence where you are loosing the image sounds to be about where the hardware is detected & drivers loaded so it could be that the monitor is handshaking with Windows saying it wants a HDMI signal and dropping the DVI signal in readiness.

Ah OK, in which case the advice from Rhys regarding chipset and onboard hardware drivers is sound, though I haven't seen a FD for a loooooooooong time. I've read about the NVidia driver issues a lot of people are saying that the 350.12 drivers are the last stable ones that they had, and have gone back to these until NVidia sort the problem out. You could try this if you haven't already.

If you are going down to BIOS level to try to sort your problem out I would suggest first flashing to the latest version. It appears that there have been a number of revisions for your board marked "improve system stability" and "improve system performance" which could help, it's also possible Asus may have added the settings you are looking for in a revised BIOS. Personally the BIOS wouldn't be my first port of call though. Prior to installing your new card did you fully uninstall the existing graphics drivers and use a utility such as Driver Cleaner / Driver Sweeper to remove all traces of the old driver before installing the new card and the latest drivers? I also tend to run CCleaners registry check prior to installing new drivers to make sure there are no fragments of uninstalled software / drivers hanging around. I would probably also uninstall and re-install any graphics utilities such as MSI Afterburner to ensure they are working with the correct hardware and make sure that tools such as NVidiaInspector are showing the correct card and details. Apologies if you already covered these bases but a lot these issues are driver related and skipping these steps is usually the cause.

To add to what Gordon has stated if money is tight I don't think that you will be happy with the performance gains upgrading to a 4790K would give you considering the costs involved. Like him I would seriously reconsider overclocking, you could possibly find the extra performance you need with your current CPU with no additional cost if you have a halfway decent replacement cooler and a motherboard that supports overclocking. It's no longer the black art it once was and motherboard designers now accept overclocking as a given, making the relevent BIOS settings easy to work with and restore if necessary. There are loads of "how to" guides and videos on the internet, just google your motherboard make & model with 3570K and you'll see what I mean. Another option worth considering would be looking for a used 3770K CPU which would slot straight into your existing rig and give you the additional 4 logical processors (via hyperthreading) with a 100MHz jump in clock speed to 3.5GHz. But if you managed to find one and applied a marginal overclock you would end up with equivalent performance to a 4790K at stock speeds for significantly less outlay.

Heat rises so IMHO any fans at the top of the case should always be exhaust. Rear fan is following the CPU fans as a direct exhaust for the cooler, front fan is intake. I have since revised the fan layout so I have more intakes than exhausts, 2 front intakes, a bottom intake, the rear exhaust and one top exhaust. The fans are controlled by Asus Fan Xpert2 so with the exception of the rear which follows the profiles of the CPU fans they only start working when the CPU is under load (35c+) starting off at minimum speed then spinning up as CPU temps increase. Quite a number of folks upgraded from early release Haswells to Devil's Canyon chips !!!!

This is a photograph of my PC which shows my ThermalRight HR-02 Macho air cooler which cools my 2700K overclocked to 4.7Ghz. Cost of HR-02 £36.11 Cost of H100i £87.10 Price difference £50.99 or 241% Can we stop now? I think the OP's thread has been trashed sufficiently, the appropriate points have been made, opinions aired, and now it's just getting nit-picky. Starting up an AIO vs Air thread might be more constructive !?!

Hi Sebo, telling yourself that you have the exact same setup as yourself and giving yourself advice on how to get the best out of it, is pretty priceless

Try making just one change at a time to see if there is a particular setting that you are making which NVI doesn't like. NVI works at software / driver level, no firmware changes are made to your card. When settings have been applied they are saved to the appropriate profile you have selected and should show each and every time you select that profile. It's possible that you have installed NVI in a directory where you don't have write permissions, try creating a new directory on the root of your C:\ drive such as C:\NvidiaInspector and installing in there, also try browsing to nvidiainspector.exe right click and "run as administrator". If you still have no luck post what settings you want changed and I will create a profile for you which you can try to import.

I'm not going to address any of the other statements in your post as folks can read between the lines and make up their own mind. AIO coolers *are* a lot more expensive than 'fugly bricks' it is just inherent by design, they have to incorporate pumps, hoses, radiators, fans,LED's, circuitry etc and be covered by a warranty for all of these sufficient to make them attractive, if this did not make them a lot more expensive I would have to question why. On the other hand these units have to be built to a price and because of this compromises are made, for instance the quality of the standard fans supplied. I'm aware that many users end up replacing the standard fans on their AIOs with quieter aftermarket options adding significantly to the original cost, just start typing in "replacement fans" into google and see what heads the list. In contrast Greggy_D has posted that his $30 Air Cooler keeps his 2500K sufficiently cooled to allow an overclock of 4.8GB, that's the cost of a couple of replacement fans........Sorry that you disagree but you're entitled to your opinions. I use Gelid GC-Extreme myself following reviews and recommendations and have been happy with the results.

750W is a strange figure, it's more than you need for your build but perhaps not quite enough if you're considering going multi GPU in the future. I put your specs into this PSU calculator and you could easily get away with a 650W PSU as Bert suggested. As has been stated already a "cheap" PSU is not a good idea, maybe looking at a lower wattage model might enable you to spend a bit more on a higher quality one. I think you might regret only getting a 120GB SSD and would look at a 240GB as a minimum. If you switched from the corsair H80i to a reasonable air cooler you could achieve similar cooling and probably save enough to upgrade your SSD, something like the Thermalright True Spirit 140, or HR-02 Macho would be a worthy contender.

Just out of interest if you disable the Punkbuster service does this make any difference to the stutters you get? I found this thread which suggests it can introduce some system overheads.

I can see your logic but what you want to do is this; 1) Select the profile you want to edit in the drop down list - "MS Flight Simulator X". 2) Make the changes. 3) Click Apply Changes

I don't want to appear picky but do want to clear up any misconceptions. The best achievable heat transfer between processor and heatsink is through direct metal to metal contact, the purpose of thermal paste is just to fill in any air gaps between the two metal surfaces with a substance that is better at transferring heat than the air it replaces. So it's a bad idea to put too much paste between the processor and heatsink or to apply paste in a method that is likely to form air pockets as both scenarios will prevent proper heat transfer leading to high temperatures. Arctic silver is a quality product that has been around for many years, however there are newer kids on the block that offer better performance.

What are you disagreeing with exactly, you appear to be just expressing your personal preference !?! I don't have a problem with the fact that AIO's can be more aesthetically pleasing but I expect most people are not in the habit of regularly opening up their case to gaze in wonder at the 'beauty' of their PC's components. In most normal cases having a "huge fugly brick" that cools an overclocked CPU just as effectively as an AIO but with less cost, less noise and less chance of failure, is going to be a non issue and the preferred option. Anyone who can't install an air cooler shouldn't be attempting a PC build, and for those getting the system built for them it's a non issue anyway, so that's a bit of a daft statement. I don't have a problem with people making an informed choice to purchase an AIO and appreciate many on these forums have made that choice and are happy with the results. The problem I have is the perceived wisdom that keeps being stated as fact in these threads that AIO coolers are the one and only choice if you want to overclock, when there is absolutely no basis for this.

Another perspective would be that you wait until August and look at building your "Dream Machine" around the new Skylake CPU and associated DDR4 based platform which would according to leaked statistics give you a 15% boost on your proposed build plus allow the opportunity to upgrade your CPU at a later date using the same platform. A Haswell (4790K) build is a dead end as far as upgrades go, as your motherboard and memory will not be compatible with newer tech. I seriously can't understand the fixation with AIO water coolers on these forums, statements such as "That CPU really needs a 240mm water cooler to get its full potential" are just wrong. There are plenty of benchmarks proving that top of the range air coolers costing less that AIO coolers perform just as well at cooling overclocked CPU's, are much quieter in normal use and have significantly fewer points of failure.

In your post you just highlight performance issues in FSX, so the first thing would be to confirm whether or not you have a general performance issue with the machine or if it is just FSX. If you run the Windows Experience Index (Start > search for Windows Experience Index) what scores are you getting? Have you run any benchmarking tools such as Unigene Heaven / 3DMark and compared the results against similar rigs?

You are using the terms TV and monitor as if they are interchangeable when they are not they are both designed for different jobs and whilst a TV can be used as a computer monitor this was not what it was designed for and will not perform as well as a computer monitor when displaying computer output. If your options are to use a TV for your computer output you are going to have to accept the limitations of the hardware. 22" 1080p monitors are relatively inexpensive these days and would do a much better job than an equivalent sized TV.

You will most certainly be able to sell on your 780Ti as it's performance is still impressive and would make a good upgrade choice for someone with a GTX680 or lesser card. If you have an EVGA 780Ti then even better as the warranty is transferable making it more attractive to a potential buyer. Check eBay for the kind of prices that the cards are selling for.

For any existing software to take advantage of DX12 it will have to be rewritten to implement the new features. As I understand it DTG do not have permission to amend the source code of FSX so this effectively rules out any version of FSX being DX12 compatible. Again as I understand it exclusive permission to amend FSXs source code was given to LM out of which was born P3D. So whilst we may see a DX12 version of P3D I seem to remember the move from DX10 to DX11 was neither swift nor trouble free.