Rhinox

I wonder how this could happen. First, there is some kind of thermal-protection in CPU itself: if temperature exceeds some limit, cpu starts throttling down (reducing frequency) and can even turn itself completely off (the same holds true for modern GPU). You could even take cooler away and CPU should survive it (never tested this personally but I've seen some video about this, not sure where it was, tom's or anand?). And as a backup, most of today's motherboards have similar function in bios: they can turn PC off if cooler-speed or CPU-temperature goes below/above given limits. So I can't imagine how someone could roast CPU today...

I'm not sure Crossfire works for LOFC or DCS. Probably not, as other users' experience show: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=80195 But HD6950 is a good card. It can be easily unlocked to full HD6970. If you intent do to it, I recommend to buy one with standard amd/ati-layout. It is much easier to get bios for standard 2GB/HD6970, than for some special iceq/frozr/toxic version...

hdd: Add SSD to your setup, min. 80GB for OS & LO/DCS (i.e. 320series, ~150€ here), you will not regret it... mobo: I'd personaly go with Z68 chipset. P67 is very good, Z68 is the best of P67 & H67 (+ a few nice features) gpu: 560Ti is good choice, just think about getting 2GB version (costs just 20-30 bucks more)

And the point I was making is that time between DCS:A-10C and DCS:WhateverNext will be the same (or even more), becase with every next DCS-module more and more "compatibility work" must be done. From this point of view even DCS:A-10C is not finished yet... And when we are talking about it, I remember DCS has been originally presented as modular system with some common "core", where new aircrafts will be just added to the existing ones. But to me BS and A-10C seem to be more like independent software packages, where tremendous amount of work must be done to make them online-compatible. Imagine once in far future ED releases DCS:Number10: they'll have to make it compatible with 9 previous DCS-packages. At that time, this "work on 9 online-compatibility patches" might easily take more time, than developing DCS:Number10 itself...

No, I did not. I was talking about DCS, and AFAIK FC2 is not part of DCS-series (even if it introduced LOFC2/DCS:BS compatibility)...

Release dates of previous DCS-modules: BS: 12/2008 A10: 02/2011 Based on that, I'd say we can expect next DCS-module in early 2013. Probably even later, because amount of work is increasing with every new addition (all those previous modules must be updated to make them compatible with new one)...

I'd say it depends on distance even more (quadratic) than on thermal intensity (linear): reduce distance to half, and you need only 1/4 of heat to get the same contrast... But I think there are some filters which help to distinguish flying targets from ground (i.e. wavelength-filter) so it does not lock on ground targets anyway...

Actually running graphics card in pcie-x8 does not make big difference: http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2011/test-grafikkarten-mit-pcie/4/#abschnitt_leistung For those not speaking german: they tested given graphic cards in pcie-x16, x8, x4, and even x1 slots. Performance loss is very small (except for pcie-x1): pcie-x16 -> pcie-x8: - 1-2% pcie-x16 -> pcie-x4: - 4-7% pcie-x16 -> pcie-x1: - 25-35% Although the tests have been done with single card, I do not think there would be much higher difference even when running 2x gpu in sli/cf.

Beautiful. How can you make these camera-motions (panning/zooming, everything so smooth and slow)? Directly in LO, or during post-processing?

Maybe it is worth to consider ATI/AMD. Some time ago I tested GF560Ti and HD6950 and concerning price and performance, those cards are completely comparable. In some apps 560Ti had lead, in others hd6950 was slightly ahead. Anyway none of them was running at full throttle in LO, even if I have set everything to max/on/full. Despite of i5@4.4GHz, cpu was still bottleneck (but things might be different in DCS, unfortunatelly I did not have it at that time)...

System tab reads 3GB because all other peripherials have their memory mapped to 4GB address-space (2^32=~4GB) causing part of your RAM being "invisible" to the system (or better said impossible to address). In this case the last GB is "overlapped" by 1GB of your graphic-card. If you try graphic card with less own memory (i.e. 512MB), you will see your system suddenly reports more than 3GB :-)

no smoke: some missiles have smokeless (or nearly-smokeless) engines. These are very hard to spot visually... no warning: for IR-missiles you do not have any warning device in F15. For radar-guided missiles, not sure about F15, but in russian-jets RWR works only to +/-45 degree from you horizontal plane (the one "fixed" with jet). If radar is deep below you or you so line-of-sight makes higher angle with jet-plane, you do not get any RWR-signal. BTW, your RWR indicates location of tracking radar, not missile-launcher (which need not be on the same place)! You might turn away from radar after lock&launch warning just to fly directly towards incomming missile...

I would definitelly recommed to upgrade your OS to 64b-version too, if you are going to use it for DCS:A-10C. You might have 4GB ram, but in 32b-OS single application can use usually only 2GB (well, 3GB under certain circumstances, or even more under even more complicated circumstances)...

I asked something similar, but either this info is not public, or nobody knows: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=77285

And after hotas/trackir, ssd seems to me as choice no.3.

Alt+Tab (or Ctrl+Alt+Del) is definitely not something I'd recommend to do. System does not handle changing graphic modus very vell, and this holds true for all games. Previously when I was using WinXP, LO frequently crashed when I returned to game after Alt+Tab, or graphic was so badly distorted that it was actually unplayable (sometimes half of my cockpit textures missing). Now I'm running W7/64 and it seems to handle it better, yet sometimes I have slightly flickering textures after Alt+Tab. BTW, why was this topic moved to "Lock On v.1.0x and Flaming Cliffs v.1.1x", when it concerns a problem with FC2 ("...lock on FC2 works fine but...")?

Hm, I would try updating graphic drivers (this might not be easy, as some notebooks can not be updated with standard catalysts). Next, reduce all graphic settings to minimum/off/low, together with display resolution... IMHO this notebook is not very suitable for gaming (if any!): i3 is low-end cpu (like modern "celeron"), and 6490M is seriously restricted by its 64bit memory-bus (standard for today's mobile graphics is 256b or 128b).

As expected. Some noticable differences only in synthetic tests or memory-intensive applications, but in games zero-point-zero-nothing. Not worth spending bucks on anything more than ddr3-1600...

+1

Hi, I'd like to have some kind of LO-server status information on the web-page, about the same amount of info as you can see using in-game server browser (mission name, time running, number of players/slots, etc), but not for all servers only for our own. Is there some utility which could handle this? I could try to code it myself, unfortunatelly I did not find any info concerning LO client-server communication, so I do not know how such a client-query should be be formated to get answer...

That is your opinion, and it is incorrect opinion. As I said previously, memory errors are quite common and natural for DDR/SDR chips, even if very rare (I'd say a moderate server with ~dozen of RAM-modules, running 24/7, hits at least a few of them per week). Even your PC has them, you just do not have any way to check it. In 12 hours, I'd say you have ~30% chance to hit one memory error (which does not necessary mean instability, as this might happen in unused or non-critical portion). But because these errors are rare and because of price, cheap "pc-world" sticks mostly with non-ecc. That level of "stability" is enough for PC, so small probability of non-recoverable memory errors is natural. It does not mean there is something wrong with hardware, or the system is broken. It just means you got what you paid for... :-)

IMHO, any stress-test longer than 3-4 hours does not make sense. Or better said, it does not necessary show stability as a function of overclocking. There are many more factors, which contribute to the overall stability, i.e. if you do not use ECC-memory modules (which desktop does?) you get up to ~1 memory error per day. I see it on my server log, which shows 3-6 "soft-errors" per week (16GB ECC in 4 modules). Or power-source: if you do not use quite expensive "on-line" UPS, there is a high chance electric voltage fluctuation might bring your computer down after a few hours, despite of filtering done in PSU. So if your system survives 12hour stress-test, ok. If not, it may be caused by many other things, not only because of aggressive overclocking...

No, you don't. But if you want to use you THW to the max, you will need it. Maybe not for DCS:A-10C, but sure for LO, or BS. Imagine you want to assign a sequence of keystrokes to single buton (i.e. your own "programm" for chaff/flare release sequence, or cycle-switching nav/return/bvr/vertical/shlem/a2g modes with single button), or keystroke to axis when it reaches certain value. That all is very easy with T.A.R.G.E.T. And for some even more complicated tasks even T.A.R.G.E.T. is not enouch, it can be accomplished only in scripting language. Moreover, when you assign buttons in game, you will loose it whenever your reinstall game (or move to the other pc). With T.A.R.G.E.T., you just copy&backup your profile. Concerning firmware, I think it is worth to update it. Usually it solves some problems, or adds functionality.

Could you explain this? AFAIK, 2500k/2600k are almost insensitive to memory speed (and therefore bandwidth). I've tested my rig with memory running at 1066/1333/1600MHz. It has impact only on results of some synthetic tests, but nearly none on LO/DCS. Moreover, RAM bandwidth is influenced most of all by memory controller, which in case of i5/i7 is part of cpu. So P67 chipset has very little to do with it...

I'd switch that P67 mobo for Z68 (which is actuall P67+H67, and a little more). Z68 has some nice add-on features: ssd-caching, on-cpu graphics support, discrete & on-cpu graphics combo. And the best is, it does not cost more... :-)