qrazi

Netherlands.... Look at my specs, and i'm sitting here talking about computer parts I'll never own... :D

It is possible FSX improves a lot with i7 compared to Core 2 Quad. Do you maybe have benchmarks? I'd be really interested!

Ah, guess prices in the States or really not the same as in my country... :) Those prices make GTX 260 in SLI actually really attractive... Two GPU's on one board is really not that different than two boards with one GPU each. When you write about horrible performance in some games, that is mostly driver related. If you read the first Radeon 3870 reviews with Crossfire setups, you see the same; some games 3870 in CF actually performs worse then a single card. nVidia SLI setups also have this, although admittedly to a lesser extend... And as I said, a lot of those issues are actually cleared up, or being cleared up, in new drivers...

with freetrack you have to make or buy a tracker, so why not getting/making a tracker with IR leds straight away? most webcams that are tested with Freetrack provide 30 fps, altough on different resolutions. What really seems to be a good improvement, and putting Freetrack on par with TrackIR, is using a Wii mote instead of a webcam. Gives almost no CPU usage and solid 100FPS... :D So for people like me, without lots of money to spend on their favorite hobby, Freetrack is really a good alternative to TrackIR

I'm not saying the i7 doesn't improve over the Penryn in games. It's just really not anything like the improvements you see in content creation and server applications. Most games apparently are not bottlenecked by FSB/Memory speeds, which are the main improvements on the i7, but they do appreciate good FPU and large caches. Those where already available in Penryn, and that's why you see less improvement in games compared to Penryn.

The Radeon 4870X2 and a GTX 260 SLI setup are both dual dual GPU solutions, and therefor both are affected by dual gpu 'problems'. nVidia is known for its good drivers, but ATi has definitely improved a lot on its driver. They have to, if they want to keep pushing dual gpu cards. Dual gpu improves framerates a lot if the game is specifically supported in the driver. If not, it usually still improves framerates. Then there are off course certain games that give glitches with certain dual gpu setups. There is a user on these forums somewhere who uses a 4870X2, perhaps he good give some more insight on the stability etc. Also, I've seen more then a few users with SLI or CrossFire setups, but nobody complaining that dual gpu work like sh*t on Lockon (or BS). So dual GPU should be definitely be a working solution for you... :D

First benchmarks give the i7 not much higher benchmark scores (actually lower in quiet a few cases) compared to same clockspeed Penryn Core 2 Quad CPU's. Where the i7 really shines is (3D)content creation and server applications. That is not to say the i7 is a bad cpu. I'd say it is at least as good as the core 2 quad, and depending an what you want to do with it, and how big your budget is, might actually be the best choice. Gaming benches for the i7 on Anandtech

I would personally opt for the 4870X2. Performance is better then GTX 260 SLI in most benchmarks, the high resolution ones anyway. Besides, it consumes less energy then two GTX 260 cards, which not only saves you on your energy bill, but also keeps your system temperature overall cooler. Good review on Anandtech. Unfortunately most review sites don't use flightsims anymore for their benchmarks. Even SimHQ has not used them in their last review. Its understandable, because most flightsims don't use cutting edge engines, and are more cpu limited anyway, but it makes it harder to get a picture of the performance in the sims we love from all the cards out there...

There is a difference. It will probably not be 80-100% increase in framerate, but depending on the used resolution and detail settings, SLI/CrossFire will show improved framerates. Perhaps some people on the forum can actually support this, people who went from single card to same type SLI/CrossFire.

IMHO it's fine if they make their own interface closed, but it would have been nice to still see general head tracking support, and not only for NP. Reminds me of the demise of 3dFX' Glide API....

Only Natural Point TIR 3&4 support? I just voted for "No I am strong, I am waiting until the western version is released...", but I guess I'll have to change that into "I have the Russian version/will be getting it and I plan on purchasing the western one. ".... if the russian version works with Free-track....

Are you sure that has DirectX 9.0c support? :D

GTX 260 in SLI should be faster then GTX 280 in almost all scenarios, but especially in higher resolutions. Example: Anandtech Benchmarks Couldn't find a 9600GT SLI vs GTX 260 SLI review so quickly, but found non-SLI on Techreport

Ah, sounds like a perfect fit for me!... :D

Sorry, maybe mentioned before, but HalfLife 2 has many, many mods. So Steam should be able to cope with mods.... Right?

No, if software is optimized for just on or two core, a core 2 duo 3GHz (~ E8500 with it's 3.16 GHz) will be significantly faster then a Phenom X4 9950 (the fastest Phenom right now) inmost benchmarks, especially games. Example: AnandTech review. That doesn't mean that the Phenom is slow, or should be avoided under all circumstances. Just saying that in certain games, AMD just has no equivalent to a 3GHz Core 2 Duo yet...

Your mobo doesn't support Phenom's, so the maximum you can put in is a Athlon X2 6400+. Asus CPU support list Like I said before, I don't know the prices you are dealing with, but if it is reachable, I'd look into getting a middle class Core 2 Duo CPU, like a E7200 or E5200, especially with some overclocking. However, without overclocking, or with a price difference that isn't worth it, going for the highest clocked Athlon X2 that fits your budget seems like a pretty good choice... :)

You have a website with your local prices maybe? Is all about the best bang for your buck in this budget... :P

It is indeed not likely that a relatively young, a-brand, high-end PSU is failing on you like this. But then again, the same sort of goes for the CPU. I have had a situation that sounds like your with my old Athlon XP system. Used to overclock that as well, but after a few months I could reach certain clockspeeds anymore. Turned out to be the PSU. It could still take the standard clockspeeds, and a slight overclock, but any higher and all I got was reboots.

Just read an interview about this sim with on of its lead designers on SimHQ. Seven-G I guess there are a few more interesting sims comig besides DCS:BS.

Main difference is in the amount memory being supported. consumer 32-bit OS's have support for a maximum of 4GB, and most of the time the OS sees no more then ~3.2 GB of it. Also, in Windows XP and Vista 32-bit, an individual process can consume 2GB's maximum. 64-bit versions support way more memory, all the way up to TB's (depending on the exact OS). And they allow a process to have more then 2GB memory. Windows 64-bit uses WOW64 as a sort of emulation layer to run 32-bit software on a 64-bit OS. This is with very little performance penalty, and in some cases actually some small gains. The main disadvantage is that not all software just runs on 64-bit. Things like drivers, and virusscanners need specific 64-bit support. That said, almost any modern piece of hardware will run on 64-bit. IMHO, if running 4GB (or more) memory, 64-bit is the way to go.

And why not? It's true. Sure, AMD's way to make a quad-core CPU is way more elegant, and it also scales way better. Intel's approach is not as elegant, and it has some big drawbacks. The biggest being that for both dual-core dies to communicate with each other, they have to use the FSB. And it is pretty common knowledge that a FSB gets pretty crowded with communication without added core to core communication. When Intel put two Pentium 4 cores together, the performance of the resulting dual-core was no match for AMD's native dual-core design. But that wasn't because of the way the cores where put together, but because the basic Pentium4 core itself was inferior to AMD's offering. Right now it's the other way around. Even though an Intel quad-core will not scale 100% compared to a dual-core, the end result is way more powerfull then AMD's quad-core (which can be almost 100% more powerfull then a AMD dual-core K10).

Your motherboard seems to support 1333MHz CPU's all the way up to the Core 2 Extreme QX9650 (MSI CPU Support website). nVidia also has 1333MHz FSB support in its features sheet: nVidia 750i SLI specs. That your overclocking is going worse and worse could be caused by several things. It is possible that your PSU isn't up to the task anymore. It is possible that the overclocking has worn down your motherboard. And as you mentioned yourself, it is possible that the CPU is just not overclocking well anymore. I'd try and swap PSU's, CPU's and mobo's if possible. Would be a shame if you buy a new CPU and it turns out that wasn't the problem to start with.

Because it works in 32-bit on his system, it is most likely not a hardware problem, but a problem specifically related to his 64-bit software setup. Whether that is the OS installation, or the driver installation, I don't know. As Airway already mentions, the X52 is compatible with Vista 64-bit, see also Microsoft website My guess, software problem. Solution: not really anything but trying stuff. Reinstall vista perhaps? Edit: Where exactly do those buttons not work? In Saitek software, in windows calibration, in game, or none of the above?

Thank god I still have an old 17"CRT which doesn't go beyond 1280 x 1024 pixels.... :)