Just an FYI
I keep my responses in forums to a level where everyone who reads the information GETS the message. If I were to address information in MSFS forums on the same level as I address one of my JEDEC workshops no one other than real engineers with solid backgrounds would understand what hell I am talking about.
Your suggestion that damage would not occur which did not address the fact that damage will in FACT occur, just not right away, is a not how an engineer with a lick of sense and concern for the readers addresses a topic in a non technical forum.
People need to know the facts so they can make informed decisions. Based on the right information someone may not risk a clock that runs their system @ 75c under normal running load with demanding applications since they dont buy new hardware every other year and instead opt for a lower clock to protect their investment. They may also opt for the better timing memory because they want every advantage possible with a new purchase since so many of them have learned the HARD WAY in the past when they skim on quality they get what they pay for in MSFS.
According to your statement a layman could assume they were completely safe and their proc would continue to run for the rated 10 year life overclocked at the temps you suggested. Your information was
false the way it was presented which negated the laws of physics, regardless of how you meant it.
And as a participating test engineer I was at the Intel conference on Bloomfield back in 2008 where that presentation above as well as the advances the proc provides with respect to memory performance based on its timing was also shown. Although it is true because the bandwidth situation has changed with 2nd generation DDR3 and timing is not as critical as it was with DDR2 or 1st Gen DDR3, the result (positive or null) is centered to the application in use and how demanding it is on the proc cache
Since MSFS is old school rendering and somewhat poor design in coding which brings on issues very similar to serious memory disambiguation, the communication path between the memory and the proc cache is cluttered as hell and every cycle counts to the result. Therefore, memory speed in relation to Column Address Strobe and tRD
http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=195 are still very valid elements to obtaining better results in MSFS.
I also know exactly what advances the new Intel design has with Windows7 and NONE OF THEM will have any effect with MSFS because the software was not designed under the Vista or W7 driver and memory management model
Nothing in the Windows7 or Vista OS (other than moving from 32 to 64bit, just like with XP) will make FSX run better other than tighting up the loose nut behind the keyboard.
Although I do agree that W7 is a far cry from the Vista disaster the differences people MAY see in MSFS and report as "W7 is the best OS for FSX because my frames went up"
are not a result of the OS itself but changes they made due to a reinstall, period!
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 4:25 pm