Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyby
FF! Thanks for replying. Much appreciated. Sound advice on waiting. It won't be long before virtual airmen are flooding this forum with their system specs and in-game results. I even have a 920 already; had it for a while. It's just that to get the 920 up to 3.6ghz it runs @317 watts (100% load), and 173 watts @ idle, while the 2500K is stated as 4.3ghz @ 187 watts (100% load), and 83 watts @ idle. This processor will do 4.8~5ghz on air. Heat is not so much as issue too (nor is water cooling said to be of much benefit, and overclocking is restricted to the CPU only. No FSB or memory to worry over. That's impressive. Here are a couple of links for the info I've put here; CPU comparatve:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/...ssors_review/1
Not bad, but the issue I'll wait for is to see if there's any benefit to hyper-threading when it comes to CoD (heavy flak, looking down over London, and a sky full of planes,for instance). Won't be long now. Less than TWO WEEKS!! 
Flyby out |
Nice, thanks for the link!
For me the problem with the overclocked CPU simply was the rising board-temperature. Voltages became pretty unstable after a while, causing instability, no matter how high or low the actual CPU-temperature was. So I tuned down to a still good 3.6 GHz.
I'm considering an upgrade for SoW as well, but I'll definitely wait and test the simulation before judging which part to upgrade. Considering the thin information on features and usage of multi-threading and DX-features, there's simply no basis for a reasonable update, now.