Falconise

Should be 3 x 1GB, for triple channel ram. If they ship you four, just keep one stick in the drawer as backup.

Hmmm, interesting. The all steel version HAF 932 is listed as the same wieght. You'd think the aluminum one would be lighter. http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=33029&vpn=RC%2D932%2DKKN1&manufacture=COOLERMASTER Cooler Master's site is the same: http://www.coolermaster.com/products/product.php?language=en&act=detail&tbcate=17&id=5777 http://www.coolermaster.com/products/product.php?language=en&act=detail&tbcate=17&id=5363

I'm on an NV card, but have run into AA not working several times. For the most part, it seems some games like to have AA disabled within the game, and then use the NV control panel to force it on. This usually gives me the best performance too, because the AA ingame isn't as optomized. Also, other games do not like this and I have to use the game to enable AA, setting the NV control panel to auto or game controlled. It's a bit of a pain having to shuffle the settinsg back and forth depending on the game, and to be honest I sometimes run without AA because of it -- leaving the settings as is for the most played game. So I feel your pain. I also do not like the ATI control panel much, it is slow to launch and requires netframework to be installed on the system. It can be hard to navigate because I am not used to it, and takes a bit of digging to get the right settings, and in your case, get them to work!

A nice new case! http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=35005&vpn=RC%2D840%2DKKN1%2DGP&manufacture=COOLERMASTER Same as my HAF932, except all aluminum, has fan filters, and one extra HD bay instead of a 5.25 bay. If you wait long enough, I'll sell you my HAF when I get one of these sweet aluminum monsters! I am going to have to reinstall IL2 and try Black Death. Might be a while though, I have work backing up these days.

Yes, you can load system defaults or optimal defaults on the last page in the BIOS. You should also have a section there that you can save your settings as a profile, which is very very handy. There should be two profiles that you can use. CPU level up is cool, eh? I've read it works pretty well, but I'd suspect it is Intel's CPus that allow it to work so well as they have a lot of overhead these days in how much faster than stock they will run. There is another setting new to Core i7 that does almost the same thing. That is probably why you see the CPU running faster than stock. It is called Turbo Mode: from here: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/11390-intel-core-i7-nehalem-920-940-965-xe-processor-review-4.html I have always wondered about the BIOS sensor readings myself. They rarely reflect what you see in the OS, yet it is definately coming from the same sensor. Chaulk it up to how software reads and interprets the sensors data, where in the BIOS there is little room for software. I disregard the BIOS sensors completely, except for in the first boot of a new system or cooler, to initially check that temps are OK. I recently ran into a shutdown issue myself, while overclocking the DFI and e2180. It turned out to be a heat issue and the alarm or auto shutdown. Once I increased the temp that the system would shutdown, everything was fine. This could be your problem too, because closing the game lets the system back into the OS, and then AI Suite shuts it down due to temperature? The four core sensors are integrated right into the CPU, and the overall CPU temp may be derived from the mobo just under the CPU, or mounted just inside the CPU integrated heatsink. Regardless, that sensor is miles away (relatively) from the cores when compared to the core sensors. So it is logical that the core sensors will read higher than the overall temp. I would personally go by the highest temp reading, that way you position yourself in the safest window of temps. The core sensors are great for indicating individual core temps when say the app you are running is single threaded (only uses one core), you can see how much that single core is rising in temp, and how much it is affecting the other cores and overall temp. This comes into play even more with the new Core i7's Turbo mode.

It's things like this that cause me to use a different hard drive for initial testing of overclocks. I have it imaged and can restore it in a few minutes in case of disaster. Once I know I am stable, I can boot to my main drive and use the system normally, with little fear of problems. That doesn't mean your firewall problems were caused by the overclock, but there is certainly the possibility. One trick in troubleshooting any problem in a PC is isolating the cause. That can be really difficult or impossible at times. Anyway, I am glad you got it back working. Strange that it was adding programs other than the one you were selecting.

What is Black Death? Looks like you have a bottleneck with your video card. Whenever you increase your cpu performance and not see a decent framerate improvement, it is usually the CPU waiting for the vid card. In order to verify this, simply overclock the vid card and see if you then get better framerates. If so, then the vid card is under powered compared to the cpu. As for the Rampage X48... It's hard to justify that price when you can get a decent Core i7 mobo for about the same. That price of $228 is minus a $50 MIR, so it's actual price is $278 before the rebate. That puts you right near the Asus P6T arena. I really think it boils down to how long you plan to use your current CPU, and if you plan to buy a quad core socket 775 upgrade later. The Rampage is a sweet board, no doubt. So if you can use and enjoy it for a couple years or more, then the current price is worth it -- $100 or so per year is piddlesquat. .

I agree that 90C is approaching or past a safe limit for even the 965 extreme. To be safest, I would go by the highest temperature reading. That is not a cheap CPU, and would be disaster if it was damaged. Small FFTs will generate the most heat possible. Still, I feel that your temps are excessive for a 3.7GHz clock setting. You should not be hitting 90C until 4GHz or beyond. I must say though, I have zero experience with the 965 or LGA1366. That is a very decent heatsink though, so if there is a problem with the cooler it must be a mounting issue or bad thermal paste application. If the heatsink is not tight enough, you will be able to move it by twisting it slightly -- it should not move. Otherwise, it will mean pulling the HSF off and checking the contact patch the paste has left on the surfaces. The patch should cover the entire surfaces with a little blotching here and there from when it was removed. If there are any areas without residue (even very thin) then the paste was not applied properly or the surface of the CPU is not perfectly true. The surface of the HSF is almost always true as they are machined to perfection where Intel doesn't pay enough attention to this. Advanced users will carefully polish (called lapping) the CPU to perfect the surface, there is a lot of info on this around the internet. If there are (relatively) deep scratches and marks on the surface of the HSF when you pull it off and clean it, then it is an indication that the CPU has high points that are making these marks. Other than lapping the CPU there is little else you can do about this.

That discrepency comes from the location of the sensor for the overall temperature. I dunno where they put it, but obviously it isn't as close to the cores as the others are. Also, as before, the sensors are not as accurate as we would like. The only way to get an accurate real temp reading is to plant a thermal diode on the CPU integrated heatsink, and even that will not read the individual cores. Yet, this is what review testers will do when monitoring temps for things like HSFs etc. It isn't a huge issue though, as what you only need to monitor is how much the temps are climbing, not how accurate they are. The system will eventually become unstable at a certain temperature, no matter what you do in the BIOS. This becomes obvious when you see some HSFs getting higher overclocks than others. HWmonitor is a fairly new program, and may have some bugs in it. For this reason, it would be a good idea to try another temperature sensor reading program and see if it has the same problem. It could be a stability issue, it could also be an issue with the Winbound sensor. If it is the sensor, it stands to reason that it would also happen at stock speeds. You can try Everest Ultimate or Speedfan to verify the temp readings. Core Temp is another that is highly regarded as the most accurate. I almost got a Cosmos myself, and decided on a HAF932 because of some issues I had with the drive bays in the Cosmos. I remember reading about the side panel fan and some taller coolers. The model of Cosmos you have has better intake airflow than the older one. Removing the side panel fan will have little effect on CPU temps, and only the vid card and NB temp should rise a bit. Not an issue though, unless you want to close the side panel all the way.

Not far from 375MHz now! That'll put you at the 3.5GHz goal!

Yes indeed! In teh Advanced menu, CPU Configuration. Turn off C1E support, CPU TM Function, Vanderpool Technology and Intel Speedstep. Leave the rest as Auto or Enabled. It isn't a good idea to run any power savings features while experimenting with clock speeds. After you achieve a stable clock, you can try turning them on, and sometimes they work (especially with decent mobos like Asus)! I agree, it seems 1T is not kicking in. It is something to research a bit later, but not a big deal because many systems will not run 1T even with good ram. When the CPU is overclocked, it becomes even less an issue as CPU speed is king of the hill and will overcome any benefits that 1T will give in the end. At stockspeed 1T becomes more desireable, so it may be worth googling to see if others have the same problem, and whether it is a BIOS thing or something else.

I have a registered version of Ultimate, not Pro. But perhaps that feature is not available in the trial version. The price is a little steep for what it is I think, but they do occasinally have deals on it. I can upgrade to the latest version for a discount, but I am passing on that because the only thing the newer version will do for me is better support for Core i7 (which I do not have yet). It's not a deal breaker, because you still have the Report function. The thing is, the trial runs out in 30 days, and then it will not work anymore, and reinstalling will not help. Glad to hear you are sticking with the P5E! One thing to note about overclocking, is every single session you have you learn something more, and usually achieve some sort of progress in either faster clocks or stability. You will get better at it, and it will become routine. You will learn the BIOS intimately, and become faster at making changes to the settings while knowing for sure what you changed is correct. It is a never ending process, learning.

That is still a pretty hefty price for a last generation board, and probably won't go much farther than your P5E. It will likely be more difficult too, since it has a lot more settings in the BIOS. OTOH, it may be easier, and go farther because it is a much better board. You have barely just begun with your current system, no way are you ready to throw in the towel! Unless you have somewhere to use/sell or give away the P5E, there is no reason to buy a new expensive board. It would be better to put the money away and hold out for a Core i7 system. Also, that isn't much of a price drop at all, if you take away the Mail-in Rebate! Your ram is stellar. The rated speed is pretty much as fast as you can buy. The last problem you will have is with your ram. There is almost certainly revisions on that board, it has been around for quite a while. Be aware, one trap a lot of overclockers get into is a lack of satisfaction with their clock and system components. They are never satisfied with their results, and spend all their time on trying to get it faster and stable -- rather than simply enjoying the system with regular use once they reach a goal speed. They end up buying new CPU/mobo/ram every few months, and the cycle continues. This in itself may be a worthy hobby, provided you have the cash to buy stuff all the time, at inflated prices due to the parts being new release. The syndrom can snowball very quickly into water cooling, or liquid nitrogen, extreme overclocking and is highly addictive.

Just above the fans, in the Temperature section, CPUTIN. If P95 errored, then the overclock is not stable. There is nothing wrong with the cpu, with an overclock like that! Usually, if the system is really unstable, P95 will error pretty fast. 45 minutes means that it is close to being stable. You really want an 8 hour run without errors, but if you get past 45 minutes it may easily go forever. You can also run a bunch of 3D benchmarks, to see if it is 3D stable. And, of course, play some IL2! But what exactly is failing in P95, the cpu or ram? To find out, run P95 again but with the Small FFTs setting -- this tests only the CPU and not the ram much at all. If it passes that, then you can safely assume it is a ram tweak you need. If it fails that, then you can safely assume it is a CPU problem and maybe try increasing your CPU volts a bit. Failing this, you can only back off on the speed a bit. What heatsink are you running? Stock? Your CPU Vcore is running at 1.37V according to HWmonitor. You can safely increase that to about 1.45V with the stock HSF, but temps are going to go up (especially under load with P95). The stock HSF will severly limit the overclock, and you may already be near the limit.

Good questions! Nice clock, 3.7GHz is pretty decent and must be very fast! The Core i7 CPUs only have 4 cores, the 8 cores comes from Hyperthreading (which Intel has revived from back in the old days of P4). Essentially, they are virtual cores. It didn't help much in the old days, but with the Core i7 there is significant performance increases in some tests. One thing to note: with high overclcoks this feature may not work. So, you are doing good if it does work at 3.7GHz! There should be five temperatures, and you have them all. One for the overall CPU temp, and one for each of the 4 cores. It is normal for them to have a 10 degree difference. The discrepency comes from two things (I am guessing here): 1) The sensors are not exactly accurate 2) Heat comes from electrical leakage of the microscopic curcuits, the smaller the manufacturing process, the more leakage there is. Intel has recovered most of this by using new materials in the process, but there is still a lot of heat generated by the Core i7, especially the 965. When they make a wafer of CPU's, there is a fair amount of variability in how well each CPU works. Some will run hot, some cool, some with little voltage and some need more, some will run faster, some not. Intel bins (sorts) the chips after testing them for various traits, some will be 965's, some only 920's. So, it therefore stands to reason that even individual cores will vary in how much heat they will produce, as well as overclockability and responsiveness to voltage. The cores are a lot closer than 1cm away from each other. They are all on the same die with the Core i7, not two dual core dies under the same hood like the Core2Quad chips. So, I would say they are a fraction of a millimeter away from each other. You'd think that they would affect each other being so close, eh? Hope this helps!