Noting Daves comments about temps.. I did a little experiment this morning using RealTemp to see just what sort of temps both systems are seeing. It's nothing fancy.. just a note of what temps the cpu's are hitting in like for like situations. All temps shown for the QX6700 with the E8400 are with it clocked to 3gig.
Systems at idle in Windows:
E8400: - 34 - 34
QX6700: - 29 - 28 - 28 - 29
In FSX on the ground, default Cessna at St.Just, duration approx 8mins:
E8400: - 53 - 48
QX6700: - 61 - 60 - 57 - 60
Sim closed.. back to Win desktop.. recorded after about 20secs:
E8400: - 34 - 34
QX6700: - 42 - 40 - 39 - 40
.. and after a further 5mins:
E8400: - 34 - 34
QX6700: 35 - 33 - 33 - 34
Max shown for both over test period:
E8400: - 53 - 49
QX6700: - 61 - 61 - 58 - 60
As an aside, I put the QX back to 2.66 and opened FSX again.. same as before:
Max after 5 mins in sim: 61 - 60 - 57 - 60
I'm not sure what the benchmark test does but it's measured against an E8400 giving a score of 1000. At it's correct speed, the QX gives a score of 855 and the E8400, 995. I did check the QX clocked but didn't note the result. It was slower than my E8400 though.
What does this show? Well for one thing, it shows the E8400 sit's at a steady 34deg at idle and temps don't get as high as the QX under load. It also shows that with the stock fan, the E8400 gets back to idle temp much faster than the QX (which also has a stock fan). It also shows the QX under idle runs cooler than the E8400 but takes longer to return to idle temps having been under load. It also shows the QX notably hotter under load and this test, though un-scientific, shows temps with it overclocked to 3gig show little or no increase over it's default 2.66gig which I found surprising.
OK.. the test was a simple one and neither machine was 'pushed'. I've made the QX (overclocked) very tired indeed in FSX but I'm not sure if that was the system running out of steam or perhaps the GPU reaching the end of it's tether but a flight in the Sea Vixen from Brest-Guipvas up and down the coast in search of Clemenceau (which I never found) then up and around the coast to Lee-on-Solent.. all done at around 100ft.. 200ft max.. had it juddering like a good'un by the time I landed. This said.. I was juddering too
It didn't OOM though even with only 4gig installed 
I should have had RealTemp running then. I bet everything would have been in RED I've not added the affinity mode setting yet nor have I bothered with the FSUIPC low memory warning. I'm never in a situation where I need to 'save' a particular flight. They're either VA flights where saving a flight is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike or I'm dossing around
EDIT: There's another component to this I'd not considered.. the pc case. It's been quite a few minutes since I typed the above and I opened RealTemp again on both systems. The E8400 is still sitting at a leasurely 34deg but the QX which has been sat there doing the same.. nothing.. has crept up to 35, 34, 33, 34. This got me thinking. The case on the QX is a cheapo ebuyer unit running 3x80mm fans. The case on the E8400 is a Thermaltake Soprano running a 120mm fan front and rear and an 80mm on the side (albeit clogged with dust). While this may have a limited effect on the cores when the systems are under load for a short period, it would undoubtedly effect the temps long term and is probably why the E8400 returns to idle temp much quicker and doesn't budge over time whereas the QX system temps creep up a little over time and are slower to return to idle. I think I'll finish here as I'm getting nowhere
ATB
DaveB
