Well, the next big leap might be the end of this year, I hear about a new 45nm technology Intel will be putting out, should be even quicker and cooler than that 65nm technology the C2D's have now. That should be interesting considering how stupid cool the C2D's run now. On a lark I ran the new board with no overclock at stock voltage and 2.4ghz with the water cooling and was quite amazed that it ran at 45C with Orthos (dual Prime). Not too shabby considering that at 3.6ghz the thing idles at 40-43C. Doing that the GPU was the hot item in the loop when loading the GPU as well. It actually ran hotter than the CPU at ~52C or so. I was kind of wondering how the GPU was supposed to be the higher wattage type of unit when the CPU seemed pretty toasty also...true if you dont OC it. I have what is known as a "B" chip, which according to internet rumor those will go fast on lower voltages compared to "A" chips, but draw more current resulting in more heat. Bragged about voltages on the 'net seem to confirm that theory, I can do 3.6ghz at 1.3875 volts which is quite low compared to other's results, but heat is an issue that I was chasing after for some time. Others can do the same speed but at 1.5volt with an air cooler (not sure what their temps are though, but 1.5 volt is definately not do-able with an air cooler on mine. But I guess if you have the cooling capacity, B chips can do well at goofy speeds without exceeding Intel's 1.55volt maximum "or else" spec on the C2D's unlike the A chips. I got 3.8ghz on 1.51 volt, but not Orthos stable there, I didnt try too much as the voltage scaling was getting up there, and I really didnt care too much. I have bragging rights at 3.7ghz Orthos forever stable for various message board databases at 1.4375 volts, so I'm good. 24/7 I leave it at 1.3875 volt/3.6ghz. For reference, the stock voltage spec for my chip is 1.3250volt. In case youre thinking 'that's not such a big difference'...I did some calculations with a generally used formula at the 3.6 speed/voltage I run and came up with 107 watts thermal output at that speed, compared to Intel's design spec of 65 watts it is kind a boost for a 50% overclock.

Wow, that went off on a tangent! Nothing like a pot of coffee to get the mind rambling, eh? lol.

Oh yeah, cameras. 1.5 meg is fine anyway. I kind of wonder about these massive megapixel units with obscene picture sizes. For general usage on a computer or internet, you have to shrink them down, so 1.5 should be fine for a 1024x768 photo. Sorry about stretching the screen on you, all my monitors are at 1920x1200, and I keep my camera at 1024x786, but I guess it can blast someone using a lower res than I do at times, oops.

I am wondering, do you think that some more virtual memory would help with not stretching your screen when I post one of my photos?